Good on ya Schif!

[Tommy Smith]

Whether you think Finch should have got off or not, i just want to say well done to Clinton for helping out. It's nice to see league players help each other out and he's earnt my respect!

I now rate him the second best FB in the comp

 

[Anonymous]

SHAME ON YOU CHOC!

Marshall Chalk for fullback 2005.

 

[greeneyed]

I think Clinton was crazy.

 

[greeneyed]

Finch should have been suspended for 3 weeks, having challenged. It just demonstrates there is one rule for the Roosters and another for the rest of us.

 

[lotm]

very mature response from choc.

this cynical rooster bashing is getting out of hand, imo. (*awaits barrage from fellow raiders supporters*)

 

[greeneyed]

You have got to be joking lotm!!!!!!!!! :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

 

[azza]

If it had been the Roosters, do you honestly think they would have helped us out if we were in a similar position? Stupid poaching androtops only ever think of themselves...

Anyway, kudos Schif, but I really think it wasn't necessary.

 

[Raider_69]

good on choc, i dont agree with it but he is trying to help a bloke out that quite frankly no one likes. must be outta pity, well done choc but lay off the wacky tabacy ;-) :lol:

 

[lotm]

whether i agree with choc's sentiments or not is immaterial. personally, after reviewing the footage, i came to the conclusion that 1 week would've been appropriate, as there were several mitigating factors. as that wasn't possible, i'm not overly disappointed that he got off. disappointed, but not fuming.

 

[Raider Ultra]

As was said previously, if the shoe was on the other foot would you really expect Frett Binch to do the same?

 

[I Bleed Green]

It was, and they didn't help.

They could've easily said that the tackle on Crocker didn't have any malice in it, but they didn't, so it boggles the mind to think why Clinton would help the bastards out.

 

[edabomb]

And why the NRL pays attention when it is Brett Finch taking opposing players statements to hearings. Last I remember, Wiki did the same and it didn't matter in the slightest for his ban.

 

[Chook]

I sat and watched NRL on Fox with a Raider mate and told me that CF would do this and be up front. And he was. And I want to thank him for that.

It was a dangerous tackle and Finch was guilty of being a part of it, he does have 94 points now hanging over his head. But he's been clean all year and that has to count for something come the back end of the season. Had Woolford had a clean skin he could've done exactly the same thing and played last weekend!

Anyway, thanks again Clinton.

Chook

 

[DJ Raida]

I think clinton got a story added to his house for helping finch out
either that or one of his family was taken hostage because sanity would prevail in deciding whether to help brett finch out

 

[azza]

I think Schif must want to ensure the Roosters don't win the premiership, hence he testified for Funch at the judiciary.

 

[Ultima]

I sat and watched NRL on Fox with a Raider mate and told me that CF would do this and be up front. And he was. And I want to thank him for that.

It was a dangerous tackle and Finch was guilty of being a part of it, he does have 94 points now hanging over his head. But he's been clean all year and that has to count for something come the back end of the season. Had Woolford had a clean skin he could've done exactly the same thing and played last weekend!

Anyway, thanks again Clinton.

Chook

Yeah... Clean for a year means something :roll: Woolford, Croker, McLinden all got done in 2000's finals even though McLinden had NEVER been to the judicary before and the others had no points either... Furner only got off in a perfect display of the Judicary corruption....

 

[azza]

Ultima, you've got the wrong Mac. It was McFadden.

Yes, the judiciary showed what BS they are as far as consistency is concerned by letting Furner off because it was his last season in Aus. They didn't actually bother to consider that in letting him off they showed that the whole process is an absolute charade.

 

[Munky]

I sat and watched NRL on Fox with a Raider mate and told me that CF would do this and be up front. And he was. And I want to thank him for that.

It was a dangerous tackle and Finch was guilty of being a part of it, he does have 94 points now hanging over his head. But he's been clean all year and that has to count for something come the back end of the season. Had Woolford had a clean skin he could've done exactly the same thing and played last weekend!

Anyway, thanks again Clinton.

Chook

Yeah... Clean for a year means something :roll: Woolford, Croker, McLinden all got done in 2000's finals even though McLinden had NEVER been to the judicary before and the others had no points either... Furner only got off in a perfect display of the Judicary corruption....

Those three had it coming for ending Puletua's season.

Still fuming about that, I just hope Finch misses the next two game through Karma...

 

[Kris_man]

whether i agree with choc's sentiments or not is immaterial. personally, after reviewing the footage, i came to the conclusion that 1 week would've been appropriate, as there were several mitigating factors. as that wasn't possible, i'm not overly disappointed that he got off. disappointed, but not fuming.

look lotm, i dont intend to "barrage" you with insults, rather i'll just say this:
the NRL, as i'm sure you can agree, have been very strict all year in regards to dangerous tackles, especially ones where the ball-carrier is lifted above the horizontal. this isn't about whether the tackle itself was dangerous or not, it's about precedent. and seemingly precedent does not count when dealing with the Roosters. as the thread on the NRL forum says, Ben Ross and the Panthers deserve an explanation.
I actually commend Choc here too. he's setting the standard for decency and sportsmanship in the game. but should we expect the Roosters to return the favour? hell no. they wouldn't even view it as a favour, they'd view it as Schif's duty, im sure of it. bastards.

 

[greeneyed]

Let's face it.... what Croker did IN THE SAME GAME was a lot less than what Finch did. Where are the Roosters coming forward in his defence????????

No where.