The Game 2021 Judiciary Charges

[This Year?]

It baffles me why we haven’t challenged anything the match review committee have dished up in recent times. I actually can’t remember the last time we did?

I’m guessing it’s a Sims brother...

To me it shows the club doesn't get behind the players in these sorts of incidents. I guess the way the club sees it they just cop it than try to challenge it and lose. I still don't get why there's extra time given for losing a challenge anway.

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

To me it shows the club doesn't get behind the players in these sorts of incidents. I guess the way the club sees it they just cop it than try to challenge it and lose

If I was a player who was adamant my charge wasn’t warranted or should be reduced I’d hope the club would at least have a sensible conversation with me and collectively agree the plea.

I actually don’t know who a player/club manages this process?

It’s always reported that the player has accepted/pleaded but I’d think the club has the over-riding say on the plea.

I still don't get why there's extra time given for losing a challenge anway.

Possibly to prevent frivolous appeals with nothing to lose from players n clubs. But I tend to agree with you. The court system can work this way and early settlements help unclog the system.

But here, in the NRL I don’t see why a player who contests a charge should ultimately cop a much larger penalty than what the gradings are set at for an early plea.

My thought is .... why they have this...

The big gap between the “early plea” and “guilty” finding at the judiciary is to effectively scare the player/club into accepting the ruling, thus the match review committee/NRL can justify themselves as grading n punishing correctly.

The difference here for some players is from 2-3 weeks ... which in real terms can be enormous against the player/club.

I’d think that if anything, any suspension should remain fixed - regardless of an early plea or guilt at the judiciary.... however the player should pay a fine of $XX if found guilty at a hearing. Covers legal costs etc.

This way, there isn’t the huge disparity in suspension time if challenged, while there is enough disincentive to frivolously appeal - and a legitimate penalty to recover costs of holding a hearing.

 

[League Unlimited News]

 

[some11]

Thank christ for that. It was Maumalo's shoulder that made contact with the head lmao

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

“Warriors forward Josh Curran was successful in seeking a downgrade to his careless high tackle charge at the NRL judiciary and is free to play against North Queensland this week.

Curran was fined $1350 after pleading guilty to a grade one charge over his tackle on Melbourne's George Jennings, avoiding a two-match ban he would have received if unsuccessful at the judiciary on Tuesday night”

...

https://www.nrl.com/news/2021/04/23/round-7-charges/

I’d like to know what he’s actually plead guilty to here.... not just “grade one”, but what he’s actually plead guilty to doing here....

 

[blocka]

“Warriors forward Josh Curran was successful in seeking a downgrade to his careless high tackle charge at the NRL judiciary and is free to play against North Queensland this week.

Curran was fined $1350 after pleading guilty to a grade one charge over his tackle on Melbourne's George Jennings, avoiding a two-match ban he would have received if unsuccessful at the judiciary on Tuesday night”

...

I’d like to know what he’s actually plead guilty to here.... not just “grade one”, but what he’s actually plead guilty to doing here....

sets a very dangerous precedent if a head clash is now deemed as a careless high tackle

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

sets a very dangerous precedent if a head clash is now deemed as a careless high tackle

Is that was he actually plead guilty to???

Surely not...

 

[t-ba]

sets a very dangerous precedent if a head clash is now deemed as a careless high tackle

Precedent?

Judiciary?

Let's be honest this is roughly how they figure out charges

 

[Meth]

I think we did a deal with the devil.

curran gets to play. NRL saves face.

 

[blocka]

I think we did a deal with the devil.

curran gets to play. NRL saves face.

Agreed, I think sometimes clubs are afraid to challenge too much because of the unpredictability of the judiciary

 

[Danish]

If I was a player who was adamant my charge wasn’t warranted or should be reduced I’d hope the club would at least have a sensible conversation with me and collectively agree the plea.

I actually don’t know who a player/club manages this process?

It’s always reported that the player has accepted/pleaded but I’d think the club has the over-riding say on the plea.



Possibly to prevent frivolous appeals with nothing to lose from players n clubs. But I tend to agree with you. The court system can work this way and early settlements help unclog the system.

