Hayne and Keating will play!

[ElectricEelMan]

I'm all for keeping the toughness in the sport, but that quote is neither here nor there. Regardless of how tough/grubby the act was, it was illegal - you cannot collect a player's head. THAT is the issue.

yes, i am not arguing it was not illegal, it was careless hence Grade 1 justified
again anyone thinking Hayne should be suspended for that are pussys

 

[Fui!!!]

I'm all for keeping the toughness in the sport, but that quote is neither here nor there. Regardless of how tough/grubby the act was, it was illegal - you cannot collect a player's head. THAT is the issue.

Yes you can. How many accidental high tackles are let go.

Do you want all them charged?

 

[parra-matters]

some people here are ethier young kids or have no brains.
Gibbs was different because he had form and carry over pts thats why he got 3 weeks, would have been 2 but he tried to fight it and lost.
Also wasn't going for the ball and the try was already scored.

Some people are just typing in here with a hatred of Hayne or Parramatta instead of looking at the facts.

 

[Eelementary]

Best point of the day, and its what Elliot has been saying on the Sunday Roast.

Its just Tigers supporters who think they got rubbed out of the finals by the judiciary.

Last I checked I am an Eels fanatic, and I can see why people are a bit annoyed...

 

[Flapper]

f**k off. you're saying the tigers last 2 games werent important then? you're a f**king nuffy

I'm a Tigers fan and I totally agree with the decision, and the fact that no one here can grasp the concept of carryover points astounds me. Gibbs penalty was slightly harsh, but he chose to fight it, which is why it looks worse. If Hayne fights it, he might get suspended.

And I pray to God you're not a Tigers fan, as you're f**king thick as two planks.

 

[Tigers_are_Pro]

I'm not complaining about the Tigers being given the short end of the stick. Chances are we lose with Gibbs playing anyway, the consistency and ruling is what I'm upset about.

You can't/shouldn't be allowed to lead with your knees and make contact with a defenseless player's head.

To think that it should go free is kind of disappointing for me.

 

[Eelementary]

yes, i am not arguing it was not illegal, it was careless hence Grade 1 justified
again anyone thinking Hayne should be suspended for that are pussys

Ah. Fair enough, mate. I didn't get what you were trying to say.

Yes you can. How many accidental high tackles are let go.

Do you want all them charged?

No, you CANNOT go after an opponent's head - just because you do accidentally and it doesn't get penalised doesn't mean it's legal, mate.

I'm a Parra fan. I'm happy - he got charged (as he should have imo) but not suspended.

All I am saying is, when all is said and done, he hit a guy in the head. Accidentally or not, it's still against the rules.

 

[Deleted member 10972]

I feel that Hayne should have been suspended. Whether he is committed or not, the point is that he led with the knees. Look at Hazem during Luke Burt's try, Hazem made a late tackle he was committed to, yes, but at least he led with the upper body.

Okay, the try-scorer was in a different position, BUT the fact remains that in NO instance should you be leading with your boots OR knees. This is dangerous, in particular to the vulnerable tryscorer. If you want a miracle try-saver, dive arms first and try and get your upper body under the try-scorer.

I rate Hayne highly, as everyone does, BUT this is what sickens me about the media's impact on the NRL decisions sometimes. Hayne should have been suspended, BUT his suspension would have massively affected the crowds and media coverage of the game - no poster boy to focus on. Hayne should have been suspended, in consistency with previous decisions. I hope Bryce Gibbs and the West Tigers camp take this into account, because in all honesty, there is very little 'justice'.

 

[mickdo]

To all the whingers, Cameron Smith last year got a grade 1, the same as Hayne. He missed the GF because of his carry over points. Hayne had no carry overs.

Gibbs would have only got 1 week if he didn't have carry overs, and got 3 because he contested it and lost. His charge was greater than Hayne's because he dropped knees on a player who had the ball and dived in to score. Hayne was going in to a contest where the ball was on the ground from a kick. No comparison.

Now piss off you bunch of sooks.

