Smug Panther
First Grade
- Messages
- 7,004
First time anything has ever gone our way with the judiciary. Another hundred calls like that and we might be even
kFirst time anything has ever gone our way with the judiciary. Another hundred calls like that and we might be even
First time anything has ever gone our way with the judiciary. Another hundred calls like that and we might be even
It's all the same. Api missed a game for something 20 players do each weekYou are confusing the judiciary and MRP mate
The Prince of Penrith can. Just like how Cam merkinster can kick people. Different rules for top level talentSo you can shoulder charge, just not with any force
Yeah, he should have kicked him instead.Haha what a load of bs. Then nrl wonders why it has no credibility with the fans. If that’s not a shoulder charge I dont know what is.
The judiciary is a circus. the suspension of Crighton for the crusher last wek proved they just make it up as they go.
Now Radley faces 3 weeks for nothing after already copping 5 weeks for a hit we have seen countless times since.
And of course Cleary doesn't get charged for a clear shoulder charge and Munster keeps kicking people and the judiciary turns a blind eye. Whats that like 4 people he has kicked on a field since the 2018GF. In the old days a kick or trip was a straight send off
Not sad just stating facts
I am a biased Penrith fan, but it is the right decision. The shoulder coming into contact with players happen 10 times every game and the only reason we are taking about this one is because Penrith scored a try off the dropped ball, Hook had a sook and it is Cleary.
The four tests in the series of tweets above seems a pretty common sense set of criteria for looking at ‘shoulder charges’ if applied consistently. This is where everyone gets outraged, because know one thinks we do see consistency (albeit there is generally disagreement about individual incidents on this forum, with disagreements generally along tribal lines). I don’t remember the Douehi incident referenced above, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it didn’t have these same criteria used. The last (admittedly of three) of Ravala’s (sorry for butchering his name) charges also seemed very harsh to me. But I would argue that they are wrong decisions, while the Cleary one is right.
Not enough linear force from Cleary for mine, as it looked to me to be a more protective action on his behalf to favour his injured shoulder.I am a biased Penrith fan, but it is the right decision. The shoulder coming into contact with players happen 10 times every game and the only reason we are taking about this one is because Penrith scored a try off the dropped ball, Hook had a sook and it is Cleary.
The four tests in the series of tweets above seems a pretty common sense set of criteria for looking at ‘shoulder charges’ if applied consistently. This is where everyone gets outraged, because know one thinks we do see consistency (albeit there is generally disagreement about individual incidents on this forum, with disagreements generally along tribal lines). I don’t remember the Douehi incident referenced above, but it wouldn’t surprise me if it didn’t have these same criteria used. The last (admittedly of three) of Ravala’s (sorry for butchering his name) charges also seemed very harsh to me. But I would argue that they are wrong decisions, while the Cleary one is right.
Remember the Round 12 Panthers V Dogs game were in the first 4 minutes of play, Hetherington was penalised twice for high shots? Wonder what happened to the crackdown in that game?None of these “shoulder charges” should have any penalty whatsoever IMO. Nothing all season that I’ve seen has been dangerous that I can recall.
Saw the replay of clearys… nothing wrong IMO except the hypocrisy of the NRL in making such a farce of things with their stupid rules changes, crackdowns etc.
But Vlandys and his “player welfare” stance was made… And Ravalawa has worn the absolute brunt of it. So why has Cleary been cleared…??
Ravalawa has had about 10 weeks on the sideline and not once did he even come near endangering an opponent, all contact was nowhere near the head.
By but the rationale of Vlandys and the NRL on Ravalawa.. there’s no conceivable way that Clearys tackle could be anything but a a chargeable offence… when i thought I’d lost all respect for the NRL this year, they’ve taken it even lower…
In another light, remember Lachlan Burr copped an approx $1800 fine when Tedesco fell into his chest. This is a bloke on the lower end of the pay scale in the NRL. A fine like that is significant for anyone, especially him. But by the charge rationale of the NRL, Clearys tackle wasn’t as bad as Burrs..
What the absolute f*ck…
It’s blatant player favouritism. It’s not Clearys fault, nor Tedesco etc etc … it’s just the have and the have nots through the eyes of the NRL.. and no doubt any mention of this will be glazed over by Vlandys lapdogs at foxleague…
Love to be a fly on the wall in Ravs house when he heard this…
If Griffin went full berko and whaled on the NRL about this, I couldn’t think of a more justified response. No doubt he’s be fined for it. While Cleary gets to keep all his paycheck..