The shoulder charge isn't outlawed. If he gets any ban I'd be amazed.

Look at the replay. Moa clearly makes contact with Rinaldi's head, though entirely accidentally.

I'm looking forward to seeing it again on TV tonight, but at the time and on the replays I thought it was a great hit, the sort that if it had been in the NRL would make the end of season list. The fact that the London players were not appealing for anything spoke volumes. And to follow it up by letting Kaufusi get away with his attempted assault just rubbed salt into the wound.

I've got no idea what Moa can expect on Tuesday night from the RFL. Would hope it's SOS, and Moa's previous good (from what I can remember) record will be taken into account, but this is the RFL.

The point about the comparison with NRL is a good one.

I'd be disappointed with SOS. Should be no case to answer.

I thought they seemed to carry on at first, not even stop in expectation of a penalty. It was only Kaufusi who decided the sending off gave him free reign to go head-hunting.

I'd just be happy that he is available to play against Salford.

without him and O'Carroll we would be looking very light in the pack.

Are you saying he deliberately went for the head? Because if you are, you are speaking nonsense.

seen the replay - he lines him up and hits with the shoulder, but turns away just as rinaldi steps and ducks into it. impact is top of shoulder into head - not an intentional attack on the head as rinaldi has clearly ducked into it. technically yes its a sending off, but there was so much doubt on the field that it should have gone on report. silverwood has had some info from somewhere i'm sure - this is the question that should be asked

also you can hear the hull player (lynch probably) stating that rinaldi has ducked into what would have been an impact on the upper chest/shoulder if rinaldi had stayed upright

overall its more of a non deliberate/accidental/unlucky attack on the head and sending off sufficient will probably result

inconsistency all weekend, he got the red card from the night before imo

what annoyed me more was the wild swing the london player took 2 minutes later which didnt even warrant a talking to

Let me be totally clear here.

I think the red card was harsh, because moa did not do it intentionally, and the london player went to dummy/side step and lowered his body position, hence the contact being around his face.

But for me if there's anything that made up the mind of the t/j or the ref, it would be that Moa was not in control of the tackle, which made it look "reckless". I've watched it over and over again, I don't think our fans screaming OOOHHHHHFFFFF on the reply/big screen helped.

Heart says NFA, head says 2 match ban.

Lewis