Judiciary

[Gareth67]

What do u think the SUPER LEAGUE was all about.?

Yes I see your point , Rupert Murdoch had 2 bites of the cherry so to speak . Once with the Super League back in the 80’s , which of course is now defunct and now with the NRL .

 

[Number of the Beath]

Yes I see your point , Rupert Murdoch had 2 bites of the cherry so to speak . Once with the Super League back in the 80’s , which of course is now defunct and now with the NRL .

The NRL is, and always was, Super League by stealth. Anyway, in the '90s after the misfire of an expansion to national level, the talk was always around there being too many Sydney clubs and the league got what it wanted. Not the supporters, but the media and league HQ. Super League was all about elitism and the idea of elite professional competition. However, the problem with elites is that everything underneath gets neglected. And so traditional clubs get the axe - or shoehorned into unsuitable mergers - unless they find themselves a sugar daddy ( Rorters, Souffs ).
And it can't be said that Saints in the '90s weren't viable and couldn't attract top-flight players (We don't have any now). Standalone St George contested 3 grand finals, punched above their weight to get there and should have won in 1993. And if the club was "broke" how did it manage to substantially fund the JV?

 

[Dragon David]

We need Ben Hunt as the captain of the team to step up and continually query the refs decisions - not look up to the heavens! Anything that might help us get more rub of the green would be beneficial to our chances of winning.

 

[BBTB]

The NRL is, and always was, Super League by stealth. Anyway, in the '90s after the misfire of an expansion to national level, the talk was always around there being too many Sydney clubs and the league got what it wanted. Not the supporters, but the media and league HQ. Super League was all about elitism and the idea of elite professional competition. However, the problem with elites is that everything underneath gets neglected. And so traditional clubs get the axe - or shoehorned into unsuitable mergers - unless they find themselves a sugar daddy ( Rorters, Souffs ).
And it can't be said that Saints in the '90s weren't viable and couldn't attract top-flight players (We don't have any now). Standalone St George contested 3 grand finals, punched above their weight to get there and should have won in 1993. And if the club was "broke" how did it manage to substantially fund the JV?

We(stg) could take care of our end....illawara had the Gordon's....Now illawara went broke........and those "good for nothing "Gordon's stepped in on a shonky deal with that parasite "Doust".Before he supposedly retired. Only to turn up again on the board, back up by the Gordon's of course. The whole Stgeorge/ill organisation is putrid to the "core". Just like the NRL.

 

[Trifili13]

Just saw the Cleary tackle from last night and he cops a $1,000 fine for early guilty plea. My question is, what is the fine for? Either it's a dangerous tackle and should be suspended or it's nothing and we move on. However with Cleary being one of the golden children, the commentators, and i think it was Alexander, so no bias there, said it was a 1 on 1 tackle so it could not be a hip drop. What rubbish. Now I do agree it was not a classic hip drop, but could easily have broken the other players leg. Love to see how many weeks Fui or Moose would have got if they did that tackle on a star player.

Also the BS last week with Junior Paulo that it was a good shoulder to shoulder hit. I didn't see any effort to wrap his arms around the player, and certainly not at the same time as the hit. Hello NRL, anybody home, I thought hitting with the shoulder and not wrapping your arm was illegal or does that rule only apply if your name is Rava and you hit them in the stomach?

While I am on my rant, I hate refs calling dominant or surrender in a tackle. A tackle is a tackle, you should not get any extra benefit of laying on the player just because it was a good hard hit. It's like saying that was a great team try so you get an extra point or bring the kick closer to the posts.

Just stick to the f'ing rules and not make stuff up. It's like they don't penalize teams for being constantly offside because there would be too many penalties in the game. My view is if a team is dumb enough to keep standing offside or doing it purposely then keep penalizing them.

Rant over. Thanks for reading it. I hope everyone enjoys the Easter break and lets hope the Dragon's give us something to cheer about against Newcastle and the rest of the season.

