Didn't notice anything in the build up or hear the linesmans comments because my dad was going potty next to me! In that case, I'd be more inclined to say it was a bit more premeditated.

When I watched the game back I noticed that Ferres had twice before lifted legs in the tackle.

In the first there was half a spear tackle on Roby followed by a slightly late shot on Walsh, not sure if ferres was involved but it was on his flank.

I haven't thourght of him as a dirty player in the past but someone who likes to play rough. The lift itself was so unneeded can't just say he got it wrong and lomax landed on his head which can happen .... There was something behind it I think, just not to that degree, has to be 7 game ban

Completely agree that Ferres was very close the edge on quite a few tackles today, could have been penalised several times.

Just had a look at the grading suggestions, and a spear tackle with pressure on the head or neck (which in this instance there clearly is) carries a penalty of grade E-F (4-8 games to 8+ games)

8 Games plus for me and i'm not joking. No place in the game for that kind of tackle and who is Brett Ferres to determine whether a bloke walks again or not ? To lift any player like that takes a huge amount of strength and effort and then to continue that motion and drive him into the floor is appalling. The fact Lomax isent paralyzed should not take anything off that tackle, just one each either way and Lomax is lying in hospital waiting to feel movement in his legs. Watch the game and it's clear that Ferres is un-happy at a number of decisions and took his anger out on Lomax. I'll be appalled if it's not at least 8 games

He has been charged with a Grade E, 4-8 match ban.

[urlhttp://www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?5152[/url

It has to be 8 games

If the rule is 4-8
What do you have to do to get 8???
The extent of injury or no injury cannot come into this.

I can't get over how disgusting that tackle was.

One thing the would eradicate things like this would be very hefty fines to go with the ban.

If he picks up 8 games, our next game against them in the league will be the 8th.

He won't get 8 games. The panel will take into consideration that no injury occurred.

I reckon he'll get 6.

Not 7. Is there a difference? Other than he managed to get Lomax totally vertical? The other fella managed about 120 degrees??

The Panel is not known for its consistency.

Why should that make a difference. He drove him down onto the top of his head. Jonny was lucky, Alex Mckinnon wasn't so lucky. Same tackle, Same ban for me.

I hope your right but I doubt it

When do we hear the decision?

Usually after 5 p.m tonight.

4-5 matches, I reckon.
They state "tackle went wrong" rather than malice to avoid the full 8 matches.

I think it will be 4-5 matches at least, mostly because of the timing and the injury to Alex McKinnon.

I think this injury highlighted there can be zero tolerance of dangerous tackles like this. Some guys might end up getting lengthy bans, for the occasional accident or poor technique, not to mention something more malicious, but you cannot risk somebody getting a life changing injury.

What may go against him is that he has previous for a similar offence for Huddersfield after already having a caution whilst at Castleford. www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/discipl ... rch=search

What may go against him is that he has previous for a similar offence for Huddersfield after already having a caution whilst at Castleford. www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/discipl ... rch=search

Watch the tackle again, I am not defending it but he didn`t go down on his head. Just looking at the tackle Lomax seems to jump up into it as though he could be looking for a penalty, which he got but with a slightly different outcome. ????

Lomax is trying to get down for a quick play the ball as the line is disjointed (and he should of given the pass) - to try and stop this Ferres holds him around the waist bear hug style to try and hold him up.

He then for some unbeknownst reason continues the lift (to suggest lomax jump is silly, owing to the fact he's trying to get down to play the ball) - I would suggest Ferres overestimated the force needed to continue holding the player up in the manner he was (which to be fair is an unusual tackling position) - then, more perplexingly continues to drive through the tackle which puts lomax in a vertical position.

Even at this point Ferres has opportunity to release the tackle and give away the penalty, but he continues the tackle until lomax hits the floor (I would definitely say first contact was on the head but I haven't seen it in 24 hours - lomax does the correct thing of not tucking his head in though)

the tackle was right in front of us and believe me Lomax`s head hit the ground at the same time as his shoulder and then Ferres landed on his head with his body, all this talk about Lomax jumping is ridiculous and Ferres followed through when he could have stopped and lowered Lomax at any time, but didnt and looking at the previous he has with the disciplinary over the same tackling technique the lad obviously hasnt learned anything and if he carries on he WILL seriously injure someone

Well ... Ferres is named in the Huddersfield 19 man squad ...

What I don't get is if you are in that position, why drive down??

Hold the player accept you have given a penalty, but hold him until help arrives to put him down safely. I could understand if it was a weight issue, but when vertical he can stop the momentum and just hold.

That way he gives a penalty, gets a warning, but there is no pile drive, no red card and no inquest. People see a genuine attempt to rectify the problem tackle and everyone walks away happy.