Dean Collis has been picked up by the disciplinary review panel again, for dangerous contact in a tackle. He has been given a reprimand and escaped a ban.

is he really such a bad tackler? I dont think he is....obviously the RFL are seeing things we're not.

Regarding collis and his ban against bradford i watched a nrl game and a player got put on report for being the third man in the tackle and tackling below the knee which is exactly what collis did so wether thats outlawed i dont know but that may clear up why he recieved the ban

'Cannon ball' tackle it is referred to. However players had done dangerous tackles and got away with it, even if they did injure players. Unfortunately our game was on Sky and Gaskell got injured, if we had fought the ban I reckon he'd of got off though.

The 'Wigan Tackle' is being clamped down on this season; a few years too late, but better late than never.

Until it's forgotten about in a few weeks. This ritual early season crack down on the perceived evil of the moment is getting truly tedious and as you say a touch late.

I'm ok with them picking out tacklers with poor technique that cause injury.
If he's been picked up twice he needs to improve.
For the sake of his own team and the opposition player.

Just aim above the knee or clamp the legs together tight. That's all it takes.

Agree. It's the same every season for about a month and then never penalised afterwards. Offside from the kick off seems a popular one as well, also will disappear shortly I reckon.

it'll be the same as that "swirly arm warning" thingy.

Not seen that since about round 4 last year

I'm assuming it was justa warning as he didn't appear in the banned list?

correct Pop's

heaven forbid a referee backs into him though, they'll have a cell reserved in Brixton

Although, can I add without people thinking I'm prejudiced......

How can someone who's been banned 3 games ago for dangerous contact, be cited for dangerous contact, and get a warning?

The RFL felt guilty for the ban he received (2 match).

Because they make it up as they go on.
Compare Matty Bowen head high shot to for example Tanseys push on the ref.
I aren't suggesting Tanseys was guilt free but 3 matches for that and none for that high shot???madness!!!
Now throw in Collis who even the Bulls fans though was harshly treated!
It doesn't prove or disprove anything apart from the erratic nature of the whole process!!

pretty much echoed my thoughts Kinley.

Ban first, warn second. Brilliant.

banning Tansey I can't argue with casue it's been done before - but fining the lad £300 as well? That's just robbery.

Why don't they just sue him for whiplash and have done with it

I don't agree with the Tansey part.
I posted this on the Cas forum but the high shot is something that can happen either on purpose or by accident because the tackle is part of the game. It has to be assessed.
A push on the ref is not part of the game and should be treated seriously.
You are not comparing harm to the receiver, you are comparing importance and likelihood in the game.

For me a head shot needs dealing with but there is a range of bans that could apply to different circumstances. The ban for a push on the referree has to be a major deterant from even trying it.
Tansey deserves the ban. Whether the individual head shot deserves more is debatable.