Laughable outcome considering the defence they offered, who were the numbnut judiciary members that fell for that ? The NRL is really struggling for credibility at the moment and this just proves they have lost the plot.
I don't know how anyone could consider that tackle anything less than an illegal lifting tackle, the intention is irrelevant. I believe the rule has some reference to arms between the legs and players passing horizontal, how they deemed that tackle didn't fulfil that criteria is beyond me.
Ultimately I don't care whether Thurston plays or not, but the issue is credibility of the judiciary process, and sadly they have proven that there is none. Every club should keep a copy of that tackle, because given that precedent there should be no more suspensions handed out for lifting tackles or dangerous throws.