Troll poster, don't feed them.

removing the emotive factor of getting wound up by a KR fan after a defeat, i think somewhere in the middle is about right of the two opinions.

No way did he mean to break his ankle, it looks as though he is trying to slow the play the ball down. Professional foul as they say. However, you can not make that movement on an ankle especially when the tackle was already completed. For me, it was defo akin to a cannonball tackle - in that unnecessary pressure was put on a joint. He could have avoided doing it, but didn't.

Grade C i imagine, with the EGP if he has it reducing it to two games.

It was no1 on McDermott's list of priorities post match to cite Sneyd's tackle as deliberately intended to injure, so yeah, I guess it's up there.

I have watched it a Couple of times. McGuire goes down under the tackle and tries to regain his feet. I can't be sure Sneyd heard a held call and went to turn McGuire over. You see this in tackles all the time, when a player grips from the knees.

I don't believe there is intent to injure. Sin bin was the right call. McGuire has some outhouse plays in his armoury and the kicking out is one. The injury may be genuine, but I feel the outpouring from Leeds is a ploy to reduce his ban for kicking; that's pure Leeds in their attitude.

People also miss the Ablett coming in and pulling back the punch which he stopped short of landing, by putting it into Sneyds leg. Certainly will make Friday interesting.

Think we looking at 3-5 game ban if you compare it the ban that Elima got last year. http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... engthy-ban

Think we looking at 3-5 game ban if you compare it the ban that Elima got last year. http://www.therfl.co.uk/news/article/29 ... engthy-ban

He actually seemed more angry at the the ref for sin-binning McGuire than he was at Sneyd I thought.

Mrs Barista wrote:It was no1 on McDermott's list of priorities post match to cite Sneyd's tackle as deliberately intended to injure, so yeah, I guess it's up there. Indeed - and a tad hypocritical on Brian's part .

Mrs Barista wrote:It was no1 on McDermott's list of priorities post match to cite Sneyd's tackle as deliberately intended to injure, so yeah, I guess it's up there. Indeed - and a tad hypocritical on Brian's part .

The dobbins seem to Be very concerned over this incident

Watched it about 10 times now my opinion is ...it's a bad one tbf but absoloutly no intent what's so ever in my mind , Danny McGuire retaliated with a kick to sneydes head . Both should receive a ban

Reckless from Sneyd but nothing intentional, or that irregular. Still doubt we'll see him for a good few games.

McGuire did kick out yes, but AFTER the roll by Sneyd that has damaged his ankle and clearly left him in pain.

Before the roll all McGuire is trying to do is stand up and has his right foot in place for the PTB. The only reason Sneyd holds on is to stop him from doing that because you have no defenders back, not because of some alledged fear of getting a kick if he lets go.

Sneyd could've stayed laying on his stomach whilst holding the ankle, that's fine. Sure he'd have conceded the penalty and probably 10 mins anyway but nothing dangerous about it. But he doesn't stayed on his stomach, he decides to roll himself over completely unnecessarily. He still could've achieved the aim of not allowing him to PTB by staying layed on his stomach whilst holding the ankle.