As a Salford fan I think the ban is fair. There's no excuse for late challenges especially those that are aimed 'high'. I think their was deliberate intent to hit late with the shoulder but I don't think he went deliberately for the head. He aimed high but generally so as with a shoulder check. That's my interpretation. Obviously late but not singling out the head in particular.

Think the RL should afford field-kickers some protection. I love the hard stuff in RL but only if it's fair, and punch-ups are part of the game and shouldn't be looked upon as a disgrace to the Sport. Unfair late challenges should be penalised even more heavily than they are in my opinion to discourage future incidents that may be worse than Saturdays event.

Four weeks to sit on the naughty step and think about what he did. Let's hope he learns.

Think he can count him self very lucky not to be looking at more.

I think that's a tad harsh given he has no previous in superleague or elite.

I'm guessing he can still play in elite for UTC. It's a shame for him because everyone has shown slowed down videos and it makes it look worse.

Spoke to a number of Salford fans at the game and they only thought it was bad due to the length of time theo was on the floor

It was late and looked bad. I think its a case of lesson learned.

Right on to the next game... whose turn is it to start the "Daunting" thread ?

He's appealing the length of the ban.

I've still not seen the incident </Wenger> so I'm not going to get into all that, but I'd have thought he would just take it on the chin, so to speak.

It was a smidge late!

The way I saw it (and I'm coming at it unemotionally unlike a lot of Salford fans) is that it was deliberately late. A lot are saying an elbow then shoulder, I just see a shoulder. While it connects with Theo's head, Bousquet was looking away at the time of the challenge and the angles both were running, to me, showed that it wasn't a deliberate head attack. Under those circumstances, I'd say the ban is fair. To appeal it is taking the mickey a little bit. It was deliberate and late. What's to appeal?

I cant see why you would appeal when there is a risk of ban extention.

Possibly a chance of extension in this case as it's so cut-and-dry as regards to intent.

From the club

They've a point re consistency. Unless there has been a change in policy, then it deserves to be considered in the same light as similar incidents - that seems a reasonable argument. The question then comes down to intent, which without us all being Derren Brown is always going to be difficult to pin down. The club, understandably, wish to protect and support their player. Fair enough.

The point of law regarding the mens rea refers to intention, recklessness and knowledge. Now should he or Catalans believe the tackle was fair and would have no objections to it being played on let's say Henderson or Pryce then they have a right to appeal. My thoughts are they know its bad but want the ban reducing to assist the clubs playing staff. It was a shocker and to many fans & pundits alike 4 games is light.

He was 0.28 seconds late, also, there is no indication as to what knocked theo out, the impact of 123kg man hitting a 77kg man or the force of that impact and theo hitting the floor.

It was no worse than Ellis for England on Stacul last year and Ellis played the next week

I understand defending your own team, but if the boot was on the other foot would you say the same?

Not sure I could give a tupenny one, so long as the process was transparent.

Anyway, appeal rejected. Ban upheld.