What's new
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!

Alex McKinnon possibly Quadriplegic - Mclean guilty of dangerous throw - 7 weeks

How many weeks?

  • 1-2

    Votes: 53 42.7%
  • 3-4

    Votes: 25 20.2%
  • 5-6

    Votes: 10 8.1%
  • 7-8

    Votes: 10 8.1%
  • 9+

    Votes: 26 21.0%

  • Total voters
    124
Status
Not open for further replies.

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
In REALITY, this statement is 100% correct,

The statement is 100% bullshit.

Mckinnon is entitled to place his head any way he wants to. He shouldn't be dropped on it. But he was. That is the problem, not where he chose to position his chin.
 

Tayjack

Juniors
Messages
582
Judicary has made their decision...7 weeks...so be it but if the same type of tackle occurs (and it has) and there is NO horrific injury like what happened to Alex McKinnon and the player on the receiving end suffers a minor injury or is unscathed....does the lifter get 7 weeks.

The NRL will have to be consistent .......7 weeks for all lifting tackles regardless of the injury suffered.

Absolutely correct - what a joke he gets 7 weeks, the members of the panel need to hang their heads in shame.
 

El Diablo

Post Whore
Messages
94,107
typically a few journos are going off on twitter saying it was too much

not one of them ever said what he should get before tonight
 

Tayjack

Juniors
Messages
582
The statement is 100% bullshit.

Mckinnon is entitled to place his head any way he wants to. He shouldn't be dropped on it. But he was. That is the problem, not where he chose to position his chin.

Seriously??????. of course he is entitled to place his head where he wants too, however withe speed of the game these days, and the fact his upper body - head mainly was never far off the ground, it was never going to be a good outcome, mackinnon made a split decision and normal one in my opinion, i probably would of made the same one, and it turned out to be life changing, but that don't put maclean responsible for the result, not one bit. If anything the weight of the other two have caused the horrificness of it and probably had more to do with it, but again - they can't be blamed either because of the decision that was made with his head being tucked down, which he thought at the time he was probably going to go over apex, so its a natural reflex to tuck your head like that, when he wasn't going over apex, which he is not to know(when in that position)- thats called an accident mate, its as clear as day, in which hundreds of former and current first grade players have also stated, are they all wrong??
 

bor

Juniors
Messages
392
This is a very difficult situation for everyone. A young man may never walk again, another young man (most probably) feels responsible and everyone else is looking in adding their own 2 cents - either calling for Mclean's lengthy suspension or defending him.

There is no winner tonight, ultimately the suspension is insignificant relating to the whole situation.
 

insert.pause

First Grade
Messages
6,446
While it was an accident, the majority of suspensions are, it doesn't change the fact that he had the hand between the leg and lifted beyond the horizontal, there is casualty there, he's not completely responsible but he did contribute to the position McKinnon ended up in. I don't begrudge the job of the judiciary, it was a very complex and emotional case and the verdict was never going to please everyone, they were really caught between a rock and a hard place. Sad fact is both McKinnon and McLean were just very unlucky and both need to be supported by the NRL.
 

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
Seriously??????. of course he is entitled to place his head where he wants too, however withe speed of the game these days, and the fact his upper body - head mainly was never far off the ground, it was never going to be a good outcome, mackinnon made a split decision and normal one in my opinion, i probably would of made the same one, and it turned out to be life changing, but that don't put maclean responsible for the result, not one bit. If anything the weight of the other two have caused the horrificness of it and probably had more to do with it, but again - they can't be blamed either because of the decision that was made with his head being tucked down, which he thought at the time he was probably going to go over apex, so its a natural reflex to tuck your head like that, when he wasn't going over apex, which he is not to know(when in that position)- thats called an accident mate, its as clear as day, in which hundreds of former and current first grade players have also stated, are they all wrong??

He was tipped up so he was driven into the ground head-first. This was not an accident, this was deliberate. The result is a tragedy that was entirely avoidable if he was not placed in this position in the first place.

His injury is the very reason the rule is in place.
 

meercat

Juniors
Messages
810
Pretty sure it was stated that the prosecution wanted an extra ~6 weeks for the injury sustained. Clearly stated that the injury wouldn't be taken into account in the VERDICT, not the sentence. With that in mind seems the throw itself got a 1-2 weeks with 5-6 added for the injury sustained which seems fair enough all things considered if they have gone down that road. As for the if he didn't duck his head he would be fine, as has been stated countless times, if he isn't lifted it never is an issue in the first place and I think you will find people are punished for accidents. Now hopefully this bloody media circus of speculation can end and everyone focus on the important thing in this matter, the welfare of Alex and his family.
 

magpie4ever

First Grade
Messages
9,992
Unfortunately, stemming from this tragic accident the NRL wanted a scapegoat and McLean was it.

Before, everyone gets hysterical have a look at the Warriors players tackle on Patterson last weekend it was ten times worse without the physical result. What suspension did he get?
 

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
There is no winner tonight, ultimately the suspension is insignificant relating to the whole situation.


It is absolutely significant in removing dangerous techniques from the game. But as the penalty has not achieved this, we will continue to watch players being placed in dangerous positions and it is unnecessary.
 

georgesnmith

Juniors
Messages
1,781
the media are saying its a lengthy ban so maybe theyll lay off for a bit now.

i did fear a much harsher suspension when he was referred straight to the judiciary without charge

at least players now know that injuries suffered are taken into account when determining their sentence

even if its a minor infringement, if a bad injury results then you cop a long ban
 

Parra

Referee
Messages
24,900
Comans removed king hits and the obvious potential for severe injury by imposing very harsh suspensions.

The NRL had the opportunity to do the same tonight and failed.

Those who fail to understand history are doomed to repeat it.
 

typicalfan

Coach
Messages
15,478
the media are saying its a lengthy ban so maybe theyll lay off for a bit now.

i did fear a much harsher suspension when he was referred straight to the judiciary without charge

at least players now know that injuries suffered are taken into account when determining their sentence

even if its a minor infringement, if a bad injury results then you cop a long ban

I expect at least one journo over the next few weeks to highlight half a dozen or more tackles from a round of footy to show how frequent this type of tackle is and how often it goes unpunished. Waiting for it to happen.
 

The_Savage_1

Juniors
Messages
995
Comans removed king hits and the obvious potential for severe injury by imposing very harsh suspensions.

The NRL had the opportunity to do the same tonight and failed.

Those who fail to understand history are doomed to repeat it.

they can't just do it on a whim, if they were to draw a line in the sand from now on and increased the penalties for dangerous lifts I don't think anyone would have a problem with that.
 

Dave_

Juniors
Messages
2,330
7 weeks, wow.
I thought maximum 2.
Had an extra week to think about it and still came up with a bad decision. Nrl = laughing stock

Your a Storm supporter, of course you'd say that. Snowden's suspension last year should tell you that suspensions are based on the injury suffered and not so much the tackle itself.

You = shameful for thinking that anything in this situation is a laughing matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top