kickback said:That is the lowest act in footy, Even a king hit is not as bad as a player attacking the eye of another player. "its not his go" what a load of sh*t!!!
Tommy Smith said:Hey it's Tuesday, not Saturday.
Rubbish. Just because he is bad at it, doesn't change the fact that he still tried it.avsterooster said:if he had serious intent of eye gouging he would of caused significant damage to morrisons eye gouge... as eye gouges have in the past
avsterooster said:if he had serious intent of eye gouging he would of caused significant damage to morrisons eye gouge... as eye gouges have in the past
in saying this as a rooster supporter i am appauled that he even had his hands around the eyes at all. now eskimo sharkie said if he was a roosters supporter hed be ticked off the club is waisting its money personally i think that is one of the dumbest statements i have ever heard...
the club is a business. ryan cross is a key part of the business, definitely one of the roosters top players this year. you think they would just let him go to the slaughter with out defending him. the roosters have done it better then any club in the past and will do it again, they will invest money in a defense team and as shown in the past it may very well reap dividends.
personally i think he should go for a few weeks. 12 weeks i think is a bit excessive as no damage was caused but still that he did the act and brought the game into disrepute deserves 6 weeks or so... thats not up to me
but to say the club should not defend him is ludicrious.
avsterooster said:if he had serious intent of eye gouging he would of caused significant damage to morrisons eye gouge... as eye gouges have in the past
avsterooster said:in saying this as a rooster supporter i am appauled that he even had his hands around the eyes at all. now eskimo sharkie said if he was a roosters supporter hed be ticked off the club is waisting its money personally i think that is one of the dumbest statements i have ever heard...
the club is a business. ryan cross is a key part of the business, definitely one of the roosters top players this year. you think they would just let him go to the slaughter with out defending him. the roosters have done it better then any club in the past and will do it again, they will invest money in a defense team and as shown in the past it may very well reap dividends.
personally i think he should go for a few weeks. 12 weeks i think is a bit excessive as no damage was caused but still that he did the act and brought the game into disrepute deserves 6 weeks or so... thats not up to me
but to say the club should not defend him is ludicrious.
Eskimo Sharkie said:Take a leaf out of Manly's books. Hopoate was playing like a champion until he nearly decapitated Galloway. They recognise and accept a disgraceful act for exactly that and tear up his contract. Do you think that he was any less pivotal to Manly's premiership aspirations than Cross is for the Roosters?
Eskimo Sharkie said:Take a leaf out of Manly's books. Hopoate was playing like a champion until he nearly decapitated Galloway. They recognise and accept a disgraceful act for exactly that and tear up his contract. Do you think that he was any less pivotal to Manly's premiership aspirations than Cross is for the Roosters?
sretsoor said:Yes but Manly attempted to defend him 1st and when they lost, they tore up the contract.