Baz & Marsh were both at fault, but....

[Willow]

Have you got pictures of the attack by Corey Payne on Morrison's head?

Nope, have you?
Don't tell me this another one of those debates where I have to provide the evidence for the opposing side. lol

Will you defend him as well?

If its as bad as you say, then no. I'm not defending any player for their actions in this. Are you?
Are we talking about the same dust-up, or some other unrelated incident? If its the latter, then it won't be part of the same proposed MRC scrutiny.

I'll agree its nothing like the Williams incident.

A few of your fellow Parra supporters don't agree with, but I agree with you Colonel - don't let let them drag you down mate. ;-)

Not Barrett's go? Like a dollar for every time I've heard that this year. Reaction under pressure is generally a good sign of what someone's go really is.

Well I don't subscribe to that defence either but you can generally tell when a player is heading for a crash. I could see that Williams was going to snap weeks before he did. He was taking exception to almost everything.

With the power of hindsight, I'm still in two minds as to how Barrett should have reacted. IMO, he was copping it and the ref wasn't doing much reffing in that area. Barrett actually went MIA for a while, the first time he touches the ball again and he's whacked for the umpteenth time.

He could have done one of three things:
1. Get up and act like nothing happened, possibly with the view that he'd hit Marsh with bell ringer of a tackle later on. He had tried this method earlier in another incident.
2. Take a dive. Milk the penalty. As far as I know, this isn't Barrett's way. But in retropsect, it would have changed everything.
3. Get up and thump Marsh.

With only half a second of thinking to do, Barrett reacted with the third option. Definitely heat of the moment stuff.
Its not the first time a player has reacted like this, and it certainly won't be the last. IMO, it's time a few people accepted that its sometimes a evitable consequence of what happens on the football field.

 

[strider]

I think Barrett should retire from the kicking duties if he feels he shouldn't have opponents rush him when he kicks....I mean no other kicker in the game ever gets pressure put on him when he kicks in general play - no one else ever gets hit hard - its just Trent, cos the world is out to take trent's head off :roll:

 

[The Colonel]

Nope, have you?
Don't tell me this another one of those debates where I have to provide the evidence for the opposing side. lol If its as bad as you say, then no. I'm not defending any player for their actions in this. Are you?
Are we talking about the same dust-up, or some other unrelated incident? If its the latter, then it won't be part of the same proposed MRC scrutiny.

Saw the result of the punches thrown. Not defending anyone in regards to the incident - it was during the all in. No need for pictures, just wondering was all - you had pictures of the Eels, was wondering if you noticed your "angels" as well. ;-)

A few of your fellow Parra supporters don't agree with, but I agree with you Colonel - don't let let them drag you down mate. ;-)

That's nothing unusual.

I'd even go as far to suggest, viewing this shot, Barrett may have been partly responsible for the end result.

Personally I think it was lucky it was on Barrett and not Tonie Carroll. Should the players involved receive a suspension? Barrett and PJ might receive one but I don't think they deserve them.

The others involved? Unlikely as I've said but as you have suggested the case could argued. It could probably see both sides pretty thin on next week

Well I don't subscribe to that defence either but you can generally tell when a player is heading for a crash. I could see that Williams was going to snap weeks before he did. He was taking exception to almost everything.

The William's incident was light years from this. Had it not happened then it would have happened later.

With the power of hindsight, I'm still in two minds as to how Barrett should have reacted. IMO, he was copping it and the ref wasn't doing much reffing in that area. Barrett actually went MIA for a while, the first time he touches the ball again and he's whacked for the umpteenth time.

He could have done one of three things:
1. Get up and act like nothing happened, possibly with the view that he'd hit Marsh with bell ringer of a tackle later on. He had tried this method earlier in another incident.
2. Take a dive. Milk the penalty. As far as I know, this isn't Barrett's way. But in retropsect, it would have changed everything.
3. Get up and thump Marsh.

With only half a second of thinking to do, Barrett reacted with the third option. Definitely heat of the moment stuff.
Its not the first time a player has reacted like this, and it certainly won't be the last. IMO, it's time a few people accepted that its sometimes a evitable consequence of what happens on the football field.

The whole game was a tough fought affair and the incidents in earlier games may have added to the tension. There were tackles on both sides that were tough. Its not the first time that it has happened and it won't be the last. Barrett probably should have reacted better, but in the end he didn't.

 

[drake]

The whole game was a tough fought affair and the incidents in earlier games may have added to the tension. There were tackles on both sides that were tough. Its not the first time that it has happened and it won't be the last. Barrett probably should have reacted better, but in the end he didn't.

Pretty good summation Colonel.
I'd like to se it left on the field, and hope that Marsh's comments are a media beat up.

 

[The Colonel]

Both players have been charged. Grade 2 Careless for PJ - with his record though he won't miss any games. Grade 2 Striking for Barrett. Probably a harsh but fair result on both incidents - didn't think there was enough contact for a grade 2 charge for PJ.

 

[Willow]

Both players have been charged. Grade 2 Careless for PJ - with his record though he won't miss any games. Grade 2 Striking for Barrett. Probably a harsh but fair result on both incidents - didn't think there was enough contact for a grade 2 charge for PJ.

Thanks for the scoop Colonel.
Its not on the NRL or LU site yet. I'm assuming you've seen the press release?
If PJ Marsh is charged as you say, the surely this puts the video ref's decision under scrutiny as well?

 

[The Colonel]

Yep, came through a mate who works at ACP.

