I missed the very start of the match, looking at that picture I'm very glad I did! Nasty nasty looking injury that one.

The Mika incident is difficult. I'm pretty sure Ganson's first reaction was a play the ball, which was changed to a penalty later (listening the the ref on Sky can be problematic with all the babble over it so there's a good chance I'm wrong). Completely unintentional, just went for an aggressive tackle, and if Amor hadn't stepped there wouldn't have been a head collision. But ultimately there was contact with the head, so I suppose a penalty isn't a bad decision. Thing is though 'contact' is made with the head in a hell of a lot of tackles, be it in the wrestle on the way to the floor, on the floor or whatever. What's the threshold that must be crossed to make it an automatic penalty? (Presumably I will be disappointed to hear the answer is 'discretionary').

Oh and teams better be extra careful when warned by Ganson by the look of things. Yay





Good, he was playing well. Seems like he wanted to go back on but was very sensibly told not to. Rugby players are mental

Pretty sure it's the tackler's responsibility to watch where he puts his head (ie, try not get sandwiched by your teammates!).
Did Poore even make contact with his head?

Was the gash caused by the collision by the way? Because it looks like after the tackle Withers gets a stud across his head (when he's laid in the floor) but it didn't get picked up on Sky.

In regards to the penalty, he's come in in an aggressive manner leading with his head in a wreckless area. Totally accidental, but he's caused that so it's a penalty.

I thought Dobson was a moron last night when it came to talking to the ref. total lack of respect. Expect that sort of thing in football. If you don't like the refs decision, talking to him like a spoilt teenager isn't going to make things better!

I like the comment in Twitter "he looks like a baseball!"

No expert on medical treatment but the quality of those stitches does not seem great. Not sure they were done by the club medic or Pinderfields but if they were done in a specialist hospital they are not done to reduce the scarring.

Awful decision for me. Head collisions happen. Those saying it is mika's responsibility to avoid contact with the head, What about the other way round if an attacking player runs "aggressively" and a defender goes for a low tackle and gets cleaned out, is that a penalty to the defending side?

It was a typical Ganson display, irratic. When is a tackle complete, it should be when the ball carrying arm touches the deck with a defender on the attacker on two occasions last night when this happened we got a try and penalty against us. When Paterson stole the ball one on one, Ganson said the tackle was complete and penalised us, but when Caro tackled a Wakey player it was clear that the ball arm touched the deck and it was clear that Caro was in contact with the player, yet he was allowed to play on.

I just wish we could have some constancy.

Not sure that a player being left unconscious is laughable but each to their own. The clash between Mika's head and Amor's jaw was accidental. However the penalty was given due to contact with the head, accidental or not....as the referee said.

Mika was put on report because the referee, as he said, was of the opinion that Mika lead with his head and its now up to the disciplinary panel to decide if he did or not. Personally, I don't think he did, I think it was an accidental clash of heads.

I'm at a loss to understand those who think contact with the head is acceptable. It doesn't matter what part of Mika made contact with Amor's head it's still a penalty. If he wants to make an aggressive tackle he could have bent his back and put a tackle in in the regular fashion. If he'd done that he'd have been lower and so not made contact with Amor's head. If it had been his arm or shoulder that hit Amor's head no-one would be saying its not a penalty and he'd probably have been sent off.
It's the responsibility of the tackler not to make contact with the attackers head.

It was an accident but still a penalty
Any contact with the head is a penalty simple as that
If it had been deemed deliberate he'd have been off the pitch!

Oh and Rover49 you need to learn the rules on what's a tackle complete and not, Ganson got those calls right.

But he was shocking for the most part.

Ganson looked an absolute mess ( overweight). Its hard to see on TV how well he's keeping up, but I don't know how you get through 80 minutes in that shape. If he managed a half decent job, fair play to him, he must have some stamina to drag that gut around. It looks bad on TV though.

nothing wrong with mikas' challenge imo, didnt think he lead with his head just unfortunate

poores' was accidental, it was unfortunate that withers got hit by two of his own players in the tackle

At the time i was incredulous at the decision to give a penalty but that was purely heat of the moment and i can understand why it was given now. Clearly not deliberate (who would tackle with their head on purpose?) but i can see Mika getting a ban for this knowing the disciplinary panel and that would be a joke

Think you've just secured yourself a mention by @RLMeltdown.

They said the decision was laughable not the fact that Amor got knocked out



Sure some people want our sport to be more like netball/

Correct. I don think Mika should be banned, however I can see him getting a letter from the RFL about his tackling technique - Its his responsibility to ensure he 'gets it right' and as has been said on this thread, he could have bent his back and tackled Amor around the legs.

ganson put both teams on a warning then carded the next offence.
compare that to bentham who put wigan on a warning. wigan then conceded the next five penalties but no card. at least ganson was consistent for both sides. all you can ask for is consistency unlike bentham who needs to grow a pair

That's true of every tackle though, it's very rare for a forward on forward tackle with momentum behind it to be a legs tackle.
Mika was trying to put a hit on Amor, the fact that he nutted him is just unfortunate for both parties.
A ban would be very harsh.

You want him to go in low on a prop running the ball back from a KICK OFF?



Nobody is going to go for the legs in that situation, because if you go for the legs in that situation you're going to collect a knee or a hip and you're the one who ends up sleeping or with 20 stitches

There's very good reason that you don't see head-on tackling at the waist or below in the game very often, it's because it's effing stupid and coaches don't coach it. It's pretty much unheard of to tackle at the waist or below in a 1 on 1 kick-return scenario like that



Both players were at fault. Mika had his head on the wrong side of Amor, it was a technically bad effort. But equally Amor is a forward, a prop has no business taking the ball up from the kick off and trying a pirouette.

Accidents happen. You can't just dish out punishments whenever someone has an unfortunate injury. If Amor wasn't cut and got to his feet to play the ball not a single person here would have anything to say about the tackle. Head clashes are a fairly regular occurrence in the game, especially when people get wrong footed

why would you want to ruin a good game by sin binning for small time penalties which wire also did?

It would be if the attacker nutted him

set a dangerous precedent by giving a penalty for that it was an accidental had clash, its a by product of the game and it will always happen. if thats a penalty the best 2 props to have are ian kirke and paul prescott as they get a head clash almost every game.

Can you read? Are you broken? Where did I say it's funny when a player is unconscious?

Wither's will have a banging head ache this morning! As for the Mika incident, it was a penalty but accidental. These things happen in such a tough, intense sport.

A penalty is a dangerous precedent? More like an innocuous outcome if you ask me.

However, I do agree that accidental head clashes will always happen, in much the same way that involuntary high tackles will always be made. Both worthy of a penalty and, in most cases, no more.

Deliberate for mine, he clearly is looking where he's putting his head, at best its reckless which as in law is equally blameworthy. Put him in the stocks ! Next case.