There's a difference between being tackled hard and tackled unfairly.Evidently, it was the latter as the referee penalised the offence.

I'm not going to suggest they should be banned or cited if the video's been looked at, but don't pretend your players are innocent in their actions towards him.

He put his arm around Sam's neck, picked him up, slammed him down and then preceeded to strike him when Sam pushed out to get him off him. How is that Sam conning anyone?

It was only a couple of weeks ago that Wigan fans were defending a Tomkins headbutt because "all good halfbacks are a bit nasty".

Tomkins is a marvellous player and a joy to watch. He is also a niggly wind up merchant and brings a lot of the hassle he gets on himself. That's not to say he deserves to be assaulted (I haven't seen any of the Hull highlights so have no idea what went on) but he would be well advised to settle down and concentrate on being a great RL player (which he undoubtedly is), and the same goes for his bro.

Neither seem able to get through a game that I've seen without doing something cheap at the moment and they don't need to be like that. IMO of course.

They were all good strong aggressive tackles from manu. Everytime phelps ran the ball in from fullback and his head was taken off nothing was done as phelps didnt pretend as if he had been hit by a train like that little fanny you have playing at fb.

Class though isn't he?

And yet the disciplinary panel saw nothing wrong. Do you think you might be making a bit too muh of it?

A bit like people are with the Joel Tomkins incident you mean?

I agree, and you're right to say he doesn't deserve to be assaulted which in the OP was a tad strong. The Hull fan in question didn't seem to be able to discern between a ''hard challenge'' and one that was worthy of a penalty on the field, but not further sanction from the RFL.

His brother's an idiot at times and just seems to lose it, something he'll hopefully grow out of.

If they were good tackles why was you penilised for them? 3 or 4 times you conceded penalties for tackles on Sam dont talk rubbish.

It was virtually the same as the 2nd incident (cant remember when it was) which I think is why most Wigan fans were annoyed because it was the 2nd time he had done it yet still no action, then it all exploded!

Perhaps he can pop down to Saints and pass some aggression on to our young forwards, who seem to be coached to be complete pushovers.

We'd have lost y'day without Joels aggression. We looked completely flat all day and only really sparked into life after the incident with Yeaman.

Havn't seen anyone going OTT, in fact most are saying it was silly as oppose to thugish (which is being kind). He deserves two matches and he'll get it.

I don't consider Joel Tomkins to be a dirty player, but as I've mentioned elsewhere he is very petulant and seems to have a massive chip on his shoulder. McGuire needs to have a word because I don't want to see real talent go to waste.

He doesnt deserve two matches at all he hit the chest first. A high shot isnt given if you bounce off the chest like that so why should he get banned?

IMO, it's Sam's charge we should be more worried about for two reasons.

1 - His is a lot harder to defend, as 'running in and punching' doesn't leave much wiggle room.

2 - We can cope without 1 second-rower for a couple of games. Being without Sam, Gleeson, Richards and potentially Deacon put a lot of strain on the backs.