Like to know what Tony Smith said to him after full time.

Putting someone in hospital and someone attending hospital for a check up and then being absolutely fine are two HUGELY different things.

What if he's found not guilty?

He'll get a ban anyway because he only plays for Wire!

Staying in overnight because the Doctors want to keep you in for observation and a checkup are also again HUGELY different things.

HUGELY different to what, I take it you mean discharged immediately?

How is Mr Gale?

You are right, no system is perfect. However, it shouldn't stop us trying to improve the system we already have just because we will never achieve perfection.

If a player is banned in his last game for a club, under the current system it does penalise his new club as the suspension is carried forwards (eg Hock and, cough, Sandow!) so that's hardly a reason not to move forwards.

Surely the current systems is designed as much as possible to penalise the individual - nobody can hold a whole club responsible for the actions of an individual (okay, some Saints fans may argue otherwise re: Shaun Wane)?

If a player racks up loads of future suspensions, he will be less attractive to other clubs who may sign him in future. Sounds like an excellent deterrent to committing foul play in the first place to me.

He is fine.
However, he wasn't fine when we needed him to be for 76 minutes on Sunday (though at least he didn't have to suffer watching the team as I did).
Nor does the fact that he is okay retrospectively justify any foul play.

It's about time coaches were fined for spouting off about fictitious injuries. sneyd was pilloried for his tackle on maguire when mcdermott came out and claimed his ankle was broken when he had no idea and was shown to be an idiot when maguire was back 2 weeks later. It's like players feigning injury to get a penalty or someone sent off. The game is going the way of football

This is the tackle: www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... due-to-ban Russell on Wire FM tomorrow morning at 8am so somebody might be able to listen and hear about his injury!

This is the tackle: www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... due-to-ban Russell on Wire FM tomorrow morning at 8am so somebody might be able to listen and hear about his injury!

Quote ="Rugby"This is the tackle: www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... due-to-ban'" Not actually as late as I though it was when I saw it live. However, it is still late and the contact is with the head (paused and 00:03 of the video - the ball is a well away and the contact is with the top of Westwood's arm and Gale's head. Not the worst I have seen by a long way, but still worthy of a 1-2 game ban in my opinion.

Quote ="Rugby"This is the tackle: www.skysports.com/rugby-league/n ... due-to-ban'" Not actually as late as I though it was when I saw it live. However, it is still late and the contact is with the head (paused and 00:03 of the video - the ball is a well away and the contact is with the top of Westwood's arm and Gale's head. Not the worst I have seen by a long way, but still worthy of a 1-2 game ban in my opinion.

Lazarus like recovery from Gale at the end of that video that coincided with Bentham not awarding a penalty although you can see at that point that Gale's badly broken jaw has fixed his mouth in a grinning position.

Straight forward assault to the head, Benny knew what he was doing. Can understand Powells rant that not one official saw it at the time.

But Gale didn't recover. He was taken off for a concussion check and never returned, instead making his way to Pontefract A&E.
I don't think anyone has claimed he had broken his jaw, did they? Regardless, the fact no lasting injury was caused does not justify foul play.
I assume Bentham didn't award a penalty as he followed the ball rather than watch a player not in possession? Either than or he is incompetent - take your pick!
However, the touch judge on the far touchline did suspect foul play, reported it and as such it was put on report.

I think you need to remove the tinted spectacles and drop the idea of laying the blame for Westwood's possible suspension at the door of the opposition player.

Only Westwood knows how intentional it was, but even if Gale had retained possession the tackle would have been illegal as contact was made with the head. I'm not sure how intentional it was, more careless than deliberate would be my reaction.
Unfortunately there are two things wrong with the tackle - it was late and made contact with the head.
However, I have seen a lot worse.

Totally agree NT, my post was a reaction to some alarmist posting earlier on in the thread and I hadn't heard any detail of Gale's injury...I'm glad it seems to have blown over.

I look forward to a return visit to Wheldon Road, I'm sure that you guys will be up for it, yesterday's match was a bit unexpected to say the least.

Likewise. I particularly look forward to watching Sandow but hope we put in a better performance!

On a lighter note, did anyone catch Bentham and Mylers moment of banter when Myler went over for the last try and you could see Bentham ask the touch judge if he knocked it on only for the pair to share a laugh.

It was only what could be described as the start of a true bromance!

After a couple of "benefit of doubt" tries awarded to Warrington, I enjoyed our fans in the Wheldon Road end singing "It's a Try" the next time a Warrington player was clearly held up over the line.
Became less funny when Warrington scored from the next play.

My bias eyes aren't what they were but does gale slip slightly before his offload? Doesn't look that bad at all to me.

Penalty nothing more.


However, what a tackle on Carney to prevent the try by Russell. That's amazing.

[url=http://s8.photobucket.com/user/wirefan/media/Screenshot_2015-07-27-23-06-28_zpsl2kkpkgo.jpg.html[/url

First contact = arm to shoulder?

Picture sums it up arm first and Bennie isn't even looking at Gale , hard to tell from poor coverage but ,I felt Gale dummies to go right then turned left and caught Bennie out but, we will see how panel view it ,I'd suggest decision will be nothing more than guess work

Depends on how the committee look at it.

On the positive

1. Judging by that picture it's not that late.
2. Benny's knees are bent, he going in for a big hit no doubt, but both players are stooping.

On the negative

1. Benny is not looking at the player, he can see the ball is gone, and follows through with the hit.
2. He's Westwood, and he plays for Warrington.

I'm guessing he'll get a two game ban. For reason 2 alone.

I read somewhere in defence of Bennie that Gale admitted he milked it.