BREAKING NEWS. Fui Fui DENIED leave to appeal

strider · Sep 23, 2005

me PO'ed :evil:

The Colonel · Sep 23, 2005

strider said:
me PO'ed :evil:

bullsh*t.... :lol:

eloquentEEL · Sep 23, 2005

This process does not follow normal legal procedures. What other judicial process allows a single person to veto an appeal? Let alone vetoing the appeal based on what they think the result will be? I've tipped Parra to win on Sunday so we can call off the game. Hell, let's disband the NRL and just give Parra the trophy for the next 100 years, because that's what I think would be the result.

Reading through the statement makes me frustrated and physically ill. Woods has exposed his own bias by describing Fui's arm as "large and powerful". That should have absolutely no impact on the case. What's next? You can't touch Barnes at all because he is of slight build and fragile?

Fui now has until round 8 next season to sit down with his lawyer and focus on putting together a lawsuit against this joke of a "judicial" system through the REAL legal system. There should be some kind of restriction of trade or something that they can get them on; and I don't care if anyone says that it may hurt the image of rugby league if it is pursued. NOT pursuing it will hurt rugby league much much more in the long run, as it will continue to become more and more of a joke.

Anyway, somebody must be accountable for this process. I want to know who it is.

Stagger eel · Sep 23, 2005

well elo, there's not too much we can do about it but you can be sure of one thing Berick Barnes won't be tackled for the next 3 years as he joined the Queensland Reds to play Union as a flyhalf and normally flyhalves don't really get their jumper dirty.

Twizzle · Sep 23, 2005

JessEel said:
there you go kids, the full report

thanks mum

strider · Sep 23, 2005

The Colonel said:
bullsh*t.... :lol:

you mean it shows? O

The Colonel · Sep 23, 2005

He was never given 9 weeks. The loading that he has accrued in the past increased his time to be served.

Was it worth the three weeks on a reckless charge? Probably not. Limited contact was made but the player was falling at the time. There have been a lot of similar tackles that haven't received a charge that heavy.

Careless and at the very best a grade 2. He still would be missing the Grand Final but not the Tri-nations.

As I posted in the NRL forum in reply to Physique. He'd still miss the GF whichever way the turned it. It is the loading that stuffed him.....

Ron Jeremy · Sep 23, 2005

What a f**king joke!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I f**king hate this bull-sh*t system.

It was not a nine week suspension....and even though Fui is no angel to head high tackles the nine weeks is a absolute disgrace!!!!!!!!

Hellsy · Sep 23, 2005

Oh well.. .poor Fui.. Maybe Parra can work on his tackling technique for next season.

Guess my source was right in not being confident..

The Colonel · Sep 23, 2005

Ron Jeremy said:
What a f**king joke!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I f**king hate this bull-sh*t system.

It was not a nine week suspension....and even though Fui is no angel to head high tackles the nine weeks is a absolute disgrace!!!!!!!!

It WASN'T a nine week suspension. It was three weeks increased by his [prior offences.

Even on a down grade he would have missed the GF.

parraitdoesmatta · Sep 23, 2005

eloquentEEL said:
Fui now has until round 8 next season to sit down with his lawyer and focus on putting together a lawsuit against this joke of a "judicial" system through the REAL legal system. There should be some kind of restriction of trade or something that they can get them on; and I don't care if anyone says that it may hurt the image of rugby league if it is pursued. NOT pursuing it will hurt rugby league much much more in the long run, as it will continue to become more and more of a joke.

Anyway, somebody must be accountable for this process. I want to know who it is.

think u will find he will not have to wait till rnd 8 next year

Ron Jeremy · Sep 23, 2005

The Colonel said:
It WASN'T a nine week suspension. It was three weeks increased by his [prior offences.

Even on a down grade he would have missed the GF.

It was still 9 weeks colonel!!!!!!!!! get my point.

He was outed for 9 weeks due to other infringments, carry over points etc.

That doesn't seem fair to me when the video footage was inconclusive.

The Colonel · Sep 23, 2005

Ron Jeremy said:
It was still 9 weeks colonel!!!!!!!!! get my point.

He was outed for 9 weeks due to other infringments, carry over points etc.

That doesn't seem fair to me when the video footage was inconclusive.

