I think Kev Sinfield is in for a shout. On his day he was 1st class

Ahahahahaha

4th best loose forward of the SL era IMO

Great captain, great goal kicker but overrated as a player.

Sinfield was the glue that held that great Leeds side together but as an individual player, I don’t think he’d be in my top 15-20 from the Superleague era.

I think what this season is showing so far is that despite the open nature of it, the quality is low. Warrington looked to be the real deal this season early on then were comfortably beaten by Wigan and then Saints with a number of players missing.

Wigan then looked to be the team to beat and they have since had a couple of defeats on the bounce and that capitulation against Leeds.

Meanwhile we have been largely poor all season bar the Warrington game yet we win our game in hand and we are only 2 points behind Wigan.

We only had to lift our intensity in the second half on Saturday and Salford went to pieces. I still say that Salford are the best side in the comp attacking wise when they throw it about but they folded on Saturday when put under pressure.

Catalan look really good in patches too but are still largely inconsistent. And as for Leeds well no-one knows how they are going to play from one week to the next.

Even though it's true that Salford fell apart in that second half it was helped along more than a little by some utterly bizarre refereeing decisions. How you kept 13 men on the field in the current climate is completely unfathomable. Worse still, the referee insisting the downed Salford player leave the field after being blindsided by a cowardly attack from Lees and then awarding a 6 again as Salford tried to regroup from his error. Wow...just wow! The man is a buffoon!

As to Lees and his latest "indiscretion", words fail me. He won't be happy until he puts someone out for the season. Oh, wait a minute...

I thought it was just Saints fans that had an issue with Kendall?

Ridiculous to say that the broken ankle is a result of the swinging arm, thats just bad luck. Seconds before Lees drops the ball that leads to his swinging arm, Ritson is hit high and Saints get the penalty. Direct contact to the head but no Salford player is up before the MRP.

Every time someone is guilty of a high shot, if the opponent falls as a result then are they all at risk of breaking an ankle? Wright has just had bad luck in this instance but how that can be linked to a direct result of his tackle is a joke.

Sironen's late hit was described by Kendall in his chat with Roby as 50/50. He was fully committed yet is hit by a 1 game ban. I don't believe that there are no other similar hits in any other SL game.

Cunningham was better than Roby, so was Scully, Faz, Barrett, Lyon...in fact quite a few but Roby's toughness to keep going for so long has to be admired and applauded

the problem you've got Stu (in this instance) is you are on a Wigan board and the majority will see it differently to you as a Saints fan, and it works the other way round too, when it comes to Wigan indiscretions .

However, in general, you assessment of the MRP / some refs is fair. It is baffling sometimes, that someone you expect to see up there isnt, and equally, ones you dont notice during a game are up there and get a ban

Re Sironen, he has history, and was up for 3 in the MRP, so there was a good chance he was going to cop a ban and equally Lees, has been sin binned a couple of times this year, with no fault found so to speak, but then no ban. So from that perspective, you can sort of understand some of the frustration from Saints fans, but sin binning doesnt necessarily mean ban incoming

The margins this year in particular with regards to the late hits are so fine its untrue. However, i watched the Wigan v Leeds game back last night whilst riding my bike, and listened to the commentary when Tetavano got sent off. All the former players, were of the opinion he could have pulled out and it was unnecessary to hit Smith. I didnt think it was nasty, but marginally late, and it did end up a bit high. He has copped a 2 game ban for it too, so the MRP must have considered it bad enough to warrant that.

i also agree with your comment about high hit and broken ankle. Unfortunately, thats bad luck and not an expected injury from a high shot.

I'm not defending Lee's swinging arm, it was reckless and I would've expected a 1-2 game ban. He dropped the ball from a carry and it seemed the red mist came down and he swung a lazy arm. However as I've said I'm disputing the broken ankle as a result. It's completely different to the Knowles/Cooper incident.

We are certainly no angels however when you look at the timings of these "late hits" there are milliseconds in them. The Sironen one- if he leaves Croft then its the chance of a dummy by Croft and a walk in try, he has to effect the tackle and was committed. There was no malice in it. Lomax takes it to the line frequently and is clobbered but nothing the other way.

Whilst I appreciate that previous form is causing the bans, its also unfair to single players out purely because they have been guilty before.

We are on the verge of a tic and pass competition with the best players in the stands every week. It's a joke.

i've just seen the Lees tackle on twitter for the 1st time. I agree that D is harsh, and that in this instance taking a broken ankle into account as a result of a high tackle is incorrect IMO. I've posted on this forum and the Warriors fans previously, that taking an injury outcome on a tackle is going down a dangerous route / precedent. I've seen high tackles (bad ones) where the player has just got up, cos they are hard as nails / hard head etc etc, but someone else has seemingly only been caught lightly but outcome far worse. with Cooper / Knowles, there is far more chance that the injury was as a result of the tackle than the Lees one at weekend, and in that instance, i can understand that it could be used when grading the discretion

I think we all know that some players, across all teams, play the game right on the edge, and at times, as you say, are a split second off with their timing. Unfortunately, given the current rulings, they either need to adapt, or accept that they are going to cop bans. I know as fans we want to see the star players on the pitch, but equally, given the pending court case, we also need to protect the players or another court case in a few years time could be the end of the game as RL aint flush with millions in the bank

I was being facetious Stu. I wasn't directly linking a swinging arm to a broken ankle!

On a more serious note though, the constant excusing of Saints players behaviour (and by that, I'm not suggesting you condone it) is starting to grate a bit. There's always mitigating factors when they transgress. Knowles didn't really mean to put Cooper out therefore his reckless tackle was excusable because "he's not that sort of player etc". Lees suffer red mist and it was just a "lazy arm". Sironen's multiple bans are all borderline (yet he keeps making the same mistake) or, God help us, persecution from the refs or disciplinary. Etc, etc, etc.

It's becoming a joke. There's nothing funnier that the Redvee lot constantly referring to Smithies, or Wigan players in general, as thugs.

I'm not sure everyone is condoning such behaviour. I talk to a lot of Saints fans who are frustrated at Matautia, Knowles and Sironen constantly being banned. They do need to learn and adapt and I would say 90% of the bans I have agreed with.

I just honestly feel that the one on Saturday was a joke. I also genuinely feel that other similar types of hits are happening all across SL but not being cited.

Do I think that we are being targeted on purpose to stop 5 in a row? Is it a conspiracy? No but the lack of consistency is appalling.

I specifically said you aren't condoning it, Stu. However there is a lot of excusing it from Saints fans in general. I see the frustration with the three mentioned but I also see a lot of the "not really their fault but need to learn" or "not that sort of player" type of comments when it's quite clear that the sheer number of offences indicate they are exactly that type of player! For the avoidance of any doubt, I am not suggesting they are intentionally setting out to injure but they are clearly reckless and not learning from it.

Whether Sironen's latest example was a fraction of a second from being a good hit is irrelevant in his particular case. You could equally say it was a fraction of a second the other way from being much worse! The point is, he is constantly doing this type of late hit. Some worse than others, of course, but ALWAYS running the risk of injuring someone. That's reckless. The odd one from a player not known for this type of tackle is one thing but this is why 'previous' is taken into account.

You also get the daft conspiracy theories but we'll leave that out of an adult discussion

Borderline recklessness has been the foundation of Saints attitude in defence. By saying you are committed and couldn't do anything is not an excuse - if you charge at someone in a reckless manner then you are going to commit reckless tackles.

Just as many players have changed they way they charge at kickers and are now much more controlled in their contact there has to be an element of responsibility with the tackler to be able to make a safe tackle.