Start of the second half against Wakey, Con Mika launches into a tackle and heads collide.

Is the general concensus of neutral fans that it was: Deliberate, Sloppy or a Legitimate tackle?

Pure accident.

Kirman stepped slightly just before the impact, stepping straight into Mika who was leaning into the tackle. The two actions led to the head-to-jaw collision.

Though I'm sure the RFL will find some misdemeanour in it all and some bullsh*t 'attack to the head' crap.

Nothing wrong with it.

What a laughable decision it was, how ganson picked out a penalty from that I'll never know!

He rightly picked out a penalty because Mika made contact with Amor's head. It was obviously unintentional but, especially when making such an agressive tackle, Mika has a responsibility to be careful in how he makes a tackle.

Penalty was the right decision. If Mika has a decent record then he shouldn't face any further action from being on report. IMO obviously.

This.

Well if that's the case, Rovers should of had a penalty when Poore made that aggressive run at Withers head in the first minute, it's poores' responsibility to make sure he watches were he puts his head when running in to the tackler.

Hahaha what a load of rubbish, obviously I'm being sarcastic if you couldn't tell.

Agree. Very lazy attempt at a tackle.

Just seen the pictures of Withers' head on Twitter btw, very nasty!

Personally I didn't think there was much wrong with it. I don't believe it was deliberate as Ganson commented over his mic. I also don't think there was anything wrong with the tackle against Withers. It's a tough game.

IMHO Ganson had a howler tonight and wanted to look good on TV. Both sin binnings were a complete joke as well. It seems that since they introduced this new rule about the full team on a warning, the refs are looking for an excuse to use it.

I'm not saying that's the reason we lost tonight, we simply didn't have the manpower to compete.

Ouch.

Ganson said it wasn't deliberate. And I don't think it was - but that doesn't mean it's not a penalty. It was the right decision: if you are going into a tackle at high speed with a frankly somewhat risky angle of attack it's the defending player's responsibility to ensure nothing goes wrong.

What he said ^^^

He lead with his head and made contact with the head, accidentally or otherwise, so a penalty was the right decision.

Amor seems fine by the way - he Tweeted to that effect after the game.

I was sorry to see Withers go off in those circumstances - watched it back on Sky and it seems he got sandwiched between his team-mates; nasty injury, hope he's ok.

Withers' head:

Headache in the morning! Ouch.

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.