Fuifui faces 12-week ban

[Frederick]

Fuifui faces 12-week ban
By Steve Mascord
June 13, 2006

NRL prosecutors are set to demand a ban of 12 weeks for Parramatta prop Fuifui Moimoi when he fronts the judiciary tonight on a biting charge.

The Eels prop had his case referred straight to the judiciary by the NRL match review committee yesterday.

With two high-tackle suspensions last year, it's understood Moimoi's only hope of escaping three months on the sidelines is to plead guilty or beat the charge before the tribunal.

He would still have to front the disciplinary committee with a guilty plea but it is likely prosecutor Peter Kite would then recommend a more lenient nine or 10-week suspension.

South Sydney centre Adam MacDougall, meanwhile, is facing a four to six-week suspension for striking Brisbane's Darius Boyd.

Discussing the referred charge against Moimoi, chief video reviewer Greg McCallum said: "The player lodged the complaint correctly with the referee, the referee and touch judge witnessed it and the player and referee have lodged official reports.

"The video review committee viewed all available angles and given all the evidence, referred the charge to the tribunal."

In deciding what suspension to recommend in an ungraded charge, the judiciary takes into consideration other ungraded recent charges, such as those meted out to John Hopoate, Danny Williams and Greg Bird.

While Moimoi's two marathon suspensions last year are not involved in any mathematical calculation by Kite, they are taken into account when he recommends a suspension to the panel.

But the judiciary is free to hand down whatever penalty it sees fit.
With Origin II taking place at Suncorp Stadium tomorrow night, the hearing will be staged tonight.

Parramatta players claimed during and after the game that they were the subject of Storm grapple tackles but Eels chief executive Denis Fitzgerald would not comment on whether this would form part of Moimoi's defence.

Speaking before the matter was referred yesterday, Eels lock Glenn Morrison said: "I spoke to Fui and he said he didn't do anything.

"That's not in his nature at all."

The last player found guilty of biting was Cronulla's Chris Beattie in 2001.

He was suspended for two matches. The most recent official biting allegation was from Newcastle's Josh Perry against St George Illawarra's Luke Bailey but the Dragons prop was found not guilty.

The longest suspension for biting was eight matches, meted out to the Bulldogs' Jarrod McCracken for an offence against South Sydney's Ross Harrington in 1991.

Eels five-eighth John Morris added: "I still don't know what happened and Fui seems like he's pretty amazed by it."

White showed referee Paul Simpkins a mark on his left bicep when making the 56th- minute on-field complaint during the 34-22 loss at Parramatta Stadium on Sunday.

The Daily Telegraph

LINK

 

[RABK]

Parramatta's season just gets worse and worse.

 

[eelsta]

you can say thar again:crazy:

 

[b&wdynamite]

12 weeks is a joke in my opinion, don't get me wrong in no way do I think he should get off lightly for it (if proven guilty of course!) but what sort of message does that give to parent's?

On one hand Moi Moi is looking at 12 weeks for biting an arm through a jersey and Trent Barrett/Adam Mc Dougall get/are looking at 6 weeks for callous high shots which could have much much greater consequences.

I heard Brandy touch on this in NRL scoreboard last night too, with the same issue - yes biting is bad and a very cowardly act, but surely it is not worth double the penalty of trying to knock some blokes head off with a forearm?

(note this is not an attack on Trent Barrett or McDougall, these are just the latest big cases in the high shot category)

I guess this all goes back to the oldest complaint about the judicary and its processes - PLEASE BE CONSISTENT!!

 

[SpaceMonkey]

If he gets 12 weeks, they better prove clear intent and that he gave White's arm a serious chomp. A few teeth marks after white shoved his arm in Fuis face hardly prove that IMO.

 

[innsaneink]

12 weeks is a joke in my opinion, don't get me wrong in no way do I think he should get off lightly for it (if proven guilty of course!) but what sort of message does that give to parent's?

On one hand Moi Moi is looking at 12 weeks for biting an arm through a jersey and Trent Barrett/Adam Mc Dougall get/are looking at 6 weeks for callous high shots which could have much much greater consequences.

I heard Brandy touch on this in NRL scoreboard last night too, with the same issue - yes biting is bad and a very cowardly act, but surely it is not worth double the penalty of trying to knock some blokes head off with a forearm?

(note this is not an attack on Trent Barrett or McDougall, these are just the latest big cases in the high shot category)

I guess this all goes back to the oldest complaint about the judicary and its processes - PLEASE BE CONSISTENT!!

Youve just made Barretts and MacDougalls incidents deliberate....you KNOW for a fact they werent accidental?

Seeing you noted brandy on NRL Scoreboard...you wouldve also heard Junior say that while elbows and forearms can cause severe damage and are not good, they also can be accidental, they can be tackles and shoulder charges gone wrong.

I cant see how a player can accidentally bite another.

