I'd like to see the incident before commenting. I don't think he should have been banned for the previous tackle, so I'm probably not going to think he's done anything wrong this time either. He's been singled out for some reason and he only knows one way to play - so he's just going to get in trouble each week.

Wigan player in over-aggressive tackling shocker.

Going for a players injured knee, after the hooter had gone when he'd been held by 2 players already? Shocking.

Just seen it - as I thought, bugger all in the tackle.

Where have you seen it?

Don't know about them but I saw it on the highlights before the Salford-Bradford game on sky this afternoon, not a great angle mind.

Bugger all in it - he tackled the bloke around the thighs, no contact to joints. If Jeff gets a ban from that we'll have total confirmation that the RFL is bent.

I though there was nothing in the Leeds one myself

He was warned for a high tackle.

If he went into Vella's knee (which he didn't) then it's not a high tackle.

after watching highlights before bradford game , it looks inconclusive to me , the camera angle doesnt help but he seems to hit round the top of the legs - anybody but lima and the incident would be brushed aside

Cockayne was at it all night. He cant take it but likes to dish it out. Presscott's tackle was the final straw and he lost it .

Missed all the recent action as am enjoying the sun in Gran Canaria at the moment.......

Lima may be summoned to the RFL yet again, for tackling round the legs.

This is supposed to be dangerous, and one can understand the reasons why. However, as I commented here after the furore over the Clarkson challenge, noone has actually been injured by any of Lima's "low/chicken wing" tackles this season.

It seems ok to tackle high and late ( Carvell on Dureau) or with your forearm/shoulder (Morley on Huddersfield player), both resulting in facial/head injuries, one of which required the player's hospitalisation.

I can't understand the logic behind all this - no doubt Warrington trolls will enlighten me. Please don't say the RFL found there was no case to answer. We know they did, the only question is why?