Excuses no more

[Ausguy]

If cronulla "win" the spoon then i hope those in charge will see the errors the club has made in the past and not repeat them. What other club would hang their star player out to dry whilst all the time talking about the team sticking together? Look at what other clubs have done, manly and the like who rallied around and supported their star player during his time under the microscope. No, but not cronulla, they decided it would be best to play the nice guys. Well.. look at where it has got them, they didn't have to make the choices they made. No one made them release Bird, no-one made them sign Matuia. These are mistakes the club and coach has made. I will watch with interest as this Inglis saga unfolds, but i promise you it will be handled very differently to the Bird case even though the circumstances are exactly the same. Congrats sharks, well done!!!!

The circumstances are heardly exactly the same, Bird glassed the girl ffs.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

The circumstances are heardly exactly the same, Bird glassed the girl ffs.

No, Bird glassed the club.

 

[Drakken]

The circumstances are heardly exactly the same, Bird glassed the girl ffs.

Assault is assault regardless. They both face the same charges, circumstances may differ but end result is still the same. They both assaulted a woman!!

 

[Drakken]

When you change the point of an argument because of you have lost, a good way to do it is by agreeing with me . Well done.
However, in hindsight, what we should have done is played Bird in the finals lat year, then f**ked him off for being the vindictive low life he & his manager are .

I never changed the point at all, i've been saying this from the start. You on the other hand wanted to pursue a minor point in my opinion and try to turn it into an argument.

 

[Ausguy]

Assault is assault regardless. They both face the same charges, circumstances may differ but end result is still the same. They both assaulted a woman!!

Complete horsesh*t, the end result isnt the same at all.

any cops in here...?

please clarify that if i stab Drakken with a knife you will charge me with the same thing as if i pushed him to the ground.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

somebody please stab somebody FFS!

 

[SadShark]

I'll stairb meeself in the klitorus like I said in another post blacky...............if it helps any.........spose.

 

[Quigs]

I can work it out for youse

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LBIsDBC848

Hope this helps

Cheers
Declared Idiot #88
Quigs

 

[Surely]

Yeah it's time for me to suck on ya mums tit again ;-)

Arse clown, Keep the family references out please.

 

[Drakken]

Complete horsesh*t, the end result isnt the same at all.

any cops in here...?

please clarify that if i stab Drakken with a knife you will charge me with the same thing as if i pushed him to the ground.

Stabbing someone with a knife would result in a charge of assault with a weapon among other various assault charges and Bird was not charged with this offence. He was charged with assault and reckless wounding. Inglis has been charged with assault and recklessly causing injury. Very similar charges which both carry very similar penalties.

 

[Frailty]

Stabbing someone with a knife would result in a charge of assault with a weapon among other various assault charges and Bird was not charged with this offence. He was charged with assault and reckless wounding. Inglis has been charged with assault and recklessly causing injury. Very similar charges which both carry very similar penalties.

They are not comparable...

Crimes Act 1958 (Victoria) - Section 18 states:

18. Causing injury intentionally or recklessly

A person who, without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly causes injury
to another person is guilty of an indictable offence. Penalty: If the injury
was caused intentionally-level 5 imprisonment (10 years maximum); If the
injury was caused recklessly-level 6 imprisonment (5 years maximum).

Now compared to NSW Crimes Act 1900 - Section 35 subsection 4:

(4) Reckless wounding A person who recklessly wounds any person is guilty of an offence.

Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for 7 years.

Even just looking at the language of how the legislation is written, reckless wounding is a larger crime than causing injury.

 

[samshark]

Stabbing someone with a knife would result in a charge of assault with a weapon among other various assault charges and Bird was not charged with this offence. He was charged with assault and reckless wounding. Inglis has been charged with assault and recklessly causing injury. Very similar charges which both carry very similar penalties.

Your fighting above your weight here Drakken. They are not similiar charges at all. For starters you are talking about two different states with different legislation. Also, look up the definitions of a wound and injury in the respective Crimes Acts and you will get a better understanding. Birds was much worse and totally different circumstances so it is unfair and wrong to say the Storm have handled things better than the sharks. There were various factors behind how Bird was handled, most of which can be blamed on one person, G. Bird.

 

[The Masked Avenger]

At least we are all gettng value for money as we fork out our hard earned to go out and watch the boys run around on a Sunday afternoon.

Honestly, can anyone tell me where else you can spend $10 (Family ticket for me and 3 mates), and get to laugh your tits off?

Makes the Melbourne Comedy Festival look dammned overpriced!

 

[Quigs]

Funny you should mention that.

Was watching at the pub yesterday - along side the only other two sharks supporters in the town, and throw in the mates son, he to is a sharks supporter. So there are the four of us watching, laughing, getting publicly ridiculed by the rest of the bar patrons - bless their little cotton socks.

Halftime we are copping sh!t by the buckets, then up pops good old hammerhead taking out the maiden sprintrace.

Well didn't that stop em in their tracks.

The Sharks finally won farkin' something.

Cheers
Declared Idiot #88
Quigs

 

[Ronnie Dobbs]

Yeah it's time for me to suck on ya mums tit again ;-)

:lol: Sign him up!!!!!

 

[Drakken]

Did they both assault women? Are you saying it's ok what Inglis has done compared to what Bird did? Both these women suffered injuries, both these players have done the same thing. Can you not see that? The difference is the storm won't hang Inglis out to dry, they will rally around their star player and support him, something the sharks including their supporters never did.

 

[Drakken]

They are not comparable...

Crimes Act 1958 (Victoria) - Section 18 states:


Now compared to NSW Crimes Act 1900 - Section 35 subsection 4:



Even just looking at the language of how the legislation is written, reckless wounding is a larger crime than causing injury.

So Inglis faces a maximum of 5-10 years whereas Bird was facing a maximum of 7 years. Sounds like similar penalties to me

 

[Frailty]

So Inglis faces a maximum of 5-10 years whereas Bird was facing a maximum of 7 years. Sounds like similar penalties to me

No Inglis' maximum would be 5 years... His charge is reckless not intentional (which brings a 10 year max).

Furthermore, you are neglecting the simple fact that Bird was also charged with misleading or giving a false statement to Police (can't remember exactly) as well as Bird lying to the club.

Inglis on the other hand notified the club of what had happened, and the club then contacted the NRL.

If Inglis was tried in NSW he would be tried under Common Assault which brings a maximum of two years I believe.

 

[Frailty]

Did they both assault women? Are you saying it's ok what Inglis has done compared to what Bird did? Both these women suffered injuries, both these players have done the same thing. Can you not see that? The difference is the storm won't hang Inglis out to dry, they will rally around their star player and support him, something the sharks including their supporters never did.

The gender of the victim is irrelevant. Furthermore, they are not similar due to the nature of the injuries suffered (Milligan require microsurgery whilst Inglis' ex didn't). Inglis has also not mislead the club or police.

 

[Drakken]

No Inglis' maximum would be 5 years... His charge is reckless not intentional (which brings a 10 year max).

Furthermore, you are neglecting the simple fact that Bird was also charged with misleading or giving a false statement to Police (can't remember exactly) as well as Bird lying to the club.

Inglis on the other hand notified the club of what had happened, and the club then contacted the NRL.

If Inglis was tried in NSW he would be tried under Common Assault which brings a maximum of two years I believe.

Inglis is being charged with common assault as well, so to was Bird.