4 games into the season and 3 bans handed out

I've been banned from Rovers board for about 5 years. They can't handle the truth, which, given their current reality, is probably a good thing.

No. You called him a ****wit. Enough. Just ignore each other as this is really quite childish now.

Well if it means we have the best defence in the league, then Radford's school of tackling is fine with me.

Not necessarily about Turgut but there's an interesting comment from Ralf Rimmer of the RFL in a Q&A on Twitter this afternoon.

@Red_Devil878
Why is the disciplinary panel so inconsistent?

@TheRFL
RR: We aim to be consistent. Currently there is an independent review into our judicial process with four clubs (HKR, Hull, Oldham & Wakey).

I don't even think it's necessary to have everyone on the panel to be that have played the game. A basic understanding of physics/physiology and the difference between an actual choice to do X as opposed to X happening because of other factors that dictated the outcome.
Sliding in with knees to a defenceless player (scoring atry for instance) is a deliberate choice
A tackle that starts off below the shoulder but hits the head as the attacking players body drops (either through being tackled from behind/falling etc) but cannot physically adjust arms/body in a split second to avoid head contact is not 'reckless' or a deliberate choice.
people who can understand that Charging and handing out bans on outcomes i.e. how severe an injury is to a player is not fair or just.
A deliberate swinging arm/leg twist and the player gets up quickly should have far more of a punishment than what I described above where the player may be laid out.
Whilst we want to avoid contact to the head unfortunate incidents out of the control of the tackler in normal legal play should not be unduly punished otherwise no-one would ever attempt to make a tackle.
Intent is everything as it is in law but RFL disciplinary is a fooking shambles.