I agree its a severe punishment, but is I believe correct taking in to account not only the seriousness of the incident in hand but also the fact he has already been dealt with previously for the same type of offence. There can be no doubt that it was only through pure luck that Connor Wynn was not seriously injured or worse and luck is not a commodity that can be judged on by a panel.
I don't think Pryce is a nasty player but he has clearly not learned from the last time he has done this (only a year ago) so that will also play a part in the length of his ban.

He should be thankful he hasn't seriously injured a fellow player and take the time to think about the consequences of being so reckless in future.

I’ll stick to my original opinions on this one, and fully believe Pryce on his explanation, I’ve seen much worse and intentional thuggery, get less or even no punishment.

Ten matches jeez, we must have nearly a complete team of super league players banned at present, in my opinion we are setting a dangerous precedent here, imagine if it’s say Jake Connor, similar scenario, our season would be finished. I fully respect others opinions, and understand it differs from the majority.

I honestly don't think 10 games is over the top considering he's been up before the panel before for the same offence in less than a calendar year. The tackle was terrible and by pure luck Connor Wynn was able to walk away unharmed.
I'm don't believe Pryce meant to do it but that and the fact no injury was sustained doesn't and shouldn't come in to it. I imagine the panel have also rightly taken a dim view of the fact its less than 12 months since he was up for similar offence and has now repeated it.
Yes its harsh and severe but none the less its a lesson he needs to learn before his luck (and an opposing players luck) runs out and he does more than just cause an injury if repeated again.

The RFL and the Disciplinary panel have rightly copped a lot of flack for their decisions and punishments given out so far this season but on this one I think they need to be given credit for judging the incident on the seriousness of it and given punishment based on all possible consequences without having pure luck as any defence. It was a bad enough tackle on its own but the fact he has done it before less than 12 months ago then it had to be a severe punishment as he has clearly not heeded the last warning he was given.

If any of our players did or do a tackle like that then I would have no complaints if they also received such a heavy ban and if that meant our season was finished I'd rather that than see any players career of life finished because of that type of tackle whether intentional or not.

That'll be the reason why he was punished with a longer ban. He's had ample opportunity to correct his tackling technique but has failed to do so. Connor Wynne was very lucky to come away unscathed. If Pryce does it again the next player may not be as fortunate.

It's widely acknowledged that bans have been overly zealous for relatively minor incidents but in this case the RL has a real duty of care to protect players from foul play like this that could cause permanent damage to a players health and quite rightly imposed a ban that is appropriate for the offence.]

I think for once it's been dealt with correctly, not over lenient but also not overly punished. He's a young kid trying to impose himself physically and has accepted his punishment on the chin and apologised numerous times. Thankfully no harm done and he'll have time to reflect and realise the seriousness of what he's done.
I honestly think some of bigger clubs and their more senior players wouldn't have been dealt with the same or offered the same level of remorse but that's just my opinion..