Round 19 Vs Raiders

[franklin2323]

Fans want big hits and tries. Simple really and they try to make it too complicated.

 

[BxTom]

Not late. Not high. Not a shoulder charge. Not dangerous.

Lets bin him and suspend him for no reason. Meanwhile we will defend the actual shoulder charge from this game as being ok because it was in the act of stopping a try.

Shoulder charge is an illegal play. Yet doing it to save a try is apparently not a professional foul or worthy of suspension. These braindead merkins have no f**king idea.

Im happy not to suspend a fullback in that situation. But that's a professional foul at the very least. Any other illegal play to save a try is...yet this one that can hurt a player isn't.

None of it makes sense. Tackle a half well. You're suspended regardless of any wrongdoing. Yet same tackle on any other player is fine. Its one thing to protect playmakers. Its another to apply the rules differently to them and against them.

Should also be a penalty try.

 

[Roosters rule]

So what did fafita get?

1 week out.
The Kikau suspension is a disgrace, it was a borderline late hit. Worth a penalty thats it. No contact was made with the head or neck.
The NRL are a joke.

 

[Panfa]

Our referees for this week are none other than ashley i hate penrith klein and dave munro the nrl really have it in for us whos the video ref cummins or sutton lol.

 

[Whino]

I am very pissed off with Kikau's suspension.
9 minutes to make a decision is a joke. He should have never been charged in the first place.
The NRL is a joke.

 

[kinghippo]

Everyone should make some signs of protest for the game saying

“Was that a shoulder charge?”

You could just hold them up after every tackle.

“Free big Villy” is another good option.

 

[TheFrog]

Should also be a penalty try.

There's plenty of precedent for it not to be a penalty try, but sometimes it's a penalty and sometimes it isn't. And only the Slater one was charged but he was cleared. That was just grandstanding ahead of the Grand Final.

If a shoulder charge to the body is considered by the game ok to stop a try,or just a penalty, what is the basis of it being a penalty, 10 minutes in the bin, and a 2 game suspension at other times? It cannot be player safety or you wouldn't be allowed to do it in a try scoring position either. It's like saying you are allowed to do a spear tackle or an eye gouge only on a player attempting to score a try.

This ruling raises far more questions than it answers.

9 minutes to make a decision is a joke.

It sounds like the decision was made before the hearing even began, quite likely not even by Garlick and co.

 

[kinghippo]

I am very pissed off with Kikau's suspension.
9 minutes to make a decision is a joke. He should have never been charged in the first place.
The NRL is a joke.

Obviously the NRL stepped in on this one.
I can think the process went something along the lines of “ We have tough new laws”
“ We need to support our Refs”. “ It doesn’t matter if he is guilty we need to make a point!”
“ it’s only Penrith “

 

[Whino]

It sounds like the decision was made before the hearing even began, quite likely not even by Garlick and co.

I think his cards were marked before he went in. The refs unfairly put him in the sin bin and they have been trying to justify the decision ever since.

 

[OldPanther]

 

[snickers007]

I am very pissed off with Kikau's suspension.
9 minutes to make a decision is a joke. He should have never been charged in the first place.
The NRL is a joke.

The judiciary panel has very clear guidelines as to what is / is not a shoulder charge. These guidelines, like most things with the NRL, are overly technical, and leave zero room for context. Penrith needed to argue, within the framework of what is or is not a shoulder charge.

I find it hard to believe that any of the judiciary members believed that the tackle deserved a suspension. But given their guidelines, and the frameworks that they are forced to operate in, they had no choice but to find him guilty.

In other words, the system is broken. In trying to create 100% consistency, they lose the feel for the game. And when other parts of the system break down (referees and the match review committee), there is no avenue of righting the ship.

The worst part about it, is that we have to cop this result, and our uproar will initiate change of some kind, but it won't actually benefit us, and will be just another band-aid trying to hold together the system.

There is no other justification for the decision. No stakeholder in the game, from the ARLC board members, down to Johnny Smith Under 8s coach of the Betoota Bandits thinks that eye gauging, tripping, and knees to the head are more acceptable in the game than Kikau's tackle.

 

[forby]

Very clear - if you wear Penrith colours you are guilty before being charged!

 

[OldPanther]

The judiciary panel has very clear guidelines as to what is / is not a shoulder charge. These guidelines, like most things with the NRL, are overly technical, and leave zero room for context. Penrith needed to argue, within the framework of what is or is not a shoulder charge.

I find it hard to believe that any of the judiciary members believed that the tackle deserved a suspension. But given their guidelines, and the frameworks that they are forced to operate in, they had no choice but to find him guilty.

In other words, the system is broken. In trying to create 100% consistency, they lose the feel for the game. And when other parts of the system break down (referees and the match review committee), there is no avenue of righting the ship.

The worst part about it, is that we have to cop this result, and our uproar will initiate change of some kind, but it won't actually benefit us, and will be just another band-aid trying to hold together the system.

There is no other justification for the decision. No stakeholder in the game, from the ARLC board members, down to Johnny Smith Under 8s coach of the Betoota Bandits thinks that eye gauging, tripping, and knees to the head are more acceptable in the game than Kikau's tackle.

Surely the rules don't count a player genuinely wrapping the attacking player as a shoulder charge though.

 

[snickers007]

Surely the rules don't count a player genuinely wrapping the attacking player as a shoulder charge though.

From the quotes I read, they argued that he didn't make a genuine attempt to wrap his left arm - thus defining it as a shoulder charge.

I'm not justifying the decision - it is horseshit. But the judiciary members didn't really have a say in it.

 

[Westernised Panther]

‍‍

In other words..........NO!!

 

[Blade23]

This is the inconsistencies of the NRL.
They can rub Kikau out of 2 matches yet they didn't suspend Josh Mcguire earlier this year for an eye gouge.

 

[Black Diamond]

This is the inconsistencies of the NRL.
They can rub Kikau out of 2 matches yet they didn't suspend Josh Mcguire earlier this year for an eye gouge.

TWICE!

 

[Blade23]

TWICE!

Thats right.

This will go in the bin as a ridiculous suspension, Like George Brugess getting a couple of weeks for throwing a drink bottle.

 

[Thirsty Panther]

Kicks should of used Slater's lawyer.

 

[BxTom]

1 week out.
The Kikau suspension is a disgrace, it was a borderline late hit. Worth a penalty thats it. No contact was made with the head or neck.
The NRL are a joke.

Are you suggesting that the NRL match review committee is not
impartial?



Off with your head!