 

[Trifili13]

Sorry, wrote above that it might have been Alexander that made the comment that it was a 1 on 1 tackle so could not have been a hip drop. It was actually daddy Cleary in last nights press conference.

I have also since read that Andrew Johns and others have said it was a dangerous tackle.

 

[Dragon David]

Just saw the Cleary tackle from last night and he cops a $1,000 fine for early guilty plea. My question is, what is the fine for? Either it's a dangerous tackle and should be suspended or it's nothing and we move on. However with Cleary being one of the golden children, the commentators, and i think it was Alexander, so no bias there, said it was a 1 on 1 tackle so it could not be a hip drop. What rubbish. Now I do agree it was not a classic hip drop, but could easily have broken the other players leg. Love to see how many weeks Fui or Moose would have got if they did that tackle on a star player.

Also the BS last week with Junior Paulo that it was a good shoulder to shoulder hit. I didn't see any effort to wrap his arms around the player, and certainly not at the same time as the hit. Hello NRL, anybody home, I thought hitting with the shoulder and not wrapping your arm was illegal or does that rule only apply if your name is Rava and you hit them in the stomach?

While I am on my rant, I hate refs calling dominant or surrender in a tackle. A tackle is a tackle, you should not get any extra benefit of laying on the player just because it was a good hard hit. It's like saying that was a great team try so you get an extra point or bring the kick closer to the posts.

Just stick to the f'ing rules and not make stuff up. It's like they don't penalize teams for being constantly offside because there would be too many penalties in the game. My view is if a team is dumb enough to keep standing offside or doing it purposely then keep penalizing them.

Rant over. Thanks for reading it. I hope everyone enjoys the Easter break and lets hope the Dragon's give us something to cheer about against Newcastle and the rest of the season.

I'm agreeing wholeheartedly with your report/post Trifili13. That tackle by Cleary was dangerous in my opinion and deserves more than a $1,000 fine, particularly seeing that N Cleary will be earning a fortune in the next 5 years. It should not have been a fine as the tackle was done on purpose so was not careless and therefore the grading should have been higher. But, when you have the name Cleary, only the bare minimum is charged.

Agreed with the other matter of the Paulo shoulder hit as well.

If both incidents involved anyone of our players, we know what the outcome would be. It's a bloody unfair situation as far as I am concerned.

We win tomorrow, I can see a much improved showing in the next few games, including the one against the Roosters.

 

[SaintPeter]

If that was Sims or the other Boofhead they’d be lookin at a month.
The Cleary tackle

 

[Dragon David]

From Foxsports News:
WEBSITE LINK TO ARTICLE ADDED BY MODERATOR (Please do this yourself in future): https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nr...6/news-story/6b8442cbcc9611fd1f59d7dddfe8a0e7

"Panthers star Nathan Cleary has escaped with a fine after he was charged for an ugly tackle on Broncos playmaker Billy Walters on Friday night.

With 14 minutes left to go at BlueBet Stadium, Cleary attempted to tackle Walters one-on-one, using his leg as leverage to take the 28-year-old to the ground.

Cleary was charged with dangerous contact and will be fined $1000 with an early guitly plea or $1500 if he fights the charge and loses."

Cleary has got mountains of money. Why not fight the charge? It would only cost him a mere $500 more if he loses, blah, blah, blah....

 

[BLM01]

You ma

Just saw the Cleary tackle from last night and he cops a $1,000 fine for early guilty plea. My question is, what is the fine for? Either it's a dangerous tackle and should be suspended or it's nothing and we move on. However with Cleary being one of the golden children, the commentators, and i think it was Alexander, so no bias there, said it was a 1 on 1 tackle so it could not be a hip drop. What rubbish. Now I do agree it was not a classic hip drop, but could easily have broken the other players leg. Love to see how many weeks Fui or Moose would have got if they did that tackle on a star player.

Also the BS last week with Junior Paulo that it was a good shoulder to shoulder hit. I didn't see any effort to wrap his arms around the player, and certainly not at the same time as the hit. Hello NRL, anybody home, I thought hitting with the shoulder and not wrapping your arm was illegal or does that rule only apply if your name is Rava and you hit them in the stomach?

