Fifita

[Card Shark]

So there is a lot more shit going on eh.

That'd be right. :roll:

 

[Through the Lens]

I think a lot of people do not understand the process that is in play here. The Fifitas were given 5 days to respond to their ban by the Penrith JRL. They did in that time period. David accepted the ban and Andrew defended it. After they lodged their pleadings, the Sharks gave them a Show Cause notice, which gave them 7days to respond before a full board meeting. So the time frame is in keeping with that required for natural justice to prevail.

The appearance before the board is not an indication of guilt, but a formal request to present the facts of the case from the players perspective. If the player presents his own statement and is backed up by other independent statements or witnesses, that support his innocence, then the board is required to hand down a sanction that supports its interpretation of that position. The NRL Integrity Unit is then in a position to accept that ruling or to impose another penalty if it so thinks fit.

 

[bluefox1968]

I think a lot of people do not understand the process that is in play here. The Fifitas were given 5 days to respond to their ban by the Penrith JRL. They did in that time period. David accepted the ban and Andrew defended it. After they lodged their pleadings, the Sharks gave them a Show Cause notice, which gave them 7days to respond before a full board meeting. So the time frame is in keeping with that required for natural justice to prevail.

The appearance before the board is not an indication of guilt, but a formal request to present the facts of the case from the players perspective. If the player presents his own statement and is backed up by other independent statements or witnesses, that support his innocence, then the board is required to hand down a sanction that supports its interpretation of that position. The NRL Integrity Unit is then in a position to accept that ruling or to impose another penalty if it so thinks fit.

Thank you for that SANE representation of events. If only more people, including the media, would shut their mouths, we would be a lot better off.

 

[Born BB&W]

So what's the word on the street are we going to be without them for the rest of the year?

As far as the comments regarding him annoying folks at the club I don't mind that - He bends the line, is a total handful and scores his fair share of tries.

I like having both of them in the squad.

 

[coolumsharkie]

I think a lot of people do not understand the process that is in play here. The Fifitas were given 5 days to respond to their ban by the Penrith JRL. They did in that time period. David accepted the ban and Andrew defended it. After they lodged their pleadings, the Sharks gave them a Show Cause notice, which gave them 7days to respond before a full board meeting. So the time frame is in keeping with that required for natural justice to prevail.

The appearance before the board is not an indication of guilt, but a formal request to present the facts of the case from the players perspective. If the player presents his own statement and is backed up by other independent statements or witnesses, that support his innocence, then the board is required to hand down a sanction that supports its interpretation of that position. The NRL Integrity Unit is then in a position to accept that ruling or to impose another penalty if it so thinks fit.

I heard they front the board thursday. So I doubt they will play this weekend.

f**k sake.

 

[Craigshark]

Herald reporting he'll miss 8 weeks.

 

[tye]

Herald reporting he'll miss 8 weeks.

Up to 8 weeks! They expect them to miss the rest of the season. I struggle to accept this strong stance when Both Graham and Kleemer got 3 weeks for abusing and threatening the referees on national TV. We threw the season away in 2008 with the Bird incident before the semi and it looks like history will repeat.

 

[Special K]

Agreed anything more than Klemmer is a stitch up.

 

[SharkShocked]

A stitch up that our board will bend over and spread our cheeks for.

Watch us back into the corner and assume the position.

 

[Mr Angry]

Still have too say..

Abusing a junior ref if true.

Worse than what we have sacked for. ..

Sympathy very low...just not on.

if..we all await.

 

[SharkShocked]

Yeah it's not on.

But no one can cop the NRL inconsistency with punishments.

Pleas guilty to a case of domestic violence. Play all season and win a grand final.

Get into an argument with a ref at a local game. Get twice the punishment of abusing a ref on live prime time TV.

Just can't cop the treatment of certain clubs.

 

[BatteredFlake]

<P>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I'm all for protecting referees. But when the penalties also penalise those who, through no fault of their own, follow a team with no influence with the ruling classes, it gets my back up.</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I wonder also ,How much worse was the fafitas&nbsp; crimes to what normally happens&nbsp; at those games? The "I Know Who you are " that the ref allegedly said indicates a serious bias.</P>

 

[Weaponhead]

This is not a standard case of ref abuse. The issue was over the treatment of an injured player. A welfare issue. Not an accusation of cheating.

No one condones ref abuse but the punishment must fit the actual crime not to send a message for the overall issue of ref abuse. A season ending suspension with the conflicting evidence available would be ridiculously excessive given comparable instances with Klemmer and Graham as well as Clarkson in the AFL.

 

[SharkShocked]

Cronullafied.

Assume the position.

 

[Through the Lens]

I don't think for a minute that the club is going to throw it's investment to the wolves. It is going to stand on it's head to ensure that the Fifitas are available to help us through to the grand final. It will review all the evidence before it and make its decision based upon that evidence. The two lawyers that are representing the Boys will ensure that the evidence is presented fairly and forcibly. They will impress upon the Board, some of whom are lawyers themselves, that they must deliver a fair and just decision. that decision must be in accord with the expectations of the NRL Integrity unit and never the less, the outcome, which ever way it goes, can be challenged or appealed. So it's still a way to go and although we all hope for the best, but we must expect the worst.

 

[Surely]

"I tried to snatch the phone from him once, but didn't get it. I deny saying to the referee that I would 'smash him'. It is possible that I said that I would smash his phone [although the word I remember using is 'snap' not 'smash'. I also deny that people were 'holding me back' from the referee. My recollection is that there were people around yelling but no one was holding me."
However, witness statements from officials from St Patrick's and their opponents, St Mary's, back up Hannon's version, in which he also alleged David Fifita had called him a "f---ing disgrace".
"We've got witnesses from the St Pat's club who have come forward to provide witness statements," Penrith and District Junior Rugby League general manager Phil Cummingssaid. "They're officials from the club. They've been very open and honest in what they've supplied to us," Cummings told The Australian.
"They corroborate what the referees have said and they're along the lines of the same evidence and that's been supplied to the Cronulla club as well."
The St Patrick's official was not sure if Fifita had said he would "smash" the referee or his phone.
"I stepped between Andrew and the referee as he moved towards the referee," the witness statement said. "Andrew at this stage was asking for the referee's phone as he believed the altercation was being filmed. Andrew had made a comment to the effect: 'Stop recording or I'll smash ...' Again there was foul language used and directed towards the referee.
"The referee was back peddling (sic) away from Andrew as he [Andrew] was moving towards him. I was trying to calm the situation and Andrew may have or not have said 'it or you'."


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...eree-abuse-20150802-giptpw.html#ixzz3hf9QvkgD

So the witness corroborates the refs version but isn't sure what fafita said

f**king gold

 

[Card Shark]

Not looking good

 

[Surely]

3 weeks is the standard set for ref abuse

 

[THE MESSIAH !!!]

A stitch up that our board will bend over and spread our cheeks for.

Watch us back into the corner and assume the position.

Lube not required we are so used to it now

 

[carcharias]

8 weeks is ludicrous.