 

[Pierced Soul]

you're not going to get teeth marks from shoving your arm into someones face. the mark White was pointing out was very red and looked like it broke the skin, so I'd say it was a fairly decent chomp.

bye bye fui :nwave: I'd say we'd see you in the finals but the eels wont be there

 

[The Colonel]

you're not going to get teeth marks from shoving your arm into someones face. the mark White was pointing out was very red and looked like it broke the skin, so I'd say it was a fairly decent chomp.

Not sure it broke the skin but it looked like a bite mark. Looked like a blood blister of sorts.

I was just amazed that he didn't make an issue out of it at the moment it happened as he was fairly animated when he was showing Geyer. It will come down to a case of White's word against Fui's though I think. Video evidence isn't conclusive.

 

[The Preacher]

12 weeks is a joke in my opinion, don't get me wrong in no way do I think he should get off lightly for it (if proven guilty of course!) but what sort of message does that give to parent's?

On one hand Moi Moi is looking at 12 weeks for biting an arm through a jersey and Trent Barrett/Adam Mc Dougall get/are looking at 6 weeks for callous high shots which could have much much greater consequences.

I heard Brandy touch on this in NRL scoreboard last night too, with the same issue - yes biting is bad and a very cowardly act, but surely it is not worth double the penalty of trying to knock some blokes head off with a forearm?

(note this is not an attack on Trent Barrett or McDougall, these are just the latest big cases in the high shot category)



I guess this all goes back to the oldest complaint about the judicary and its processes - PLEASE BE CONSISTENT!!

You don't contract blood carried diseases from high shots, so do myou still think that high shots have much much greater consequences ???

 

[innsaneink]

Not sure it broke the skin but it looked like a bite mark. Looked like a blood blister of sorts.

I was just amazed that he didn't make an issue out of it at the moment it happened as he was fairly animated when he was showing Geyer. It will come down to a case of White's word against Fui's though I think. Video evidence isn't conclusive.

He did....as soon as White was able to get to his feet, he was obviously having words and pointing aggressively at Moi Moi...thats straight after the incident.

 

[The Colonel]

He did....as soon as White was able to get to his feet, he was obviously having words and pointing aggressively at Moi Moi...thats straight after the incident.

Sorry. I didn't see much of the footage as I was at the actual game working - the footage I saw didn't show much outside of the tackle and him standing at marker. I saw him showing Geyer and then making the statement to the ref.

 

[mickdo]

You don't contract blood carried diseases from high shots, so do myou still think that high shots have much much greater consequences ???

No, you can just get permanent brain damage, but that's ok huh? :lol: :crazy:

 

[Blaze]

Wouldn't be surprised if he ends up moving to England...

 

[The Preacher]

No, you can just get permanent brain damage, but that's ok huh? :lol: :crazy:

You're speaking from experience it seems !!

 

[El Diablo]

You don't contract blood carried diseases from high shots, so do myou still think that high shots have much much greater consequences ???

lol

so what does Fui have, Doctor?

 

[Pierced Soul]

lol

so what does Fui have, Doctor?

an anger problem and an increasingly worse judiciary record.

he ahs a lot of potential but i think if eh doesnt manage himself he's gonna end up suspended more than actuallly playing

 

[The Colonel]

I think he has just got back into the black on games played and games suspended.

 

[The Preacher]

lol

so what does Fui have, Doctor?

Bad name syndrome !!! Very Contagious.

 

[El Diablo]

Bad name syndrome !!! Very Contagious.

Brettybretty Whitewhite if Fui is found to of bitten and passed on this ailment then?

 

[b&wdynamite]

Youve just made Barretts and MacDougalls incidents deliberate....you KNOW for a fact they werent accidental?

Seeing you noted brandy on NRL Scoreboard...you wouldve also heard Junior say that while elbows and forearms can cause severe damage and are not good, they also can be accidental, they can be tackles and shoulder charges gone wrong.

I cant see how a player can accidentally bite another.

I guess I got my point across wrongly. Yes there is no way in hell a bite can be accidental on a football field - and yes it should be penalised heavily.
My point is that to the untrained, non LU eye (the sporting mums market we should be and are trying to capture) when you compare the penalties for the barrett shot to fui fui's bite, how can a bite be worth double - intentions aside.

And given that we are all taught at a young age (or should be) that you should never ever ever bite anyone, Fui Fui's mid afternoon snack would be recognised by common sense as an individuals brain explosion, not as a blight on the game in whole. Unfortunately for the people I know who don't follow league, high shots and their impacts are what they discuss when giving reasons why they don't get thier kids playing, not biting.

Maybe if it was reported a little better perhaps - that Fui Fui is facing 12 weeks because of his poor judiciary record (I can only hope the 12 weeks does include loading otherwise someone needs to send Fui a link to the centrelink website)

(I do think thou that I am senslessly rambling on this subject - a lack of sleep from the weekend sports feast is not good for the brain).