Chesterton: Webcke should have paid dearly

[The_Coach]

I think Webke only being charged with a grade 1 is also evidence for Woolford to get a down grade.

Look at both and ask how is one a grade 1 and the other grade 3?

 

[Mr Saab]

I think Webke only being charged with a grade 1 is also evidence for Woolford to get a down grade.

Look at both and ask how is one a grade 1 and the other grade 3?

woolford was grade 2

 

[gregstar]

what about PJ marsh? do you think his act was bad too? charging at a player like that and making slight contact with his chin with his elbow. Could quite have easily broken barretts jaw. PJ got off because of a good record.
Steve Price doesnt do charge downs like that.

can't argue with that

 

[melon....]

it went wrong yes i agree...but webcke was trying to slow the play down by putting him on the ground. He thought at the time he would lift his legs and put him to the ground. His theory and practise were 2 different things

Yeah OK, and Morley was only lifting his knee to complete the stride...it cost him 3 weeks. But "its not his go" you know.

Webke = favouritism instead of being The Example to others.

Webke is the best prop in the game. He is one of the few QLD players I genuinly respect. But when you are wrong or do the crime, you must do the time.

 

[The_Coach]

what about PJ marsh? do you think his act was bad too? charging at a player like that and making slight contact with his chin with his elbow. Could quite have easily broken barretts jaw. PJ got off because of a good record.
Steve Price doesnt do charge downs like that.

PJ got off because his offence was minor. It was a clip to the chin from a deflection. That's a lot different to getting a forearm straight to the chin (O'Meley) or picking a bloke up and dropping him "head first" into the ground (Webke)

Clutching at straws now are we Charlie?

 

[renouf]

Nobody seems to be bringing up the fact that O'Meley's shot was high and hit Ross flush on the jaw.. HE should of been missing this week aswell.

 

[Mr Saab]

PJ got off because his offence was minor. It was a clip to the chin from a deflection. That's a lot different to getting a forearm straight to the chin (O'Meley) or picking a bloke up and dropping him "head first" into the ground (Webke)

Clutching at straws now are we Charlie?

thing is for the 10000000000000000th time....webster DID NOT land on his head

 

[The_Coach]

Basically what it comes down to is the Superstars of the game are protected more than an endangered species.

Hindmarsh, Barrett, Webke, O'Meley.... the list could continue over previous years.

If your a big name player you always get special treatment.

 

[melon....]

thing is for the 10000000000000000th time....webster DID NOT land on his head

And Morley's knee missed Marsh by a mile....3 weeks. Thats what Webke should have got.

Faves.

 

[The_Coach]

thing is for the 10000000000000000th time....webster DID NOT land on his head

Ok then to put it correctly the 1st point of impact with the ground was his shoulder, the 2nd point of impact with the ground was his head. So there is still an amount of force going onto his neck region which could have caused injury.

 

[JJ]

Charlie, the point you miss is that Webcke had absolutely no reason to do what he did. He grabbed the leg and upended Webster, there looked to be no thought whatsoever of trying to complete the tackle. Who in their right mind goes into a tackle and grabs a leg like that?

that pretty much sums it up. Webcke was very lucky. \He deliberatley lifted the leg, no result other than a dangerous throw was ever going to happen


IMO that was a worse one than Wollford's, which just looked like a great hit to me. I hate to suggest that Slater deserved it, but has anyone else noticed how often an apparently good hit on Slater turns into a dangerous throw (or near dangerous throw). A couple of people have been suspended tackling Slater, and there was another near thing in the Brisbane game - Slater's small, and when he get's hit he seems to turn his body and head for the ground - instictive I know, but the weight shifts, he's elevated a bit, and he puts his arm and head towards the ground... I'd lik to see tape of a number of tackles on Slater and have a good look, the Woolford hit looked like a pretty good tackle to me

 

[DJ1]

The Webke and O'Meley tackles were both Grade 1 and were correctly graded as such.

The Woolford tackle was correctly graded as grade 2 but should have been downgraded to grade 1 based on the evidence of Billy Slater. This is where the judiciary got it wrong.

Fair enough the 3 weeks for Woolford due to 6 previous offences. Hopefully, his appeal will be successful.

PS I am a Doggies supporter who thinks that Woolford is a slime and would definitely prefer to play Brisbane without Webke.

 

[nqboy]

This article is nothing more than your every day bog-standard anti-Brisbane sentiment from the Sydney rag. Ray Chesterton hasn't got a clue what he's raving on about. "It was an Act of God that Webster was not crippled" he says. Has he consulted any leading experts on sports injuries on the matter? Or is he just viewing the situation out of one eye?

 

[JJ]

presumably on the "act of god" bit, he consulted the local priest??

 

[simon says]

The Webcke tackle is EXACTLY the kind of one that the league should be stamping out.The guy wasnt going anywhere,he put his hands between his legs and speared him head first into the ground.

It really was a disgrace,and Im shocked as Webcke isnt llike that.....but,he should have got three for that,with his good record.It was MUCH worse than Woolfords,and way more dangerous IMO.

Chesterton has got it spot on.

 

[mickdo]

Chesto is dead right. Webcke should buy a lottery ticket.

 

[Sir Biffo]

I don't think the tackle was worse than Woolford's, as Woolford's actually had some force in it. Saying that, I don't believe Woolford actually meant to put Slater in the dangerous position, as it was just a good driving tackle that went wrong, and it deserved 3 weeks.

In Webcke's case, it is the opposite. There is no force driving him into the ground, but even the most biased Brisbane supporter cannot say that he didn't know he was going to put Webster into a dangerous position. Now should Webcke escape suspension simply because he dropped Jake Webster when he was completely upside down? No. Could dropping a player on his head still cause as much injury as driving one into the ground? I'm not a spinal expert but I'm sure if the right combination of head position and angle into the ground occured, it could still put someone in a wheelchair. Should Webcke have got the same grade as Woolford, but not end up with the same suspension as Woolford due to his clean record? In my opinion, yes.

 

[Southern Rooster]

thing is for the 10000000000000000th time....webster DID NOT land on his head

Doesn't matter.

Webcke lifted him beyond the horizontal with hands between the legs. The only thing is he didn't drive him but he dropped him which meant he also had no control over the tackle and it was more due to goodluck then good management on Webckes part that he didn't land on his head.

The judiciary system is a joke and should be scrapped for next season. Each person should walk in there to defend themselves or plead guilty and cop what comes. If they have a previous record that can be looked at when sentencing.

Shane Webcke deserves to be sitting on the sidelines for 3 weeks at least.

 

[Bulldog Power]

chesterton is right

o meleys arm came off coreys back and is definetly a grade one

webcke seeing he was dropping this guy, could of seen that he was being driven into the ground by david stagg. both webcke and stagg should of gotten a couple of weeks at least

 

[hrundi99]

There is no force driving him into the ground

Yes there is. It's called gravity.