It may do, however he may challenge the charge on the back of the video ref calling it ok.

 

[Willow]

The point being that the video ref's account isn't really good enough for the Match Review Committee. They have effectively overuled the video ref and sent it up the the judiciary... isn't that a fair interpretation?

Marsh has been charged as well which brings into question the handling of this from the ref and video ref.

I hope Barrett and the club fights this.

 

[The Colonel]

The point being that the video ref's account isn't really good enough for the Match Review Committee. They have effectively overuled the video ref and sent it up the the judiciary... isn't that a fair interpretation?

Marsh has been charged as well which brings into question the handling of this from the ref and video ref.

I hope Barrett and the club fights this.

Fair interpretation, but one that can be argued either way. I was under the impression that Mander called the challenge OK as well so they may well be both in trouble. My only question is they have called it a careless tackle when he was attempting a chargedown.

As I've said I didn't think either deserved to be charged, the try being penalty enough, in Barrett's case at least.

 

[Willow]

And as I have said, I didnt expect the MRC to touch this.

But there's no mistaking that the argument re the video ref letting it go is now on shakey ground.

Its almost like the court of appeal overuing a district court decision, except that we're still awaiting the final outcome an no one has appealed - apart from Marsh's silly comments in the media over the weekend. You'd like to think he was miquoted.... but apparently not.

There's a touch of irony in all this.

 

[El Diablo]

If Marsh pleads guilty because he thinks it's not worth risking suspension will you be critical of him because he said he hit him in the chest so therefore think's he's innocent?

 

[The Colonel]

And as I have said, I didnt expect the MRC to touch this.

But there's no mistaking that the argument re the video ref letting it go is now on shakey ground.

For sure, however the question is in which way was it let go? The first penalty could have been against the Eels for the tackle but Barrett throwing punches may have reversed the decision. Unlikely, but it has happened before.

Its almost like the court of appeal overuing a district court decision, except that we're still awaiting the final outcome an no one has appealed - apart from Marsh's silly comments in the media over the weekend. You'd like to think he was miquoted.... but apparently not.

The appeal, if it happens is the deciding factor. If the judiciary throw the charge out then there may be some difficulty if Barrett was to challenge it too. If they give Marsh the full week then that may see Stone and Mander looking at a week off.

Not sure on Marsh's comments as I didn't read them. Given the events of recent weeks where they were slow to comment on the Dunley and Cross incidents I find it funny that something was said this time.

There's a touch of irony in all this.

Thankfully not in the scoreline. ;-)

 

[Y2Eel]

The point being that the video ref's account isn't really good enough for the Match Review Committee. They have effectively overuled the video ref and sent it up the the judiciary... isn't that a fair interpretation?

Marsh has been charged as well which brings into question the handling of this from the ref and video ref.

I hope Barrett and the club fights this.

Whats barret going to say??
" i HAVE THE WEAKEST PUNCH IN THE WORLD SO DONT SUSPEND ME"

He has nothing to help him win goooooone for a week

On the other hand Pj could fight it and win the evidence isnt as compelling

 

[Willow]

If they give Marsh the full week then that may see Stone and Mander looking at a week off.

Which begs the question, who are the 'sane' ones in all this?
A glimmer of chinwork after all?
Sorry for the back tracking Colonel but I simply have to ask. lol

 

[The Colonel]

Which begs the question, who are the 'sane' ones in all this?
A glimmer of chinwork after all?
Sorry for the back tracking Colonel but I simply have to ask. lol

I still think I'm perfectly sane. There may have been chin work but it was enough to put a skirt on Barrett. ;-)

 

[Willow]

Whats barret going to say??
" i HAVE THE WEAKEST PUNCH IN THE WORLD SO DONT SUSPEND ME"

Sorry, I know you have a view to express but it has to said there's some piss poor posts happening over this.
There have been precedents in the past. But we don't have Jim Hall anymore (thankfully) so it's probably unlikely.

Quite frankly, I think Cayless can count himself very fortunate that he didn't cop a charge for coming in and escalating it. I'm curious... what sort of defence do you think Cayless would have?

 

[El Diablo]

You haven't answered the question, Willow.

You think Barrett should fight it. What was he going to say?

 

[Willow]

I still think I'm perfectly sane. There may have been chin work but it was enough to put a skirt on Barrett. ;-)

LOL. I'm sure you recall the earlier posts Colonel.

This morning, Marsh was innocent as 'proven' by the video ref.
Anyone who thought otherwise in the Parra camp was having their sanity questioned...

By afternoon, the MRC have joined the 'nutters' in casting doubts over the video ref decision.

I'm know I'm sane. I have a certificate to prove it.

We'll see what happens.

 

[Willow]

You haven't answered the question, Willow.

You think Barrett should fight it. What was he going to say?

Always happy to answer a reasonably delivered question El.
If Marsh is found guilty or pleads guilty, then Barrett may have a case for retaliating, that's all. If the defence is up to it, they could show plenty of provocation. It has happened before. I'm sorry I can't recall the case, it was when Jim Hall was in charge.

 

[El Diablo]

Always happy to answer a reasonably delivered question El.
If Marsh is found guilty or pleads guilty, then Barrett may have a case for retaliating, that's all. If the defence is up to it, they could show plenty of provocation. It has happened before. I'm sorry I can't recall the case, it was when Jim Hall was in charge.

The other time a player was defending himself. Hopoate had a go at Stapleton so he fought back.

Marsh had his back turned to Barrett so he was in no danger and wasn't being attacked.