Credibility takes dive on big stage?

[AuckMel]

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,16938081-23214,00.html

I dunno about that. SOO's certainly played under a different set of rules to club games, so it's hard to take one of the comments in the article seriously.

All you can ask for is, consistency and if we get it right through the series, then fair enough.

 

[innsaneink]

Cut thru all the crap, TW was dumped on his head, very very dangerously, the ramifications of which couldve been disastrous and the penalty is the same for a shepherd or an offside pass.....a penalty.
Thats just wrong no matter what way you look at it.

Spear tackles now get the green light in the tri nations comp?

 

[Pierced Soul]

forget about diff rules, that tackle was dangerous. woolford didnt even put the guy on his head and he got 8 weeks. Vagana should be missing for the rest of the tournament

 

[drake]

That tackle was awful. Waterhouse is very lucky to be able to feel anything from the neck down.
Vagina should have been given at leat 8 weeks.

 

[The Observer]

What a beatup. Waterhouse was judged by FOUR NRL judiciary members and an ARL board member. They had the opportunity to suspend him and did not.

 

[douglasallen91]

What a beatup. Waterhouse was judged by FOUR NRL judiciary members and an ARL board member. They had the opportunity to suspend him and did not.

yeah that was surprising i would have nearly guaranteed a 1 week suspension.

 

[YANTO]

Winging
Now you lot have it all to do and its makes for a great series.

 

[innsaneink]

Winging
Now you lot have it all to do and its makes for a great series.

Dickhead.....do you condone those type of tackles?


I hope you dont.
No league fan could.

Try and converse about the topic at hand like an adult, eh?

BTW its wHinge. :roll:

The winger plays outside the center, wears 2 or 5.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

It had me scratching my head to be honest. I thought it was pretty clear that Waterhouse was lifted and driven, a suspension should have resulted. I have no problem however with tackes such as Toopi's earlier where the player was picked up and dumped, in those cases I don't even think the whole "beyond the horizontal" thing should come into it. It should only be aan offence if the player is driven head first IMO.

 

[yobbo84]

In a way that tackle is worse than anything MacDougall or Woolford did during the season. Whilst the MacDougall tackle was very bad, he did it in one clear movement, i.e. drove in and dumped him on his head (which is bad). However, Waterhouse's momentum had stopped completely, at which point Vagana purposefully put his hand between his legs and picked him up, dropping him on his head. There was no need at all to do that.

8 weeks min.

 

[AuckMel]

This isn't the NRL.

That said, a suspension wouldn't have been astray, but as it's been pointed out earlier, the Aussies had the chance to throw the book at him.

Who would have guessed they'd get it wrong?

 

[Paullyboy]

Im happy he is still available as its good for the game, and thats the only reasoning I can make for why the judiciary didnt suspend him either.

That tackle was a mile worse than Woolford's, and he got 8 weeks.

If it were by NRL rules he would miss half of next season. But as I said, id rather for the sake of the game that he is playing to make it more interesting.

 

[innsaneink]

This isn't the NRL.

That said, a suspension wouldn't have been astray, but as it's been pointed out earlier, the Aussies had the chance to throw the book at him.

Who would have guessed they'd get it wrong?

It shouldnt matter whether this is the ARL, NRL, CRL, QRL or whatever...its Rugby League, and no matter where it is, these tackles should be severely punished.

 

[East Coast Tiger]

All the media keep comparing the Vagana non-suspension to what happens in the NRL every week. But the problem does not lie with international football but with the NRL judiciary. The NRL is far too harsh. It seems to me the NRL system is set up to rub our best players out of action and that's not a good thing. So what if he would have got 6 or 8 weeks in the NRL - this was not the NRL. International rules can't include carry over points and loadings and so on because they are irregular and deal with players from different competitions. Plus players should get away with a little more when they are playing for their country. And when the suspension would have been for the next Test and possibly Tests in England such games should be considered far higher in importance than an average NRL game. Anyway similar things have happened in Origin where the ARL also presides over reported players straight after games. I have no problem with the outcome, though there is no doubt the tacle was foul under the rules.

 

[Sun_Down]

Im happy he is still available as its good for the game, and thats the only reasoning I can make for why the judiciary didnt suspend him either.

That tackle was a mile worse than Woolford's, and he got 8 weeks.

If it were by NRL rules he would miss half of next season. But as I said, id rather for the sake of the game that he is playing to make it more interesting.

What he said

 

[ozboy]

At least the International board is consistent.

You have to either kill somebody, or stomp on their heads to get a match ban

 

[Blake]

For years the NZRL, has had to deal with the sh*t the NRL throws their way - and more often than not thoroughly unfairly. The Kiwi's get away with one dangerous tackle and a bunch of aussies run crying foul. Boo hoo. Have your cry and move on. A country severly outnumbered and outflanked by wanker NRL clubs dealt to the Roo's at home, and you try diverting attention by bitching about ONE tackle. Yawn.