Not really, don't most bans come from penalty's?

I tend to agree, I'm not really having a go at Senior, he did seem to show concern for Joel but you are right it is quite similar in a funny way to a reckless high tackle, not done on purpose but still dangerous and worthy of a ban in some instances.



Not sure of Seniors record though if he has previous Bans they may give him a game.





To be honest the most annoying thing about it was ET (Kear) saying it was fine and he was "just making himself room for the play of the ball" With his legs!!?? Kear went mad last year when Sam caught Cunningham with a flailing leg in a tackle and called for Sam to be banned

My point was clearly that Bentham saw it ONLY as a penalty When anything that is deemed bad enough to be charged with a Grade A offence should at least be worthy of 10 in the bin.

Yes but it was in the same tackle so advantage would not have been over, if Tomkins had scored it would have been allowed but he wasnt so it should have been brought back to the original knock on by Smith.

Are you on Glue!!!!! how can you compare this tackle with the one by scruton!!????

The only difference was that Coley was lucky as to how the player fell. A tiny amount more rotation and he's on his neck - it was very dangerous.

Like Coley's dangerous throw then?

No thanks I've given the glue up.



The only difference was that the tackled player bent his back, the tackle made was just the same, had Delaney stayed straight he would have landed on his head.

If you like yes, I'm not condoning Coleys Tackle but there were 2 main differences, Delaney DID land on his back hence the Grade A if he had gone more vertical would have been worse than A its a fine line take sam tomkins tackle last week v crusaders was similar but with no case to answer, and delaney got up and played on with no problems. Joel was injured quite badly as a result of VERY dangerous play (albeit accidental) and needed 8 stitches in a severe cut and could have lost his eye.



A tackle can quite easily stray high or be a bit dangerous but you dont expect to be kicked fully in the face and there is NO NEED whatsoever for Seniors boot to be so high, Joel must be 6'4"ish!!!

Clearly not, if it was very dangerous as you put it it would be worse than a grade A. We are talking inches for gods sake!! Yes if he had been a few more inches over it would have been on his neck but you could argue if Peacocks "tackle" was a few inches higher it would have been a shocker!

Yes but Delaney DID stay straight, if he hadnt it would have been worse I agree, but the Judiciary will not use your example as defence for coley, they will look at the final outcome, Delaney landed on his back therefore making it less of an issue for coley. Next we will be saying Delaney should have thrown his head to the floor to make the punishment worse for coley (just like when Mcguire went down like he had been shot after Farrell caught him)





The attackers actions in the tackle have a major bearing on the outcome look at Sam when Peacock tackled him, if he had not put his arm up to protect himself he would have been caught on the chin and peacock would have been suspended (had an international not been coming up) but he wasnt and was very lucky that Sam put his arm up to protect himself.

No he didn't, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make with the rest of your post? I have not made any mention as to what punishment Coley should or shouldn't receive.