And it absolutely should not have.



The game is tough enough without letting people away with that sort of thing. FWIW I though Westwood should have walked in the GF and was delighted when Green got back up and played a key part in winning the game. It was a clear tactic to take a player out of the game and it failed. Bowen on the other hand didn't need to tackle Grix, and should have walked. Late, high and off the ball. How the panel suggest it came off the shoulder first I have no idea, but it does set a precedent.

A lot of posters keep saying it's set a president (I've quoted your just because it was the last one to mention it) but I don't think it does simply because the disciplinary panel have deemed it as first contact with the shoulder so any forthcoming high shots will just be classified to suit, head if they want to ban them and shoulder if they want a penalty sufficient decision.



I thought he deserved ten minutes, simply for taking out the kicker and probably a one game ban as it was high (although my guess is it wasn't malicious just a poorly executed late tackle).



As for bans, bans shouldn't be served in friendlies. Maybe a better system would that a player is banned for X games in that whichever competition the offence was commited and can't play in any game, in any competition until it has been served. Internationals would be tricky though I guess.

New(ish) poster...more through luck than judgement that Grix wasn't seriously injured, and to say it was an obstruction? Bowen was off the ground when he made contact with the head of Grix (not shoulder)

I would hope, like this one, that the video evidence is clear enough for them to spot the difference between head and shoulder







Don't disagree with any of that tbh







Agree again. Would mean the problem of having to avoid banning players due to play in the cup final doesn't arise. Any ban would be served in the next SL fixture.

Do the RFL wear cherry and white shirts ?

I heard that Nigel Wood has a pair of XXXXXXXXXXXL cherry and white y-fronts

This made me laugh and want to puke at the same time.

For those of you with twitter accounts follow @RFLReferees many decisions made explained on there (including the Bowen one) #asktheref

So to summarise the last 11 pages

Silver wood copped out

Mattie Bowen is a vicious thug who went out to hurt Grix

The RFL are all cherry and white supporters and bent.

Or

Alternatively

(Please feel free to burn me at the stake for this)

A professional REF and the Independent panel came to similar decisions based on evidence.

Most people are actually being quite even handed about this, there are the odd few who are over reacting and saying it's an assault and the odd few - like yourself - who are defending the indefensible in an attempt to avoid the quite obvious truth: it was a high swinging arm, so late that it doesn't deserve to be called a tackle. Even if he did make a smidgen of contact with Grix's shoulder first it was in such a way that contact with the neck and head was subsequently unavoidable - that is the very definition of reckless. When you accept that (as almost everyone else appears to have done) then the only reasonable response, both as punishment and deterrent is a ban somewhere between 1-3 games. That they have let him off is an indictment of the disciplinary committee, lots of people coming to the same wrong decision doesn't make it right.

So why did Lima get banned for the WCC in 2011?

Didn't Super Kel once miss the CC final with a ban?