But here, in the NRL I don’t see why a player who contests a charge should ultimately cop a much larger penalty than what the gradings are set at for an early plea.

My thought is .... why they have this...

The big gap between the “early plea” and “guilty” finding at the judiciary is to effectively scare the player/club into accepting the ruling, thus the match review committee/NRL can justify themselves as grading n punishing correctly.

The difference here for some players is from 2-3 weeks ... which in real terms can be enormous against the player/club.

I’d think that if anything, any suspension should remain fixed - regardless of an early plea or guilt at the judiciary.... however the player should pay a fine of $XX if found guilty at a hearing. Covers legal costs etc.

This way, there isn’t the huge disparity in suspension time if challenged, while there is enough disincentive to frivolously appeal - and a legitimate penalty to recover costs of holding a hearing.

the stupid new fines system for grade 1s make the judiciary particularly unfair.

You have situations regularly now where the difference between a grade 1 and grade 2 is multiple weeks. That’s insane.

there should be no early plea system at all. The NRL should hear every player’s defence by default and then make a decision.

I’d also like to see the NRL assign a pool of defence lawyers rather than have the clubs supply their own, as I’m certain that this also causes a large disparity (a high priced lawyer can pretty easily bamboozle the panel of apes on the judiciary… but not all clubs can afford to drop $50K on getting a player a downgrade).

lastly, get rid of this stupid “a panel of ex-player” morons as the judiciary. They are central to what makes the whole thing a kangaroo court

 

[Captain Apollo]

I’d also like to see the NRL assign a pool of defence lawyers rather than have the clubs supply their own, as I’m certain that this also causes a large disparity (a high priced lawyer can pretty easily bamboozle the panel of apes on the judiciary… but not all clubs can afford to drop $50K on getting a player a downgrade).

lastly, get rid of this stupid “a panel of ex-player” morons as the judiciary. They are central to what makes the whole thing a kangaroo court

So a high priced lawyer guarantees you get the result you want eh? Hmm, gee that worked so well for Latrell Mitchell

The panel of ex-players is having a jury who are "peers" of the current players, which is the basis of any judicial system. They'd have more idea of what it is like out on the field than you or I would, so in certain respects it makes logical sense for them to be the judiciary panel. This is a rugby league judiciary, not a court of law of the State.

 

[Valheru]

Just out of interest, has anyone ever been accused of a swinging arm in a normal tackle? Like, it's only a swinging arm when it hits someone in the head, right? How else do you make tackles if you don't, by definition, swing your arm into an attacker. It's only that there's less swing in a lower tackle, because the torso/legs are wider than a head - so the only head contact seems 'swinging' where other tackles 'wrap'. If Teddy doesn't slip, I don't think anyone posts 'ooh that was a swinging arm to his chest'.

And if the onus is on the defender to not contact the head then that's a shame some people have to sit in the bin or suspended for things completely outside their power. Looking for a penalty late in a game at 20-all? Just slip, or duck. The precedent is set.

A swinging arm isn't illegal by itself but it implies force and a level of intent so has been used as a marker for more severe charges in the past. Most tackles don't involve swinging arms though.

As for slipping/ducking, the precedent has been set for years, this isn't anything new. As I said earlier, there was another example in that exact same game where a dragons player was literally a foot off the ground and a roosters player brushed his face with his hand and it was penalised.

In regards to doing it on purpose, I am not sure you can slip on purpose. Ducking on purpose actually happens in AFL and it is always penalised and everyone lives with it. I don't see it being a thing in rugby league though because 99% of the time the defender/s are in front of you so ducking will only lead to serious injury to your self.

 

[Danish]

So a high priced lawyer guarantees you get the result you want eh? Hmm, gee that worked so well for Latrell Mitchell

The panel of ex-players is having a jury who are "peers" of the current players, which is the basis of any judicial system. They'd have more idea of what it is like out on the field than you or I would, so in certain respects it makes logical sense for them to be the judiciary panel. This is a rugby league judiciary, not a court of law of the State.

