Barnett elbow to the jaw

[ColdWetPanther]

6 weeks sounds about right to me, I was surprised it wasn't more to be honest and I believe the judiciary took in to consideration that in their opinion it was reckless and not intentional, therefore lessening the duration of the ban. I'm not going to bother arguing one way or the other as im not on the judiciary.

8 weeks would have been right also.

Smith for mine didn't take a dive. From what I saw he took the blow, and near immediately went to his haunches grabbing his jaw.

NAS one - that one was intentional. They had beef with eachother in that game and NAS took his chance to have a shot. Was looking right at his target, clenched fist and didn't miss.

I get there is some debate on the Barnett one and length of ban. But he was banned. I'm more annoyed that they get citings wrong like with NAS.

For mine, the penalties overall are too lenient, NAS should have got 4 weeks for that hit, Barny 8, latrell 6.

I think this is balanced and spot on Knight76; great post.

I do think one of the easy things the judiciary could do to build credibility is get rid of the ‘intentional’ grading. Let’s face it; absent a dossier detailing how a player plans to commit an act of foul play being slipped under a referees hotel room door, we are never going to see a judiciary say something was intentional. Everyone is a ‘good bloke’ with a sob story.

I’d rather see intentional done away with and reckless be given a higher penalty.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

I don’t think your assessment of the biomechanics is correct.

If you want proof, walk up to a door. Point your elbow to the ground. Push it open.

Sorry, should have qualified that by saying in a sideways movement - Barnett was running parallel to the attacker, so had to point his elbow out first if he was going to push him away, as he did. I'm not defending him though.

 

[SBD82]

Sorry, should have qualified that by saying in a sideways movement - Barnett was running parallel to the attacker, so had to point his elbow out first if he was going to push him away, as he did. I'm not defending him though.

Totally understand you’re not defending him. Sorry if that sounded like an accusation.

I’d still disagree about the biomechanics. You can generate force with your elbow pointed to the ground in any direction (within about 100 degrees of your centre line).

It can be awkward for some people (mostly men) because it requires pushing force to be generated from somewhere other than the shoulder. But I’d expect a professional athlete to at least be able to learn.

 

[The_Frog]

It was absolutely a grubby dog shot.

It was also a nice delayed dead body impersonation from Smith when he realised the penalty wasn’t coming.

Chris Smith hasn't been selected in any grade this week. I suppose that is an impersonation of an injury too.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

Totally understand you’re not defending him. Sorry if that sounded like an accusation.

I’d still disagree about the biomechanics. You can generate force with your elbow pointed to the ground in any direction (within about 100 degrees of your centre line).

It can be awkward for some people (mostly men) because it requires pushing force to be generated from somewhere other than the shoulder. But I’d expect a professional athlete to at least be able to learn.

Here's where I'm at on it now, I watched 360 and it sounds like the Knights have some sort of system going called 'check and release'. Where they bounce off the decoy runner and continue to sweep out the back.

1) That's a dangerous game if you're going to do it at head height. 2) It might be impossible at pace to do that at chest height because you're aiming down and it's more likely to slip down than give you momentum to push off 3) Gee, wasn't it bad luck that the Knights' biggest hot head was the one who accidently got it wrong and hit Smith in the head..

 

[SBD82]

Here's where I'm at on it now, I watched 360 and it sounds like the Knights have some sort of system going called 'check and release'. Where they bounce off the decoy runner and continue to sweep out the back.

1) That's a dangerous game if you're going to do it at head height. 2) It might be impossible at pace to do that at chest height because you're aiming down and it's more likely to slip down than give you momentum to push off 3) Gee, wasn't it bad luck that the Knights' biggest hot head was the one who accidently got it wrong and hit Smith in the head..

Number 3 is amazing.

 

[nick87]

I mean, you can't, biomechanically...but regardless, it's pretty much indefensible if you do lift an arm to someone's head like that.

indefensible? Friend, we got knights fans defending him here in this very thread!
Poor tough guy Barnett did nothing wrong and was just a victim of a cowardly dive apparently...
SMDH.

 

[Saxon]

Leave the poor bugger alone. he was just momentarily possessed by the spirit of Clint Newton.

 

[T-Boon]

Barnett is a known arsehole in Newy so suck shit.

 

[snickers007]

Chris Smith hasn't been selected in any grade this week. I suppose that is an impersonation of an injury too.

Gotta love the whole "concussion isn't an injury" rhetoric being pushed by Knights fans.

The fact that Smith "only" suffered a concussion probably saved Barnett an extra 2-4 weeks. Deadset should consider himself very lucky.

 

[Penrose Warrior]

Gotta love the whole "concussion isn't an injury" rhetoric being pushed by Knights fans.

The fact that Smith "only" suffered a concussion probably saved Barnett an extra 2-4 weeks. Deadset should consider himself very lucky.

Knights fans are not only saying Barnett is unlucky, but saying 'concussion isn't an injury?' Seriously?

Probably some irony in that, given holding both opinions would suggest the presence of brain injuries.

 

[Frederick]

The last 7 days in the life of Mitch Barnett:

24/03 - puff piece in Herald about how being a dad has matured him
26/03 - loses his mind against the Panthers
29/03 - cops a 6 match ban
Somewhere inbetween - probably cops a spray from AOB
01/04 - requests release to join the warriors

Yep real mature

 

[Knight76]

I’d rather see intentional done away with and reckless be given a higher penalty.

There is no intentional grading. Reckless and Careless are it, anything deemed bad enough to be intentional gets referred straight to the judiciary.

I'd be interested to see a list of all charges laid by the judiciry just to see how many times Reckless has ever been used.

 

[Sphagnum]

6 weeks! Billy Slater wouldn’t have even gotten a fine for that.