What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Judiciary

Slippery Morris

First Grade
Messages
7,888
There is a guy that had fun disallowing certain Dragons tries in the bunker, now he is having fun banning them for matches in the MRC. This goose really hates the Dragons with a passion. As soon as I saw him in their I knew Saints were gone with any reporting to the MRC. The only time they would get off is if the golden boys from the Storm do anything and they want to not make it obvious by letting other teams off as well. The pattern is so obvious now.

They were not good tackles but cannot see the difference with Big Nelson's grubby play who has been cited 4 times (2 x Careless High tackle, 1 Dangerous high and the other high tackle) and copped monetary fines each time and Sims is considered a serial offender and he has been cited 3 times (2 x Careless high and 1 Dangerous contact) this year. I never new 3 was higher than 4. Mind you Nelson got 2 charges in the 1 game (Rd19) both $3000 fines each. Would love to see the difference with a 3k fine and a 4-5 week ban careless high tackle, as from memory the difference was no way near as significant as the punishment given.

At most Molo should have copped 2 weeks if they were consistent. Saints just never complain and state the obvious so it is the dumb clubs fault for not demanding consistency seeing they are clearly targeted more than others.
 

Dragon David

First Grade
Messages
9,292
There is a guy that had fun disallowing certain Dragons tries in the bunker, now he is having fun banning them for matches in the MRC. This goose really hates the Dragons with a passion. As soon as I saw him in their I knew Saints were gone with any reporting to the MRC. The only time they would get off is if the golden boys from the Storm do anything and they want to not make it obvious by letting other teams off as well. The pattern is so obvious now.

They were not good tackles but cannot see the difference with Big Nelson's grubby play who has been cited 4 times (2 x Careless High tackle, 1 Dangerous high and the other high tackle) and copped monetary fines each time and Sims is considered a serial offender and he has been cited 3 times (2 x Careless high and 1 Dangerous contact) this year. I never new 3 was higher than 4. Mind you Nelson got 2 charges in the 1 game (Rd19) both $3000 fines each. Would love to see the difference with a 3k fine and a 4-5 week ban careless high tackle, as from memory the difference was no way near as significant as the punishment given.

At most Molo should have copped 2 weeks if they were consistent. Saints just never complain and state the obvious so it is the dumb clubs fault for not demanding consistency seeing they are clearly targeted more than others.
Yes, in my opinion the club should keep nagging and nagging and complaining without getting fined and nag until the Cows come home to roost, or should that be the Roosters to come home to ....

Anyway, we need to keep nagging. They will get the message one day that the club is not happy with our players getting copped harsher than others.
 

dannyt

Coach
Messages
14,490
There is a guy that had fun disallowing certain Dragons tries in the bunker, now he is having fun banning them for matches in the MRC. This goose really hates the Dragons with a passion. As soon as I saw him in their I knew Saints were gone with any reporting to the MRC. The only time they would get off is if the golden boys from the Storm do anything and they want to not make it obvious by letting other teams off as well. The pattern is so obvious now.

They were not good tackles but cannot see the difference with Big Nelson's grubby play who has been cited 4 times (2 x Careless High tackle, 1 Dangerous high and the other high tackle) and copped monetary fines each time and Sims is considered a serial offender and he has been cited 3 times (2 x Careless high and 1 Dangerous contact) this year. I never new 3 was higher than 4. Mind you Nelson got 2 charges in the 1 game (Rd19) both $3000 fines each. Would love to see the difference with a 3k fine and a 4-5 week ban careless high tackle, as from memory the difference was no way near as significant as the punishment given.

At most Molo should have copped 2 weeks if they were consistent. Saints just never complain and state the obvious so it is the dumb clubs fault for not demanding consistency seeing they are clearly targeted more than others.
WIthout naming names, "the pattern is so obvious now"? ;)

1661228158994.png
 

dannyt

Coach
Messages
14,490
Yes, in my opinion the club should keep nagging and nagging and complaining without getting fined and nag until the Cows come home to roost, or should that be the Roosters to come home to ....

