MEDIA RELEASE
20/01/04
NRL Judiciary Commissioner, Judge Greg Woods, has ruled that Eels forward Nathan Hindmarsh is not eligible to play in the 2004 Cougar Bourbon World Sevens tournament at Aussie Stadium this weekend.
Nathan Hindmarsh was suspended for one match in round 26 of the 2003 Telstra Premiership at Penrith Stadium for a dangerous throw.
Sevens matches and trials organized by clubs do not count against suspensions.
For the avoidance of doubt, trial games can only count towards an NRL suspension when they are sanctioned in advance by the NRL, involve two first grade NRL teams, NRL officials and an agreement to be bound by all NRL codes and procedures.
Parramatta had argued that the Sevens should count either on the basis of 'each match' or the entire tournament being counted as one match.
The club tabled written submissions last week seeking that Judge Woods exercise his discretion under section 46 of the Judiciary Code so that Hindmarsh could either compete or have the Cougar World Sevens count towards his current suspension.
The ruling by Judge Woods is as follows:
"The submission is thoughtful and helpful, and raises an interesting argument. I have given careful attention to it.
The point argued is that in my letter of 18-12-03 I have erred in my interpretation of "match", as defined in section 6 of the Code.
Having considered the argument in the light of the various relevant provisions of the Code, I am not persuaded that I should alter what I previously said.
If Mr Fitzgerald's argument were correct, it would have the following consequence: assume a player commits a very serious offence in the Grand Final. He is penalized with 500 demerit points, a penalty of a gravity which is only handed down once or twice a year. He may not play for his next five matches.
Assume that a Sevens tournament is held in January. His team does well and plays 5 matches in the Sevens (or however many is enough to win). His team wins the Sevens. He would have been picked for each of those teams.
The NRL competition starts, and his club then fields him in the first match. This would be possible on Mr Fitzgerald's submission, because each individual Sevens match would have been a "match" for the purposes of the Code. The player would have "cleared his slate".
It seems to me that the Code does not compel or even allow such an outcome. Section 6 (1) is prefaced by the formula that the definitions have effect in their terms "...unless the context otherwise indicates or requires..."
It would be an absurdity, and it is not what the Code intends, if a player who is outed for five matches in the NRL competition can serve out the suspension by sitting on the sideline at a Sevens tournament in January. That context of absurdity and unreasonableness makes the argument in the submission untenable.
I note the fact that Mr Hindmarsh was the star player in last year's competition. As brilliant a player as he clearly is, this is not something which I should allow as the basis for the exercise of the discretion presently in question. Nor does it seem to me that the player will be discriminated against under this ruling.
Regretfully, I decline to exercise the discretion as asked."
