Isnt punching like a 2 game ban not a 5-8 game ?

Are we not brave enough to play Shorrocks at 13 and O'Neill at 9? Maybe swap KPP and Bateman (if available)?

Everything seems to have increased. Paul Cullen mentioned running in to a melee and punching was an automatic 8 games now but he didn’t do that, so I’m thinking 3 to 5 (bit I’m not sure).

On current form that would seem quite a sensible suggestion
Will be interesting to see Peet’s reaction.

I was hoping for a positive response to the Toulouse debacle but it wasn’t to be.
I cannot comment on tonight as I haven’t seen the game but suspect the main problem is our lack of pace in defence and lack of power generally.

We are slow in the extreme. Defensively very poor. As a club who prided itself on defence we have become easy. Toulouse scroring 20+ got my alarm bells ringing.

I accept we are work in progress but yet another zip is pretty embarrassing.

For me the main issue is an unbalanced squad with a shortage of real quaily players in key positions basically across the piece. The future potentially looks exceptionally bright but currently too many players in key positions who probably aren’t good enough.

The backrow of Farrell, Bateman and Isa is too lightweight. One from three is acceptable, two from three is doable with a big front row but three from three is second tier.

I predict Leyth in the CC and let’s see what that brings.

Disappointed but not overly surprised. Hopefully we can respond against Cas.

Completely outlawed this year, it may very well be 8 games

Dont panic yet,just a blip we will bounce back Thursday with a thrashing of Cas.
Look we was only out played,out muscled,out enthused,out thought and out coached so if you think about it :something to work on :.

Regards glass half full fella

Fair play if it is. I’m there to watch a game of rugby not amateur boxing.

Makes me cringe when people how have sat on their phones most of a game, jump up and down as soon as a “fight” breaks out, shouting “IT IM”.

8 game should outlaw it, Peet seemed fuming with Ellis.

We’ll miss Ellis though. Hopefully Havard gets back soon.

And that's why the sport is heading for an early grave - including the NRL which is miles above us as a sporting spectacle.

We're sanitising the game for the sake of a small minority of people. Have a look at what the top viewed RL videos are on YouTube and it's full of big hits (many would carry a ban today) and fights. Why? Because people like watching confrontation. It's the reason people pay (not just watch) to see boxers on PPV, or why the UFC has exploded over the last 20 years. Guys like Eddie Hearn and Dana White saw what people wanted, gave it to them and made it must watch TV. We + RU took what was great and moved away from it.

BTW, apart from having huge by ratings, the Khan Vs Brook fight was full of celebrities & PL footballers - I remember a time when that was a Wigan Vs Saints derby. It was must see TV because you knew it would everything, including biff.

Why is football so popular then?

Rubbish! You don't make a lick of sense. The NRL has never had better viewing figures, it is booming, the game is awash with money in Oz. So you can't use accusations of sanitising the game being damaging there. The truth is, those who 'like the biff' are mostly sad old men (my age, I hasten t add) who are not the sport's future. Much like those who pine for winter rugby. From football to rugby union, even ice-hockey, the trend in all sports as been to cut the thuggery out. And quite right too. Sports need to be TV- and family-friendly.

I wonder if those people watching 'big hits' on YouTube have any real interest in the sport, or ever attend matches.

How's it rubbish? You point to one thing and ignore the rest?

I've watched the NRL coverage this week on the Australian Fox network and every commercial break is pumping the Tim Tszyu fight that's coming up. It's almost like there's a coloration between the two demographics...

Is boxing not seeing a boom btw? Are the fights now not a must see/attend event? People pay for Sky & then pay extra to watch a fight. Has the UFC not exploded over the last 2 decades with guys like McGregor now being recognisable to even the regular Joe on the street? What's family friendly about it too? I guess they are all sad old men. Or maybe those sports are now the ones for working class people who are looked down upon by others?

I'm a big RU fan and the sport has never been worse btw. The England Vs Ireland game yesterday was ruined after 80 secs. It's a TMO's wet dream with anything and everything being reviewed and penalised.

I'm not interested in boxing (although obviously many are), but because it's popular, that doesn't mean thuggishness should be encouraged in other sports.

But I agree about England/Ireland. They dish out cards like confetti there. And the yellow cards for deliberate knock-ons (and sometimes with the added bonus of a penalty try) seems wildly disproportionate.

I think we're just on the opposite sides of arguments (there's nothing wrong with that btw). For me, I see RL trying to follow RU and Football and being a sanitised sport that appeals to a family demo. I'd rather go down a boxing or even darts route that goes after men and doesn't feel ashamed by that.

I’m all for banning them for punching but I do think there needs to be a system that allows for each case to be judged on its merits. By that I mean somebody like Ellis should not get the same as a man who runs in and punches from behind. Last night was a poor reaction by Ellis but it was to a poor challenge and there lad threw back as well.

I think we can all deal with it being 3 or 4 games but not 8. To me 8 would be a bit of a joke. It’s a poor reaction but it’s a reaction all the same, it’s not just somebody throwing punches for the sake of it and being a thug.

Whilst we are on, or around this topic, it's the double standards & hypocrisy that irritates me more than anything. There was a perfect example of both in last night's game.

Dudson lead with a forearm to Zak's throat last night and nothing was said or done by the ref. Likewise, nothing was said by the idiots on Sky who just talked about Wigan's mistakes instead.

Flip the incident around and ask yourself what would have happened If that was Zak, as the tackler, who'd hit Dudson in exactly the same spot. What's the difference? Likewise from a hypocrisy POV, the guys on Sky would have at least talked about it.

We (as a sport) are all either all in on this, or not. If contact above the neck = dangerous, then it doesn't matter which way that goes.