 

[dollyhands]

some people here are ethier young kids or have no brains.
Gibbs was different because he had form and carry over pts thats why he got 3 weeks, would have been 2 but he tried to fight it and lost.
Also wasn't going for the ball and the try was already scored.

Some people are just typing in here with a hatred of Hayne or Parramatta instead of looking at the facts.

Wrong , glad hayne is playin, it will now be a good match, upset cam smith missed a GF when the player wasn't even injured. 2 eel players injured 2 dogs players, free to play

 

[Fui!!!]

No, you CANNOT go after an opponent's head - just because you do accidentally and it doesn't get penalised doesn't mean it's legal, mate.

I'm a Parra fan. I'm happy - he got charged (as he should have imo) but not suspended.

All I am saying is, when all is said and done, he hit a guy in the head. Accidentally or not, it's still against the rules.

Then please answer my question. Should every accidental high shot be charged? The 50 that happen every week?

 

[CrazyEel]

I'm a Tigers fan and I totally agree with the decision, and the fact that no one here can grasp the concept of carryover points astounds me. Gibbs penalty was slightly harsh, but he chose to fight it, which is why it looks worse. If Hayne fights it, he might get suspended.

And I pray to God you're not a Tigers fan, as you're f**king thick as two planks.

You sir I applaud for intelligence and good sportsmanship, should be more like you

Tis a shame some of your compatriots appear to be so bitter and resentful. :roll:

 

[Eelementary]

Then please answer my question. Should every accidental high shot be charged? The 50 that happen every week?

Well, I mean ideally yes - it's against the rules. But obviously that can't happen. Or won't happen.

But my initial argument was I could see why he should be charged and/or possibly suspended.

 

[Ridders]

Some people are just typing in here with a hatred of Hayne or Parramatta instead of looking at the facts.

:lol: And you Parra supporters are obviously unbiased in your opinion as well

 

[CrazyEel]

:lol: And you Parra supporters are obviously unbiased in your opinion as well

But of course, how could you possibly think otherwise :shock:

 

[Fui!!!]

Well, I mean ideally yes - it's against the rules. But obviously that can't happen. Or won't happen.

But my initial argument was I could see why he should be charged and/or possibly suspended.

Well then we aren't gonna agree on this. Because I think accidental contact with the head is a part of the game, and all these rules are just ruining the game. I like the game to be tough, like it was in the good old days.

We have to agree to disagree.

I think the right decision was made today.

 

[camsmith]

Finally, some common sense RE: Hayne. I think Keating can think himself lucky to be playing. Watch the Storm blow up about this ...

We have every right to blow up about it.

Happy for the game ... but I think it's ridiculous for the consistency of the judiciary...

They're my thoughts too.

It's a joke, but happy he is playing.

 

[Eelementary]

Well then we aren't gonna agree on this. Because I think accidental contact with the head is a part of the game, and all these rules are just ruining the game. I like the game to be tough, like it was in the good old days.

We have to agree to disagree.

I think the right decision was made today.

I agree with what you're saying mate, but I also agree with obeying the rules.

But I also agree that the correct decision was made - he was charged but with no carry over points won't be suspended. I think that was the right call.

 

[camsmith]

some people here are ethier young kids or have no brains.
Gibbs was different because he had form and carry over pts thats why he got 3 weeks, would have been 2 but he tried to fight it and lost.
Also wasn't going for the ball and the try was already scored.

Some people are just typing in here with a hatred of Hayne or Parramatta instead of looking at the facts.

But wasn't Gibbs classed as a Grade 2?

How can this be judged as a Grade 1 given the above precedent? Carry over points dont mean anything when judging the seriousness of the incident.

 

[parra-matters]

But wasn't Gibbs classed as a Grade 2?

How can this be judged as a Grade 1 given the above precedent? Carry over points dont mean anything when judging the seriousness of the incident.

Again read my post, Burt had already grounded the ball, Gibbs could jumped over burt and avoided contact, it is not the same as the Hayne one.