We see constantly the judiciary fooled by idiotic legal interpretations of rules. Look at the infamous billy slater incident in 2018 where they managed to make a bunch of boneheads agree that he didn’t actually commit a shoulder charge. It doesn’t always work but throwing money at the problem certainly helps, and players shouldn’t have to rely on their club being willing to pay for their defence in order to fight a charge. Nor should they be punished for wanting their case heard.

there is no more reason for the judiciary to be made up of exclusively former players than there is for the referees. Rules are rules and it’s just as easy for a fan to interpret them as a player. In fact I’d be willing to bet most players don’t know the rules of the game they play as much as the die hard fans do.

thinking that you need ex players to make all the decisions is how we get so many ex players being absolute dud head coaches, half of them hired by ex players who are now absolute dud board members.

 

[Captain Apollo]

We see constantly the judiciary fooled by idiotic legal interpretations of rules. Look at the infamous billy slater incident in 2018 where they managed to make a bunch of boneheads agree that he didn’t actually commit a shoulder charge. It doesn’t always work but throwing money at the problem certainly helps, and players shouldn’t have to rely on their club being willing to pay for their defence in order to fight a charge. Nor should they be punished for wanting their case heard.

there is no more reason for the judiciary to be made up of exclusively former players than there is for the referees. Rules are rules and it’s just as easy for a fan to interpret them as a player. In fact I’d be willing to bet most players don’t know the rules of the game they play as much as the die hard fans do.

thinking that you need ex players to make all the decisions is how we get so many ex players being absolute dud head coaches, half of them hired by ex players who are now absolute dud board members.

Ok so instead we'll get one eyed supporters who hate the accused and their club to sit on the judiciary then eh? That'll make it fair

Also what makes you think some of this does not happen in actual courts of law? The system is not perfect, but its better most others that have been tried (courts I'm talking about here).

 

[SBD82]

A swinging arm isn't illegal by itself but it implies force and a level of intent so has been used as a marker for more severe charges in the past. Most tackles don't involve swinging arms though.

What would you say is the lone between “wrapping” and “swinging”?

Not trying to be a jerk. But I don’t think this is a clear area.

 

[TheDMC]

there should be no early plea system at all. The NRL should hear every player’s defence by default and then make a decision.

Seriously? I think having defence/lawyers/appeals and all that is expensive nonsense that is just making the situation worse. The match review committee (or whoever it is) should review the footage and make a judgement, which stands. Player, club, and lawyers have zero input. No appeals. No guilty pleas. It is not a goddamn court.

And then the match review committee is regularly reviewed and held to account for any f**k ups until hopefully they get a consistent, fair system going.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

What would you say is the lone between “wrapping” and “swinging”?

Not trying to be a jerk. But I don’t think this is a clear area.

It's not. Wrapping is done with a wider body part ie chest/waist. It just looks swinging to the head because contact comes more full circle.

Anyway. I am absolutely all for the head being protected at all costs, so guys like Pereira probably do need to cop a penalty even though I'm still not sure and I never will be what he could have done differently at full speed.

 

[Danish]

Ok so instead we'll get one eyed supporters who hate the accused and their club to sit on the judiciary then eh? That'll make it fair

Also what makes you think some of this does not happen in actual courts of law? The system is not perfect, but its better most others that have been tried (courts I'm talking about here).

look at bloody Garlick’s judiciary record against roosters players and tell me again how non-players would be more biased.

Im not asking for a court of law system. I want the stupid need for high priced lawyers and legal bullshit removed. A pool of RLPA appointed defenders that will argue for every player charged in front of a panel of rule experts. Nice and simple.

None of this plea deal crap with legal teams and the appearance of a “jury of your peers” by loading it with ex players who couldn’t land regular jobs.

FFS we as fans of the game are not even afforded something as basic as the reasons for why each grading is given. No set of standards we can look to. The whole system is idiotic

 

[Exsilium]

Simple solution.

Grade 1 - Fine
Grade 2 - 2-4 weeks
Grade 3 - Play for the Broncos.