George Burgess facing 2 week ban for contrary conduct

[Lambretta]

What else would you call it?

Dancing whilst being cuddled

 

[Lambretta]

Napa gets off for a crusher tackle too. Bullshit.

Souths got charged for heaps of suspected crusher tackles last year.

Maybe the difference was that the Souths players committed crusher tackles and Napa didn't.

At the only point in the tackle where a crusher could have been committed, Napa had fallen off the tackle and wasn't touching the Souths player

It's fairly hard to commit a crusher tackle when you're not touching someone

The match review comittee didn't refer it to the judiciary as on watching a replay it was obvious that no crusher motion was made at any point during the incident. The referee made a simple error which was rectified after the event. No harm done.


As for your question on Maloney and Evans - both WERE charged. Both pleaded guilty. That's not getting off.

 

[Card Shark]

Shoulder charges in general are targeted because they can potentially kill. A plastic bottle is not killing anybody.

Agree.

Your club was involved in a nasty incident against the Bulldogs with numerous bottles thrown from the crowd, were you not? Did you blow up at the time for this outlandish behaviour?

A player doing it is worse, they are involved in the game. It could've instigated a repeat of what happened in the Dogs game.

Lucky to only get 2 weeks in some ways but I think 200 points is fair.

 

[Snappy]

What people, mostly Souffs fans, are seemingly unable to grasp, is that the punishment is higher because George was on the bench. Getting involved in on feild incidents from the bench, has always been harshly punished.

 

[Card Shark]

Nothing in the Napa tackle, totally an accident the way both players came to the ground.

As for Maloney, it was a kick & deserved a week suspension, as harmless as it probably was. Can't be doing that sort of thing!

 

[DiegoNT]

George- completely stupid, penalty seems harsh, maybe 1 week?
Evans- completely stupid, interfering with a player who's being assessed by a trainer (even if Carter deserved it ) should of been 1 week
Maloney - should be a week, but a precedent had been set by j . Reynolds. Fair enough
Napa- shouldn't of been penalised, sometimes people fall awkwardly in tackles.

 

[muzby]

 

[STORM.99/07]

Absolute joke. How the f*ck does Maloney not get a week for trying TO KICK SOMEONE.

Evans also threw a ball at Carter's head WHILE HE WAS BEING TREATED FOR BLEEDING.

Nah i'm done thanks.

National Rooster League methinks. Beyond a joke...

Last year it was blatently National Rabbits league.

 

[BulldogsBulldogsYepYepYep]

Last year it was blatently National Rabbits league.

This, same as the majority of this year.

Maybe they're going for a Souffs are down and out gimmick this year to be less blatant.

I don't like Souffs or The Roosters. As a fan who watches just about every match every week, I'm sick of the treatment the scum of the league constantly get.

 

[Danish]

:lol:


If I have one critique, Mr Burgess's shirt should have read "Souths No.1 member"...

 

[lockyno1]

People whinging have to remember that if Burgess didn't have priors THIS SEASON....he would have got 1 week. That is probably on the harsh side, but pretty fair.

 

[muzby]

Absolute joke. How the f*ck does Maloney not get a week for trying TO KICK SOMEONE.

Evans also threw a ball at Carter's head WHILE HE WAS BEING TREATED FOR BLEEDING.

Nah i'm done thanks.

National Rooster League methinks. Beyond a joke...

wow your vision is a bit clouded by the fact you support the rabbits..

Absolute joke. How the f*ck does Maloney not get a week for trying TO KICK SOMEONE.

watch the footage.. maloney was trying to stabilise himself, but was dragged down by the rabbitohs player.. had the bunny not try to pull maloney down, his foot would have landed firmly on the ground.. it was the action of the rabbits that caused his leg to go out at that angle..

if you ask me, bloody lucky that they didn't flip maloney beyond the horizontal, or you'd be facing more people being suspended..

Evans also threw a ball at Carter's head WHILE HE WAS BEING TREATED FOR BLEEDING.

have you done any form of first aid? compression is a key part of treating an injury, it helps stops bleeding and swelling...

evans was simply trying to assist carter by sending a ball at the bleeding area to compress the wound.. more pressure than a hand therefore more effective..


so ungrateful..

 

[Rabbits20]

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Souffs fans never fail to deliver.

You know it's true!

 

[Rabbits20]

if Carter didn't want to be hit by the ball then she shouldn't have thrown it at the roosters first

Carter lightly threw the ball as Evans is an idiot.

Evans threw the ball with full force, so there's a difference.

 

[Rabbits20]

Would've been nice for them to change the rule after the incident like they did for Evans.

As dumb as it was, two weeks for that and none for a blatant trip/shoulder charge is taking the piss.

Agree.

 

[PARRA_FAN]

What people, mostly Souffs fans, are seemingly unable to grasp, is that the punishment is higher because George was on the bench. Getting involved in on feild incidents from the bench, has always been harshly punished.

I remember the Manly/Storm fight in 2011, the famous one with Stewart and Blair, Storm players from the bench got into trouble for getting involved. I think may have been suspended.

Pretty silly stuff from both Burgess and Evans.

 

[Rabbits20]

Maybe the difference was that the Souths players committed crusher tackles and Napa didn't.

At the only point in the tackle where a crusher could have been committed, Napa had fallen off the tackle and wasn't touching the Souths player

It's fairly hard to commit a crusher tackle when you're not touching someone

The match review comittee didn't refer it to the judiciary as on watching a replay it was obvious that no crusher motion was made at any point during the incident. The referee made a simple error which was rectified after the event. No harm done.


As for your question on Maloney and Evans - both WERE charged. Both pleaded guilty. That's not getting off.

It was a clear crusher, I saw it! Napa is a repeat offender for foul play, becoming worse than Hargreaves actually.

The Souths players weren't crushers they were normal tackles.

Zero consistency.

Maloney should have got a grade 2.

 

[Rabbits20]

Last year it was blatently National Rabbits league.

No it wasn't Souths still got it tough from the judiciary.

 

[Captain Apollo]

It was a clear crusher, I saw it! Napa is a repeat offender for foul play, becoming worse than Hargreaves actually.

The Souths players weren't crushers they were normal tackles.

Zero consistency.

Maloney should have got a grade 2.

Sorry the only constant is your whining. Napa's was a crusher tackle worthy of suspension eh? FMD only person I have heard that form is you. I have yet to hear anyone in the media say that, be it in print or electronic.

As to Maloney, only grade 2 tripping charge this year that I can recall is Edrick Lee's back in Round 21. It was a dumb thing he did but he got what was merited.

Your carry on about these two just clouds the Burgess issue as it makes you out as a bitter, twisted Souths partisan who is 100% one eyed.

 

[Lambretta]

It was a clear crusher, I saw it! Napa is a repeat offender for foul play, becoming worse than Hargreaves actually.

The Souths players weren't crushers they were normal tackles.

Zero consistency.

Andrew Johns and Peter Sterling disagree with you

On the subject of Napa's tackle being cited as a crusher Johns laughed and asked if the someone was kidding. He then followed that up with "Napa has absolutely nothing to worry about there"

Sterlo reponded with "there may be nothing in it but he should worry a tiny bit as he's been charged"

Johns just repeated "no he shouldn't - that was absolutely nothing"

The match review comittee agreed with Johns and Sterling