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!

Barnett elbow to the jaw

How many weeks for Barnett

  • 3 weeks

    Votes: 1 1.8%

  • 4 weeks

    Votes: 5 9.1%

  • 5 weeks

    Votes: 2 3.6%

  • 6 weeks

    Votes: 47 85.5%
  • Total voters
    55
Knight76

Knight76

Juniors
Messages
2,045
Captain Apollo said:
You predicted it. It was referred straight to the judiciary without any grading.
Click to expand...

Was always going to be.

Be interesting from here at the judiciary. They have the weight of the media stating NRL suspensions are too soft, crackdown on concussions etc etc to contend with.

Mitch no doubt is going to go with the defence that it was accidental, sure he raised the arm but meant to just brace for impact as the decoy runner came through on him. Split second thing that timed badly.

I'd be happy with 10 weeks for that, have to send a message. But, I think 8 is likely given the NRL generally is soft of length of suspensions.

As for comments above that the coach has lashed the media that is laughable, or that the coach comments in the presser are somehow indicative of the clubs record or whatever please, leave it out!

Every coach in the NRL says the same shit, "I didn't see it properly, didn't get a good look at it etc". In fact, the coach saying Mitch doesn't need him kicking him publicly says all that is needed. The coach knows it was wrong, isn't going to carry on about it to the media and will address it in house!

Even Coach Cleary didn't really want to comment on it and said it was out of character.
 
A

AnonymousLurker

Juniors
Messages
1,914
BunniesMan said:
Worse than Latrell's. We should not be punishing injuries. A deliberate head hunter off the ball is worse than anything to a ball player. If there was any justice he would get more time off than Latrell did
Click to expand...

I agree with you somehow .
This is worse than many shown on here from other instances as atleast they were going for someone with the ball . This was an off the ball incident which makes it worse imo .

but I don’t expect much from the NRL , they gave a fine to NAS for deliberate hit to the head so they are soft . Actually he is from the knights so will cop it .
 
Bazal

Bazal

Post Whore
Messages
102,914
Still blows my mind that anyone rates this spaz.

9 weeks, just to be different.
 
Mr Angry

Mr Angry

Not a Referee
Messages
51,816
Pugzley said:
4 weeks and a $50,000 fine to Jason Ryles
Click to expand...
Deadset, I like to play jokes, I once had a mate make a mistake a work, for the next 5 years I would pay random people to walk up and ask, why did you - insert mistake - then just walk off.

So someone who knows Ryles should buy a refs shirt and every three months or so pay some random dude to walk up to Ryles and send him to the Bin, with a shhhh for good measure, then just walk off.

Ryles in Supermarket buying a watermelon - random walks up in refs shirt, sends to the bin, gives a shh and walks off.
Ryles in out to lunch with mates - random walks up in refs shirt, sends to the bin, gives a shh and walks off.
Ryles in line at the airport - random walks up in refs shirt, sends to the bin, gives a shh and walks off.

Make it so.

With Barnett same theory, but send the thug off.
 
Knight76

Knight76

Juniors
Messages
2,045
I've got no issue with Barnett getting a stint. Being referred straight to the judiciary means he is going to cop it. Rightfully so.

But the NRL really has to have a good hard look at the judiciary and how they define what is worth a suspension.

Fines for something accidental, just bad technique I can cop. But lets be honest fines mean sweet FA to an NRL player. But looking at NAS hit, clenched fist, swinging arm and connected with the head and not even sin binned on field, leading to a fine by the NRL is a complete farce.
 
Marshall_magic

Marshall_magic

Coach
Messages
15,037
GongPanther said:
Billy didn't think he meant it @ 5:50.
Click to expand...

I made a joke about it earlier in the thread (more so out of frustration than anything) but it’s this attitude that kills me about fair play. When a blatant dog shot like this happens we hear it all the time. He’s not that kind of player. He’s a good bloke. He didn’t mean it. Yadda yadda yadda. The thing is, it IS his go, he IS that kind of player. He can still be a good bloke, I don’t really care. But stop making these blatant cheap shots out to be some kind of unfortunate accidents.
 
nick87

nick87

Coach
Messages
12,386
Marshall_magic said:
I made a joke about it earlier in the thread (more so out of frustration than anything) but it’s this attitude that kills me about fair play. When a blatant dog shot like this happens we hear it all the time. He’s not that kind of player. He’s a good bloke. He didn’t mean it. Yadda yadda yadda. The thing is, it IS his go, he IS that kind of player. He can still be a good bloke, I don’t really care. But stop making these blatant cheap shots out to be some kind of unfortunate accidents.
Click to expand...

This type of thing has never been more anyone's "go" than it is Barnett.
There was nothing accidental about it, and nothing out of character. He's the classic fake tough guy who thinks he can supplement his talent disparity by being an "enforcer". That's been his MO since he was at the Raiders.

And its a shame, because he's actually a really solid and decent NRL player otherwise. He's over compensating for no reason. He's a good player, just not as good as he would like to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top