What's new
By:
Advanced search…
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

2024 Match Review & Judiciary charges

C

Chimp

Bench
Messages
2,853
kurt faulk said:
Because the critta just stood there with his shoulder high and hit the player in the head.

JWH launched his shoulder into the head of the player. I couldn't believe he wasn't sent off.

.
Click to expand...
How does Jesse Ramien get the same charge as Crighton and JWH. Ramien caught a bloke in the head with a fairly tame shot, when the bloke was about 1 foot off the ground as he’d dropped in the tackle.
Ramiens was careless, Crighton and JWH was not, they were wreckless. Crightons tackle was never going to be legal, regardless of any mitigation.
 
B

Black Panther

Juniors
Messages
1,821
kurt faulk said:
Because the critta just stood there with his shoulder high and hit the player in the head.

JWH launched his shoulder into the head of the player. I couldn't believe he wasn't sent off.

.
Click to expand...
You can’t hit a player in the head period. JWH whilst he is a bad egg he cops a fair bit from the Refs. While on the other hand, Crichton can’t even get binned. f**king atrocious.
 
kurt faulk

kurt faulk

Coach
Messages
14,413
Chimp said:
How does Jesse Ramien get the same charge as Crighton and JWH. Ramien caught a bloke in the head with a fairly tame shot, when the bloke was about 1 foot off the ground as he’d dropped in the tackle.
Ramiens was careless, Crighton and JWH was not, they were wreckless. Crightons tackle was never going to be legal, regardless of any mitigation.
Click to expand...

It was a forceful swinging arm to the head.

Stop making excuses for these players. They know what they're doing. They've been playing all their lives.

I guarantee you that if these players started copping 6 month suspensions you wouldn't see any of them shouldering another player in the head or throwing a swinging arm to the head.

Unless they're Les Boyd.

.
 
kurt faulk

kurt faulk

Coach
Messages
14,413
Black Panther said:
You can’t hit a player in the head period. JWH whilst he is a bad egg he cops a fair bit from the Refs. While on the other hand, Crichton can’t even get binned. f**king atrocious.
Click to expand...

I wasn't defending him. I was just answering why JWH should have gotten a higher charge.

.
 
yobbo84

yobbo84

Coach
Messages
11,300
Not a chance in the world Murray gets off, especially given the song-and-dance the NRL made yesterday.

But it's worth a shot because he'll only miss 2 games for us either way (if found guilty the third would be a test match)
 
C

Chimp

Bench
Messages
2,853
kurt faulk said:
It was a forceful swinging arm to the head.

Stop making excuses for these players. They know what they're doing. They've been playing all their lives.

I guarantee you that if these players started copping 6 month suspensions you wouldn't see any of them shouldering another player in the head or throwing a swinging arm to the head.

Unless they're Les Boyd.

.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t defending Ramien, I said his was Careless, but his would have been a legal tackle has the player not dropped height in the tackle.
The Chrghton tackle was a straight shoulder to the head, with arm by his side, even in a 1 on 1 situation, and not hitting RTS high, it would still have been an illegal tackle. That’s why I don’t see how it can be classed as careless - it was reckless - he deployed an illegal technique and hit a bloke straight in the melon, with enough force to send him Cat 1 concussion. If that ain’t reckless, not sure what is. Feels like they only really have careless or intentional now, and nobody ever gets done intentional.
 
SpaceMonkey

SpaceMonkey

Immortal
Messages
40,338
Chimp said:
I wasn’t defending Ramien, I said his was Careless, but his would have been a legal tackle has the player not dropped height in the tackle.
The Chrghton tackle was a straight shoulder to the head, with arm by his side, even in a 1 on 1 situation, and not hitting RTS high, it would still have been an illegal tackle. That’s why I don’t see how it can be classed as careless - it was reckless - he deployed an illegal technique and hit a bloke straight in the melon, with enough force to send him Cat 1 concussion. If that ain’t reckless, not sure what is. Feels like they only really have careless or intentional now, and nobody ever gets done intentional.
Click to expand...
Problem with intentional is it’s really hard to prove, you’d just get players contesting it every time and getting downgraded. Definitely needs to be more reckless charges on these situations.
 
C

ColdWetPanther

Bench
Messages
4,303
cooko said:
Jared has dug his own grave but I cant help but think your prior loading should be reset somewhat after you serve a suspension.
Click to expand...
I could live with this if the club lost competition points.

At some stage it become incumbent on the club to manage this sh!t out of the game. The Roosters are acting irresponsibly by allowing their player to continue to attack the heads of the opposition.

But hey, that is the Roosters way…
 
M

Maximus

Coach
Messages
13,664
Chimp said:
I wasn’t defending Ramien, I said his was Careless, but his would have been a legal tackle has the player not dropped height in the tackle.
The Chrghton tackle was a straight shoulder to the head, with arm by his side, even in a 1 on 1 situation, and not hitting RTS high, it would still have been an illegal tackle. That’s why I don’t see how it can be classed as careless - it was reckless - he deployed an illegal technique and hit a bloke straight in the melon, with enough force to send him Cat 1 concussion. If that ain’t reckless, not sure what is. Feels like they only really have careless or intentional now, and nobody ever gets done intentional.
Click to expand...

Crichton is the golden boy now, so he'll get the lowest charge possible no matter what. If there wasn't so much outrage over him not getting sinbinned, he probably would have gotten a grade 1.
 
dogslife

dogslife

Coach
Messages
18,985
Maximus said:
Crichton is the golden boy now, so he'll get the lowest charge possible no matter what. If there wasn't so much outrage over him not getting sinbinned, he probably would have gotten a grade 1.
Click to expand...
Why didn't someone tell us?! Could've gone to the judiciary and had it thrown out
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top