While I am on my rant, I hate refs calling dominant or surrender in a tackle. A tackle is a tackle, you should not get any extra benefit of laying on the player just because it was a good hard hit. It's like saying that was a great team try so you get an extra point or bring the kick closer to the posts.

Just stick to the f'ing rules and not make stuff up. It's like they don't penalize teams for being constantly offside because there would be too many penalties in the game. My view is if a team is dumb enough to keep standing offside or doing it purposely then keep penalizing them.

Rant over. Thanks for reading it. I hope everyone enjoys the Easter break and lets hope the Dragon's give us something to cheer about against Newcastle and the rest of the season.

You make a good point with Cleary. But was not Fui's recent suspension also from a one on one tackle. I could not see the difference..but of course the manufactured match review can.
He has missed enough football this year and has to get into form and fitness for origin as 1st player picked. You know how it goes.
Re Paulo..he did get suspended.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Both Lomax and Molo cop fines from yesterdays game v Knights.
Lomax contrary conduct
Molo grade 1 careless

Judiciary Report: Sims accepts four-game ban; JFH out for two

See all the latest judiciary, charges and suspension news from the 2022 NRL Telstra Premiership.

www.nrl.com

 

[ChocOConnor]

Zac should be sent directly to The Hague with old Vladimir Putin for that act. Seriously idiot thing to do but nrl must be kidding. Same fine as a bloke who nearly snapped a players leg on Friday night. Oh and the same team have been doing what Zac did for the past 3 years but again nothing to see here

 

[SBD82]

Both Lomax and Molo cop fines from yesterdays game v Knights.
Lomax contrary conduct
Molo grade 1 careless

Judiciary Report: Sims accepts four-game ban; JFH out for two

See all the latest judiciary, charges and suspension news from the 2022 NRL Telstra Premiership.

www.nrl.com

Glad Molo’s is so low. I was worried at the time that he’d be binned, and concerned that we’d lose him to suspension.

Not that I think he deserved either. Just don’t have any faith in the judiciary at the moment.

 

[Como Connection]

Glad Molo’s is so low. I was worried at the time that he’d be binned, and concerned that we’d lose him to suspension.

Not that I think he deserved either. Just don’t have any faith in the judiciary at the moment.

"At the moment", been a joke for years.
CC

 

[charlesv]

Roosters trio get off scott free again especially Teflon JWH

 

[Dragon David]

Roosters trio get off scott free again especially Teflon JWH

Need all players on deck. The match reviewers don't want to create an imbalance to both sides. It is an Anzac Day game where all is fair in love and war and may the best team win and the best hopefully will be the Mighty Dragons because we are due. Come on!

 

[SEAT 1A]

I thought JWH's hit was the same as Molo's.

To be fair, penalty OK due to the rule however, I don't you should go on report when the player is fulling.

 

[kit66]

NRL.com have Fonua-Blake's shoulder charge on Cotter as "tackle of the week". 100% deliberate shoulder charge, no attempt to use the arms. Personally I don't mind a good shoulder charge but they're now illegal and Rava got 5 (?) weeks for a much less obvious tackle in which he did actually use his arms. The Judiciary is a rort.

 

[Dragon David]

NRL.com have Fonua-Blake's shoulder charge on Cotter as "tackle of the week". 100% deliberate shoulder charge, no attempt to use the arms. Personally I don't mind a good shoulder charge but they're now illegal and Rava got 5 (?) weeks for a much less obvious tackle in which he did actually use his arms. The Judiciary is a rort.

Rava was dudded big time twice as his tackles should have been "tackles of the week".

I think someone has put some of these dubious tackles on the highlights reel somewhere but why bother using any of it as evidence when we know that they don't look at any of the evidence we produce - didn't one of the hearings for one of our guys only last 5 minutes when the charge was contested by the player?

 

[jak]

Roosters trio get off scott free again especially Teflon JWH

bet you didn't see that coming