Chris71 wrote:I honestly don't think 10 games is over the top considering he's been up before the panel before for the same offence in less than a calendar year. The tackle was terrible and by pure luck Connor Wynn was able to walk away unharmed.
I'm don't believe Pryce meant to do it but that and the fact no injury was sustained doesn't and shouldn't come in to it. I imagine the panel have also rightly taken a dim view of the fact its less than 12 months since he was up for similar offence and has now repeated it.
Yes its harsh and severe but none the less its a lesson he needs to learn before his luck (and an opposing players luck) runs out and he does more than just cause an injury if repeated again.
The RFL and the Disciplinary panel have rightly copped a lot of flack for their decisions and punishments given out so far this season but on this one I think they need to be given credit for judging the incident on the seriousness of it and given punishment based on all possible consequences without having pure luck as any defence. It was a bad enough tackle on its own but the fact he has done it before less than 12 months ago then it had to be a severe punishment as he has clearly not heeded the last warning he was given.
If any of our players did or do a tackle like that then I would have no complaints if they also received such a heavy ban and if that meant our season was finished I'd rather that than see any players career of life finished because of that type of tackle whether intentional or not.
That'll be the reason why he was punished with a longer ban. He's had ample opportunity to correct his tackling technique but has failed to do so. Connor Wynne was very lucky to come away unscathed. If Pryce does it again the next player may not be as fortunate.
It's widely acknowledged that bans have been overly zealous for relatively minor incidents but in this case the RL has a real duty of care to protect players from foul play like this that could cause permanent damage to a players health and quite rightly imposed a ban that is appropriate for the offence.[/b]
