Leeming

[Suzieb]

It was quite obvious that Leeming made contact with fages when he still had the ball a ridiculous decision to sin bin him and would be an injustice to ban him what do others think

[Wiganer Ted]

He wasn't late and not high so not a penalty.
Should have been play on.
As for a sin a bin, not surprised and will be less surprised if he gets a ban.
The disciplinary committee are always trying to justify their existence.

[Firestarter]

Just a very very poor decision and kendall needs dropping after that

[Charriots Offiah]

Just a very very poor decision and kendall needs dropping after that

And the video referee.

[endoman]

The theatrics from the Catalan player didn’t help. Disciplinary could send a great message by banning him.

[nathan_rugby]

I think the penalty was for a late hit rather than a high tackle. Although it definitely wasn’t late.

The sin bin was for an accumulation of penalties.

[Ipinwigan]

Still can't get away from the fact that between the Ref and Video Ref, they are ruining the matches as contests.
The Huddersfield v Stains game is another example of someone being sent off for a hit that he can't avoid.
So a game Huddersfield could easily of won, was over as a contest, because common sense is not used.

[thegimble]

Reason for the sin bin was for mounting numbers of pens. Ref himself says it's not contact with the head.

I did not see the game only highlights. So was ref wrong on the number of pens if not sin bin was the correct decision.

[endoman]

Reason for the sin bin was for mounting numbers of pens. Ref himself says it's not contact with the head.

I did not see the game only highlights. So was ref wrong on the number of pens if not sin bin was the correct decision.

Yes there were several consecutive penalties, but this was not a penalisable offence, it was neither high nor late. You can't just decide to sin bin someone cos you feel like it.

[doc]

It looked to be the touchy that brought Kendal's attention to the incident.