Ian Roberts was on the judiciary? give me a break!

[Forum Idiot]

Ian Roberts being on the judiciary that gave danny williams an 18 week ban is even more pathetic than MG bad-mouthing willie mason about behaviour. it is the ultimate in hypocrisy! Ian Roberts committed one of the most cowardly acts i have ever seen when he beat the living hell out of gary jack in 1991 and that was completely unprovoked aswell! the beating he gave gary jack was so severe that Jack took roberts to court in 1999. Roberts agreed to pay an undisclosed out-of-court settlement to Jack following the on-field brawl. Jack had sued roberts for $100,000 in damages. if anyone here has actually seen the incident you will agree with me when i say that what roberts did was much much worse than what danny williams did and roberts didnt even get a ban! they both got sin-binned! jack was unrecogniseable. how could roberts sit there and end a mans nrl career for something that he has outdone before as a player? no conscience. whos decision was it to appoint roberts to the judiciary in the first place? put MG on the panel while youre at it.

 

[Tupac Shakur]

Probably got put on the panel from experience!

 

[Anonymous]

That was then, this is now.
He probably knows more about this sort of behaviour than most and probably knows the best way to deal with it.
A case of of 'been there, done that.'

 

[madunit]

Do you feel that his easy let off will sway his opinion on the matter Willow?

 

[Kaz]

Ian Roberts being on the judiciary that gave danny williams an 18 week ban is even more pathetic than MG bad-mouthing willie mason about behaviour. it is the ultimate in hypocrisy! Ian Roberts committed one of the most cowardly acts i have ever seen when he beat the living hell out of gary jack in 1991 and that was completely unprovoked aswell!.

It wasn't unprovoked, Jack was using Roberts sexuality all through the game & he was taunting him about it.

So Roberts beat the sh!t out of him.

Jack took him to court, but Jack said it wasn't for the money. :roll:

Yeah right, well why did he take civil action then.

 

[madunit]

Ian Roberts took that risk of telling the world of his sexuality. He couldn't be as nieve as to assume that players wouldn't use it against him on the field. Thats a ridiculous suggestion that he was provoked. He brought it on himself by announcing he was gay.

 

[Forum Idiot]

It wasn't unprovoked, Jack was using Roberts sexuality all through the game & he was taunting him about it.

So Roberts beat the sh!t out of him.

Jack took him to court, but Jack said it wasn't for the money. :roll:

Yeah right, well why did he take civil action then.

if roberts cant handle a bit of sledging thats his own problem. did gary jack get suspended for calling ian roberts names? no? mark o'neill got suspended for smacking danny williams across the head...
the point of this thread isnt to defend danny williams it is to point out the hypocrisy of naming ian roberts to the judiciary of the danny williams case.

 

[ibeme]

It wasn't unprovoked, Jack was using Roberts sexuality all through the game & he was taunting him about it.

So Roberts beat the sh!t out of him.

Jack took him to court, but Jack said it wasn't for the money. :roll:

Yeah right, well why did he take civil action then.

if roberts cant handle a bit of sledging thats his own problem. did gary jack get suspended for calling ian roberts names? no? mark o'neill got suspended for smacking danny williams across the head...
the point of this thread isnt to defend danny williams it is to point out the hypocrisy of naming ian roberts to the judiciary of the danny williams case.

Do you think they got the Danny Williams punishment wrong?

 

[fish]

Jack shouldn't have opened his mouth if he couldn't back it up.Go out on Friday night and pull the same shit and see if you don't end up on your arse.Roberts is one of the toughest blokes to pull on a jersey,Jack was a dumb prick to mouth off like he did.

 

[Anonymous]

Do you feel that his easy let off will sway his opinion on the matter Willow?

Not sure what you mean. None of us know the full circumstances.
Needless to say, Roberts doesnt go around beating up people.

I don't agree with the notion that anyone 'brings it on themselves' by announcing that they are gay.

I can't see the relevance to the Danny Williams case.

 

[madunit]

I was thinking that due to the incident between Roberts and Jack, Roberts didn't get a punishment from the NSWRL.

Because of this leniency shown to Roberts by the judiciary, do you think he would be inclined to show the same leniency towards Williams for his incident with O'Neill? ;-)

That being the link

 

[Anonymous]

Pure speculation I'd say. :lol:

 

[Forum Idiot]

It wasn't unprovoked, Jack was using Roberts sexuality all through the game & he was taunting him about it.

So Roberts beat the sh!t out of him.

Jack took him to court, but Jack said it wasn't for the money. :roll:

Yeah right, well why did he take civil action then.

if roberts cant handle a bit of sledging thats his own problem. did gary jack get suspended for calling ian roberts names? no? mark o'neill got suspended for smacking danny williams across the head...
the point of this thread isnt to defend danny williams it is to point out the hypocrisy of naming ian roberts to the judiciary of the danny williams case.

Do you think they got the Danny Williams punishment wrong?

no. im just wondering how ian roberts was appoined to the judiciary considering that he was taken to court over something that he did to another player on the football field. and he settled out of court too so its quite obvious that he did the wrong thing well outside of the rules. how he can sit there and ban a player for punching someone in the head after he almost ended gary jacks career in the most one sided beating of all time on a man that was considerably smaller than him. williams deserved what he got but surely ian roberts is in no position to adjudicate on the matter.

 

[Anonymous]

F.I. Do you think the Danny Williams suspension was warranted?

 

[Forum Idiot]

F.I. Do you think the Danny Williams suspension was warranted?

read my last post.

 

[Anonymous]

In that case, it's done with and in your opinion, the right decision was reached. Correct?

 

[madunit]

The point being, how can it be just to have Roberts ajudicating on the Williams issue, when Roberts was never punished for an offence similar in nature. Isn't this kind of hypocritical?

Its like asking Ivan Milat to be a member of the jury for a murder case.

 

[hrundi99]

Ian Roberts took that risk of telling the world of his sexuality. He couldn't be as nieve as to assume that players wouldn't use it against him on the field. Thats a ridiculous suggestion that he was provoked. He brought it on himself by announcing he was gay.

So because he's gay he deserved to cop shit?

:roll:

Only a dickhead like Jack would be homophobic against Roberts and not expect to cop it as a result.

 

[Anonymous]

The point being, how can it be just to have Roberts ajudicating on the Williams issue, when Roberts was never punished for an offence similar in nature. Isn't this kind of hypocritical?

Its like asking Ivan Milat to be a member of the jury for a murder case.

Comparing Ian Roberts to Ivan Milat? Tell me it isn't so.... :lol:

Roberts was on the panel and according to most people, the panel made the right decision. I can't see the issue.

What Ian Roberts did happened years ago. There was different set of people involved and different unwritten rules.... and different inconsistencies.

I suppose he could pay for it for the rest of his life and we can keep passing judgment on the bloke... but apparently this is not the way the NRL judiciary saw it and Roberts was offered a job.
Is there any legitimate reason why he shouldn't be on the judiciary?

I thought it was Danny Williams who was under the spotlight. I didn't know Ian Roberts was on trial. ;-)

 

[madunit]

I was just showing you people the point of this thread. I agree comparing Roberts to Milat was extreme, but it was meant as an example to prove the point of this thread.

Roberts' performances on the panel must be of a high standard as he hasn't been sacked and he has been a member of the panel for some time.

FI's point was that he saw Roberts' position as being somewhat hypocritical.

Hrundi, I didn't say he deserved anything, I said he would be nieve to think that he wouldn't cop some sledging.