2016 Match Review Committee / Judiciary

[carcharias]

posting during the game?

I can't do that.

I'm watching the game and drinking beer

 

[Generalzod]

Its gone pretty quiet......

 

[shaggs]

I'm most looking forward to the 25 minute mark when the super sub combo of Vaughan and Tapine cum off the bench and are inserted into the game... "Vaugine" should be able to take any impact from the Sharks tiring big men and help produce points late in the half.

Vaugine like wizards sleeve?

 

[JamesRustle]

Vaugine like wizards sleeve?

Indeed. It would be like throwing a sausage down an alley.

 

[betcats]

We should overhaul the MRC and do away with the judiciary all together.

 

[Timmah]

We should overhaul the MRC and do away with the judiciary all together.

We should do away with the opportunity for someone to have a hearing?

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

 

[some11]

I think he's arguing for a Philippines style justice system, anyone accused of being a grub gets punished in the street.

 

[betcats]

We should do away with the opportunity for someone to have a hearing?

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Because it's horseshit anyway. It's a game not a court of law. Look at the video and decide what the infringement is worth it shouldn't be that hard to decide what the penalty is for high tackle.

We are such a f**king nanny state in Australia, you can't even suspend an athlete for foul play without giving them a chance for a hearing despite its being on video,

 

[betcats]

I think he's arguing for a Philippines style justice system, anyone accused of being a grub gets punished in the street.

It's all on HD video, there's no accusations, everyone can see what happened. We've got high priced lawyers defending blokes for high tackles and shit like that and we are wondering why it's become so complicated.

 

[SBD82]

Because it's horseshit anyway. It's a game not a court of law. Look at the video and decide what the infringement is worth it shouldn't be that hard to decide what the penalty is for high tackle.

We are such a f**king nanny state in Australia, you can't even suspend an athlete for foul play without giving them a chance for a hearing despite its being on video,

That's not what a nanny state is.

 

[Pete Cash]

Australia is such a f**king nanny state that you cant even chuck people in prison without a trial.,

 

[betcats]

But we aren't locking people up and seeking justice, it's ridiculous to even compare them. There is no doubt about what happened when players are charged it's on video for anyone to see. The doubt is on the "interpretation" of what happened which is created by the mrc and judiciary and the lawyers who's sole purpose is to create doubt. The whole things become a huge negative for the NRL. I can understand hearings for local park footy but not at this level.

 

[betcats]

That's not what a nanny state is.

Hmm well my understanding of the term is obviously wrong. What I meant is we are so politically correct and worried about things being fair that we can't even suspend a player straight away when it's clear they broke the rules of the game. Now we have lawyers arguing simple infringements and the results are effecting the way the game is played and ref'd.

 

[SBD82]

Hmm well my understanding of the term is obviously wrong. What I meant is we are so politically correct and worried about things being fair that we can't even suspend a player straight away when it's clear they broke the rules of the game. Now we have lawyers arguing simple infringements and the results are effecting the way the game is played and ref'd.

It's not being politically correct either.

What you're talking about is the notion that a person has the right to respond when charges are leveled at them. It's a notion that is upheld to various extents in many countries around the world.

I understand that you think that the NRL should be able to assess guilt and penalise without the hearing process. In response I would point you to all the times that the MRC have botched their job this year.

What makes you think that the people in the system you are advocating would be any more competent?

 

[betcats]

It's not being politically correct either.

What you're talking about is the notion that a person has the right to respond when charges are leveled at them. It's a notion that is upheld to various extents in many countries around the world.

I understand that you think that the NRL should be able to assess guilt and penalise without the hearing process. In response I would point you to all the times that the MRC have botched their job this year.

What makes you think that the people in the system you are advocating would be any more competent?

I think it would be better because if you remove the judiciary then the mrc just has to find a way to be consistent with the penalties applied(difficult I know) and you have removed most of the controversy involved and you avoid situations like last week where you have the mrc explaining one interpretation of a rule and the judiciary obviously applying a different interpretation of the same rule to let Wighton off or Ryan James going to the judiciary and pleading not guilty to a high tackle when it's clear as day it was a high tackle. At the very least change it to an appeals process where players can appeal the penalties after they are decided instead of this stupid system of charging them and then letting them plea their innocence or accept early pleas for lesser punishments like it actually is a court of law. Like why does a proffesional rugby league player need a lawyer to go and argue technical rugby league issues? We are not far off having a lawyer argue a bloke shouldn't be suspended for a high tackle because he was temporarily insane. We don't need highly trained legal minds defending these sorts of rule infringements.

 

[zmt]

Welcome james

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

Crucify him because he's a Bronco. Nevermind the dumb merkin who wouldn't clear the ruck

 

[carlosthedwarf]

Crucify him because he's a Bronco. Nevermind the dumb merkin who wouldn't clear the ruck

So if someone doesn't clear the ruck it's a free pass to kick them? Grow up

 

[Pete Cash]

You cant kick a bloke because he is hanging around the ruck ? Are you saying if milford gets tangled up in the ptb on say shannon boyd next time we play and boyd kicks milford in the face you would think thats fair enough

 

[Maximus]

Crucify him because he's a Bronco. Nevermind the dumb merkin who wouldn't clear the ruck

No, crucify him because he kicked someone. Clear as day


That's 10 weeks minimum.