Yes Braith was falling. BUT, the whole reason high tackles are outlawed in the game are because they are dangerous. Not just dangerous when a player is hit in the head with and arm, but dangerous when any part of the body hits the head. The outcome of that tackle last night would have been exactly the same had Karmichael used his arm, however I dare say he would have found himself sitting the game out if he had. The NRL needs to start looking at shoulder contact with the head as much as it's looking at arm contact with the head. The rule is all about player safty and it hasn't worked when you look at Braiths nose. What are your thoughts?
Braith was falling and that's pretty much all there is to it. You've got to feel for Anasta though. He cops a lot of crap for how he plays, but he puts in every week... Hunt should get two weeks just because of the contact with the head, but there was no way he deserved to be sent off (as some people have suggested in the papers this morning...). Mind you....if the Crocker grand final tackle did set a precedent...then contact to the head can be ignored if they are falling. BOLLOCKS TO THAT.
The point of Hunt's elbow struck Anasta on the head. Falling or not, Hunt led with the elbow and should get weeks.  Â
If Anasta hadn't have fallen over we would not be discussinfg this. It was an accident. Deadset, league is becoming a pussies game.
