55:18 on the game clock, not as blatant as shithead Reynolds' trips but still sticks his leg out.So does anyone have any footage of this mystery trip that Whitehead has been charged for?
Where does he stick his leg out to intentionally trip?
He comes in hard and fast, is bumped off and that's about it. If a trip occurred, and I genuinely don't think I can see one, it's accidental and surely not worthy of a grade 2 charge.
I expect the raiders will be able to fight this and win it fairly easily
Where does he stick his leg out to intentionally trip?
He comes in hard and fast, is bumped off and that's about it. If a trip occurred, and I genuinely don't think I can see one, it's accidental and surely not worthy of a grade 2 charge.
I expect the raiders will be able to fight this and win it fairly easily
(a) trips, kicks or strikes another player.
Id cop a grade 1 for that but grade 2 seems like a bit of an over charge. Im biased obviously but i feel like players have done worse trips and got lower gradings
I'll be interested to see what Reynold's charges are throughout the season. You know he's gonna.
The laws of the game merely state a player is guilty of misconduct if he -
So "intentional" has nothing to do with the matter and arguing against the charge on that basis alone would see any defence fail.
Did he deserve to be charged and the grading he was slapped with? I've no idea as I did not see the incident.
Just because they stuffed up Reynolds' charges in the past doesn't mean this isn't a grade 2. Don't do it in the first place it's ridiculously dangerous
One of the fundamentals of a fair judicial system is consistency from precedent. It's ridiculous that a player can't cite precedent and gives the nrl judiciary all the credibility of a kangaroo court.
I'm happy the Match Review Committee have come down hard on this. The amount of times a trip is said to be an 'accident' is a load of hogswash. You only have to get it slightly wrong and cause a rather major injury to a player. I'd say the same if it was a Brisbane player doing it. It should be a suspension for a trip.
The MRC should be consistent and nothing more. Thats all one can ask from a judicial system. Its why the players should be able to argue precedent.
I dont know how anyone can justify inconsistency from a judiciary. That makes the punishments arbitrary and based on factors outside of the incident
Every case is different. Precedent only comes in for the same things basically. If you think your player is not guilty, challenge it at the judiciary. I doubt you will get off, it was blatant.