I understand what you are saying. The thing is Fui has a bad record. Any tackle will see him spend a few weeks rather than one. Even a downgrade would have still seen him miss the grand final on the back of his record - even if it was only a grade one charge.

strider · Sep 23, 2005

The Colonel said:
It WASN'T a nine week suspension. It was three weeks increased by his [prior offences.

Even on a down grade he would have missed the GF.

It wasn't 3 weeks base....it was 6 weeks base with the loading giving him another 3.

Reckless grade 2 is a high grading....only 3 gradings worse....nobody gets a grade 5 and grade 4 and 3 means you damn near decapitated the guy - grade 2 is next in line.

The new footage clearly shows it was NOT what they first found him guilty of, which was a reckless grade 2...they believed he smashed him in the head with a swinging clinched fist - that was proved to NOT be the case - it was a glance across the top of the head with his arm (and I don't give a f**k how muscular his arm is - a thick arm will do the same as an average player's arm in this case).

strider · Sep 23, 2005

Witt got a Careless Grade 3 for his effort....(it wasn't as bad as Fui's - I don't contest that)....so for his careless grdae 3 with an early guilty plea he got 2 weeks....so you'd assume his base would have been 3 weeks.

Fui was Reckless Grade 2 - which is 4 gradings wrose than Witt's....so his base must have been 5 or 6 weeks....fine he has a bad record, he gets more.

I just don't believe Fui's was a Reckless grade 2....the original grading is wrong....sure he may still have missed the GF if it was graded less - but that doesn't mean he hasn't been f**ked over by some numbnut lawyer with no brain.

eloquentEEL · Sep 23, 2005

parraitdoesmatta said:
think u will find he will not have to wait till rnd 8 next year

you're right (forgot about the finals matches for this year).

9 to start
- 2 or 3 finals
- 2 NRL sanctioned trials
______________

= he'll miss 4 matches next year if we make the GF

eloquentEEL · Sep 23, 2005

The Colonel said:
It WASN'T a nine week suspension. It was three weeks increased by his [prior offences.

Even on a down grade he would have missed the GF.

actually, I calculated it the other day. he would have been available for the GF if it was downgraded all the way to careless grade 1.

we're lucky the grading wasn't Woods decision in the first place, otherwise "it seems to me" that "reasonably" it would have probably been intentional grade 5.

The Colonel · Sep 23, 2005

strider said:
It wasn't 3 weeks base....it was 6 weeks base with the loading giving him another 3.

Reckless grade 2 is a high grading....only 3 gradings worse....nobody gets a grade 5 and grade 4 and 3 means you damn near decapitated the guy - grade 2 is next in line.

The new footage clearly shows it was NOT what they first found him guilty of, which was a reckless grade 2...they believed he smashed him in the head with a swinging clinched fist - that was proved to NOT be the case - it was a glance across the top of the head with his arm (and I don't give a f**k how muscular his arm is - a thick arm will do the same as an average player's arm in this case).

300 points base + (50% for any prior similars) x 4 (3 in lower grades one in firsts) = 300 + 600.

I am pretty sure that is it. Had he gotten 6 weeks (600 points) we would be waiting a long time.

strider · Sep 23, 2005

The Colonel said:
300 points base + (50% for any prior similars) x 4 (3 in lower grades one in firsts) = 300 + 600.

I am pretty sure that is it. Had he gotten 6 weeks (600 points) we would be waiting a long time.

So a Careless grade 3 (ie Witt) carries the same base as a Reckless grade 2 (ie Fui)? .... no way

So if someone does a Reckless grade 2 and has a clean record and takes teh early plea they can get off with 2 weeks? (which is the same as a Careless grade 3)

The Colonel · Sep 23, 2005

strider said:
So a Careless grade 3 (ie Witt) carries the same base as a Reckless grade 2 (ie Fui)? .... no way

So if someone does a Reckless grade 2 and has a clean record and takes teh early plea they can get off with 2 weeks? (which is the same as a Careless grade 3)

I think so. Mate, I don't even profess to know how the judiciary works but I am certain that is the charge he was given.

BREAKING NEWS. Fui Fui DENIED leave to appeal

Post Whore

Immortal

First Grade

Moderator

Administrator

Post Whore

Immortal

Coach

Immortal

Immortal

Juniors

Coach

Immortal

Post Whore

Post Whore

First Grade

First Grade

Immortal

Post Whore

Immortal