Barnett elbow to the jaw

[Johns Magic]

Decided by a two man panel of Bob Lindner and Tony Puletua. Two old-school forwards who probably saw this shit happen every second week and no one notice or give a shit.

 

[Smug Panther]

i think 6-8 weeks was about where it sits. So 6 isn’t some gross injustice.

On the other hand, gouging getting 8 was weak. And NAS getting nothing was too.

3 wrongs don't make a right.

 

[Perth Red]

All that sin bin sht last year to supposedly protect players then They come up with this and the Nelson bs.

 

[mozza91]

6 weeks is probably abit light but is hardly a slap on the wrist.
Barnett had a good defence though. A forearm to the face is how they shake hands in Wingham.

 

[Mr Angry]

Nelson is a thug wannabe.

 

[macavity]

3 wrongs don't make a right.

its the frame of reference though. The spot outrage about this particular offence, which was punished in line with punishments for similar offences (or indeed more harshly than similar offences), is entirely confected.

 

[Smug Panther]

its the frame of reference though. The spot outrage about this particular offence, which was punished in line with punishments for similar offences (or indeed more harshly than similar offences), is entirely confected.

It's far from being in line with current concussion protocols, It's straight up incompetent. It was only a bee's dick below Hoppa and Danny Williams. Difference is they can land a hit, all 3 had the same intent

 

[macavity]

It's far from being in line with current concussion protocols, It's straight up incompetent. It was only a bee's dick below Hoppa and Danny Williams. Difference is they can land a hit, all 3 had the same intent

long way from them. He wasn’t even looking at the bloke until less than a second before contact. Let go of the pearls.

And I have given another example that was far more than 2 weeks worse.

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

Grossly excessive.

The Panther pussy should have got for a week for his forgettable acting performance.

3 weeks would be fair.

 

[Johns Magic]

It's far from being in line with current concussion protocols, It's straight up incompetent. It was only a bee's dick below Hoppa and Danny Williams. Difference is they can land a hit, all 3 had the same intent

Barnett got as much of him as he wanted - no damage - the rest was milking (quite rightly).

The judiciary has recognised that hence 6 weeks.

 

[some11]

lolololol

 

[The Silverdale Phantom]

What did Latrell get?

This is a joke.

Next time, players should make sure they belt smith properly.

Make the time count for something.

 

[Chimp]

The issue here is that the clubs pay for a super lawyer who can run rings around the NRLs lawyers - lawyers should not be part of this process, they’re not in a Court of law. Having these matters handled by legal representatives is adding expense and complexity that just isn’t needed, with loopholes being exploited.
These matters should be dealt with pragmatically and with rugby league intelligence - we should not be needing to prove intent, carelessness or recklessness - the question is simply ‘did you unnecessarily smash a bloke in the head with force’ and the answer to that question in this instance is unequivocally ‘YES’ - then it’s a question of ‘was there mitigating circumstances’ eg you were trying to make a legal tackle and simply got your timing wrong, or attacker slipped - these don’t need to be adjudicated by legal eagles, rugby league folk with a good understanding of the rules can answer those questions. 3 examples from the weekend sum it up for me;

Barnett - unnecessarily smashed a bloke in the head, contact of that sort was never going to be ‘legal’ as it wasn’t in a tackle or in a tackling motion, and it was with extreme force… BIG BAN

NAS - unnecessarily smashed a bloke in the head, it was in the acted of a tackle, but was uncontrolled and always likely to lead to high contact, and it was with force… Biggish ban as was entirely avoidable and a better technique could and should have been used, but lower ban than Barnett

Sua - Forceful high contact in the act of attempting a legitimate tackle - lacking in control, but attacker also slipped. Low ban, as could ultimately have been avoided with better technique/control

It really doesn’t need to be that hard.

 

[Apey]

Barnett - unnecessarily smashed a bloke in the head, contact of that sort was never going to be ‘legal’ as it wasn’t in a tackle or in a tackling motion, and it was with extreme force… BIG BAN

Extreme force haha. Watch it again. Intent was his biggest issue, the force was on the lower end.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

What a f**king horrible decision, at least 3-4 weeks too long.

 

[Bobby DIGital]

Hudson Young got 8 weeks for a flagrant eye gouge. On that standard this should have been a two week suspension.

You know Young missed a Grand Final during those 8 weeks right? That's equivalent to about 10 weeks on it's own. That's something Barnett will never be in danger of missing during his career.

 

[I Bleed Maroon]

He's real lucky he didn't get more, to be frank.

 

[The_Frog]

Barnett got as much of him as he wanted - no damage

That was just good luck for all concerned.

 

[The_Frog]

Extreme force haha. Watch it again. Intent was his biggest issue, the force was on the lower end.

I don't know how you can have any idea what end the force was at from the footage that went to air. Agree though that intent was the biggest issue which is why this behaviour has no place in the game. Six weeks was a tad on the light side for me.

 

[Fangs]

Clint got 12. So 6 for a fellow novocastrian.

Fangs wins!