Eels in the media

[Gronk]

Ok, who ?

Hunslet bring back former Batley Bulldogs flier from London Broncos

Hunslet have re-signed utility-back Niall Walker, who had a spell with London Broncos earlier this year.

The 23-year-old former Stanningley junior initially joined Hunslet in 2017 after living for five years in Australia where he played with Wests Tigers, Parramatta Eels and Balmain Tigers.

He left South Leeds Stadium in 2018 for Batley Bulldogs and moved to the capital seven months ago, but has now returned north.

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co...-batley-bulldogs-flier-london-broncos-2965106

 

[Eelementary]

I finally today got an email back from the NRL, regarding Asofa-Solomona's shoulder charge to Niukore's head.

Basically, according to the NRL, Asofa-Solomona's hit WAS NOT DEEMED A SHOULDER CHARGE.

"Sufficient attempts were made to use the arm in the tackle."

f**k this sport, man - the NRL is a corrupt, useless joke.

 

[Noise]

I finally today got an email back from the NRL, regarding Asofa-Solomona's shoulder charge to Niukore's head.

Basically, according to the NRL, Asofa-Solomona's hit WAS NOT DEEMED A SHOULDER CHARGE.

"Sufficient attempts were made to use the arm in the tackle."

f**k this sport, man - the NRL is a corrupt, useless joke.

Although I don't agree with them I am actually impressed they got back to you with a response.

 

[Noise]

Ok, who ?

Hunslet bring back former Batley Bulldogs flier from London Broncos

Hunslet have re-signed utility-back Niall Walker, who had a spell with London Broncos earlier this year.

The 23-year-old former Stanningley junior initially joined Hunslet in 2017 after living for five years in Australia where he played with Wests Tigers, Parramatta Eels and Balmain Tigers.

He left South Leeds Stadium in 2018 for Batley Bulldogs and moved to the capital seven months ago, but has now returned north.

https://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co...-batley-bulldogs-flier-london-broncos-2965106

It's a shame we never saw Salmon link up with the Niall.

 

[T.S Quint]

Although I don't agree with them I am actually impressed they got back to you with a response.

Im surprised they didn’t tell him to get f**ked.
Seems like something V’Landys would do.

 

[Eelementary]

Although I don't agree with them I am actually impressed they got back to you with a response.

Took them a week and a half, but yeah - I'm impressed, too.

But what a joke - THAT wasn't a shoulder charge? What game were they watching?

@Twizzle - is it against forum guidelines for me to post their response on here? I'm OK to do that, as long as it's not breaching any rules.

 

[Twizzle]

Took them a week and a half, but yeah - I'm impressed, too.

But what a joke - THAT wasn't a shoulder charge? What game were they watching?

@Twizzle - is it against forum guidelines for me to post their response on here? I'm OK to do that, as long as it's not breaching any rules.

nothing to earth shattering in their response

 

[Eelementary]

nothing to earth shattering in their response

It's nothing earth-shattering, and I'm happy to share exactly what they said.

I just didn't want to breach any rules.

 

[Eelementary]

Hi Michael,


Thanks for your email.


The Match Review Committee is established as an independent body and they lay charges based on facts and the available evidence while referencing the Judiciary Code. Every incident is looked at individually and the circumstances considered when it comes to determining whether a charge is necessary.


To ensure consistency and fairness in penalties awarded by the Match Review Committee, penalties are awarded according to a pre-determined points system. In looking at how they grade an incident of foul play, the MRC looks, among other things, at the nature and force of the contact. They can also take into account any aggravating or mitigating circumstances.


In how the Match Review Committee view shoulder charges, the MRC looks at where contact was made, did the player use his shoulder/upper arm without using his arms to tackle or take hold, what level of force was used and who generated the force, and whether the actions were careless, reckless or intentional.


In relation to the tackle that you refer to, player Asofa-Solomona’s actions was not classified as a shoulder charge. He was charged for a careless high tackle.


In regards to player Niukore, he was charged with a Grade One crusher tackle in which the base penalty is 200 points. It is worth noting that the ARLC approved changes for Round 15 and beyond for harsher penalties for crusher tackles. Previously Grade One crusher tackles carried a base penalty of 100 points. The changes were a direct result of seeing a concerning increase in these type of tackles and the penalties did not provide a strong deterrent to reverse this trend.


It is also important to note that the Match Review Committee and the referees are separate entities. The Match Review Committee is able to issue a charge where there wasn’t a penalty awarded as they have the benefit of extensive replay opportunities and the opportunity to seek additional vision at a later time. This is also case with the reverse.


Ultimately the Match Review Committee’s responsibility is not to adjudicate on the referees’ decisions, but rather it is to determine if an incident warrants a charge.


The fact remains that there is no more important aspect to the game than player safety and we will continue to work to eliminate illegal, dangerous play and minimise injuries.


Thanks again for taking the time to write to us, we’ll ensure your feedback is registered.


Kind regards

<name redacted>

Supporter Liaison

 

[Happy MEel]

Hi Michael,


Thanks for your email.


The Match Review Committee is established as an independent body and they lay charges based on facts and the available evidence while referencing the Judiciary Code. Every incident is looked at individually and the circumstances considered when it comes to determining whether a charge is necessary.


To ensure consistency and fairness in penalties awarded by the Match Review Committee, penalties are awarded according to a pre-determined points system. In looking at how they grade an incident of foul play, the MRC looks, among other things, at the nature and force of the contact. They can also take into account any aggravating or mitigating circumstances.


In how the Match Review Committee view shoulder charges, the MRC looks at where contact was made, did the player use his shoulder/upper arm without using his arms to tackle or take hold, what level of force was used and who generated the force, and whether the actions were careless, reckless or intentional.


In relation to the tackle that you refer to, player Asofa-Solomona’s actions was not classified as a shoulder charge. He was charged for a careless high tackle.


In regards to player Niukore, he was charged with a Grade One crusher tackle in which the base penalty is 200 points. It is worth noting that the ARLC approved changes for Round 15 and beyond for harsher penalties for crusher tackles. Previously Grade One crusher tackles carried a base penalty of 100 points. The changes were a direct result of seeing a concerning increase in these type of tackles and the penalties did not provide a strong deterrent to reverse this trend.


It is also important to note that the Match Review Committee and the referees are separate entities. The Match Review Committee is able to issue a charge where there wasn’t a penalty awarded as they have the benefit of extensive replay opportunities and the opportunity to seek additional vision at a later time. This is also case with the reverse.


Ultimately the Match Review Committee’s responsibility is not to adjudicate on the referees’ decisions, but rather it is to determine if an incident warrants a charge.


The fact remains that there is no more important aspect to the game than player safety and we will continue to work to eliminate illegal, dangerous play and minimise injuries.


Thanks again for taking the time to write to us, we’ll ensure your feedback is registered.


Kind regards

<name redacted>

Supporter Liaison

This calls for @Alec Saints level spam to the NRL.

 

[Noise]

The NRL are idiots. Don't they know your name is Eelementary?

 

[Eelementary]

The NRL are idiots. Don't they know your name is Eelementary?

I literally lol'd!

 

[Eelementary]

This cal

This calls for @Alec Saints level spam to the NRL.

Have at it, @Alec Saints!

 

[Eelementary]

How can they seriously say that it wasn't a shoulder charge?

What a f**king disgrace.

 

[emjaycee]

I am more wondering how the MRC can charge Niukore with a crusher but IGNORE the 2 Storm crusher tackles that were put on report. Comparing Niukore to NAS is on thing, but really how come their crushers weren't graded?

Below is my question to the NRL and their response.

Subject: Referees, Bunker and MRC inconsistency
Hi, In recent weeks, Mr Annesly has openly spoken about errors made by the referees and/or bunker in regard to onfield instances, and on numerous occasions during his Monday operational briefing with the media, he has identified certain instances where he believes the game day officials (onfield or bunker) have made an error.

Given that in the Eels v Storm game in Round 15, there were 2 penalties awarded to Parramatta for "crusher" tackles, and both were subsequently determined by the MRC to not be "crusher" tackles, is Mr Annesley able to explain on Monday the errors made by the game day officials in both of these examples please?

In my opinion, this is no different to when Mr Annesley determines that an onfield decision was incorrect and publically explains why. I look forward to seeing these 2 matters explained as errors during Monday's review.

Thanks for your email.

It is important to note that the Match Review Committee and the referees are separate entities. The Match Review Committee is able to issue a charge where there wasn’t a penalty awarded as they have the benefit of extensive replay opportunities and the opportunity to seek additional vision at a later time. This is also case with the reverse.

Ultimately the Match Review Committee’s responsibility is not to adjudicate on the referees’ decisions, but rather it is to determine if an incident warrants a charge.

It is also worth noting Match Review Coordinator Michael Robertson discusses this in Graham’s weekly football briefing.

 

[yy_cheng]

They probably took that much timr to translate it to 25 different languages then sent you the English version

 

[Eelementary]

I am more wondering how the MRC can charge Niukore with a crusher but IGNORE the 2 Storm crusher tackles that were put on report. Comparing Niukore to NAS is on thing, but really how come their crushers weren't graded?

Thing is, I didn't bring up Niukore in my email to them at all...

 

[emjaycee]

I am more wondering how the MRC can charge Niukore with a crusher but IGNORE the 2 Storm crusher tackles that were put on report. Comparing Niukore to NAS is on thing, but really how come their crushers weren't graded?

Below is my question to the NRL and their response.

So what the NRL said above to me is basically, we looked at the Storm crusher tackles that were on report because the referee and the bunker deemed them to be crushers and decided they weren't really crushers so we did nothing. Oh and we looked at a a tackle that no one else cared about or noticed and decided to charge Niukore cause we can.

 

[Eelementary]

So what the NRL said above to me is basically, we looked at the Storm crusher tackles that were on report because the referee and the bunker deemed them to be crushers and decided they weren't really crushers so we did nothing. Oh and we looked at a a tackle that no one else cared about or noticed and decided to charge Niukore cause we can.

It's a joke.

And they're trying to convince us fans that Asofa-Solomona's shoulder to Niukore's jaw wasn't a shoulder charge...

They're a damn joke.

 

[strider]

So what the NRL said above to me is basically, we looked at the Storm crusher tackles that were on report because the referee and the bunker deemed them to be crushers and decided they weren't really crushers so we did nothing. Oh and we looked at a a tackle that no one else cared about or noticed and decided to charge Niukore cause we can.

translation .... we wanted to ban him for the block of cheese breaking his jaw, but simply couldn't get a charge from it - so we found something else