Anyway, we need to keep nagging. They will get the message one day that the club is not happy with our players getting copped harsher than others.
I heard a rumour we we do nag, but the NRL be like:
200.gif
 

getsmarty

Immortal
Messages
34,237
We did fight at least one of Rava's charges last year. Was found guilty
Correct....and yet the same teams get given a gold pass... The league has made a rod for their own backs...last weekend was a disgrace...The Blowout scorelines...

The NRL should just make it for 4 team comp...because they don't give a rip about other teams being competitive ...
 

dannyt

Coach
Messages
14,490
Yes in record time....appeal dismissed in 5 minutes?
If we couldn't get that BS one, there isn't much chance at all.
Still angry every game when I see at least 10 real shoulder charges with not even a penalty.
Yes, they didn't seem to take very long at all. You could be excused for thinking the guilty verdict was a predetermined, foregone conclusion.

I can't believe how Rava got suspended for those tackles, but everyone goes into raptures over Olam's tackles. Now that's a shoulder-charge.
 

Dragon David

First Grade
Messages
9,292
Yep, just like that. Take the early guilty plea and take the easy way out. "I am guilty sir as charged and the club is happy with the decision because they are weak as..."
 

dannyt

Coach
Messages
14,490
Yep, just like that. Take the early guilty plea and take the easy way out. "I am guilty sir as charged and the club is happy with the decision because they are weak as..."
The problem is we have a very bad record when it comes to the judiciary, certainly worse than, say, the rorters, and maybe it's the quality of the legal representation. I would NEVER EVER suggest it's because of a bias towards our club, and other teams get a much fairer hearing. Perish the thought!

Given our poor record, it's almost certain that challenging a ruling simply adds one week to the suspension.
 

BLM01

First Grade
Messages
9,945
Correct....and yet the same teams get given a gold pass... The league has made a rod for their own backs...last weekend was a disgrace...The Blowout scorelines...

The NRL should just make it for 4 team comp...because they don't give a rip about other teams being competitive ...
That may be true but...another team and whilst he seems a good bloke and carries himself well in the media...is
How on earth can Tamou get a downgrade for dissent. It is not as if he did not say what he said and what he was charged for.
What is there levels of how he said it, force, looking at him?
I mean it proves it is all trial by outocme, injury, media or as normally massaged to suit a narrative

No different to Slater potentially missing a GF for a try saving shoulder charge. Whilst I am OK with that tackle rules are rules....or they are when its Dragons involved.

So they gave him a downgrade in sympathy so he gets one more game because he spoke so well, very remorseful in fronting the media after the game (worked a treat). I am happy for him but..It is BS
 

blacksafake

First Grade
Messages
9,622
That may be true but...another team and whilst he seems a good bloke and carries himself well in the media...is
How on earth can Tamou get a downgrade for dissent. It is not as if he did not say what he said and what he was charged for.
What is there levels of how he said it, force, looking at him?
I mean it proves it is all trial by outocme, injury, media or as normally massaged to suit a narrative

No different to Slater potentially missing a GF for a try saving shoulder charge. Whilst I am OK with that tackle rules are rules....or they are when its Dragons involved.

So they gave him a downgrade in sympathy so he gets one more game because he spoke so well, very remorseful in fronting the media after the game (worked a treat). I am happy for him but..It is BS
That’s unbelievable.
He told Cummins he was effing incompetent (he’s probably right) & then gets a downgrade. The media no doubt played a big part in this decision.
If a coach says that it’s 10k straight away or if McGuire said it he’d get a month.
 

getsmarty

Immortal
Messages
34,237
That’s unbelievable.
He told Cummins he was effing incompetent (he’s probably right) & then gets a downgrade. The media no doubt played a big part in this decision.
If a coach says that it’s 10k straight away or if McGuire said it he’d get a 4 months.
Fixed it for you...LOL sorry couldn't help myself...you have to laugh...its so inconsistent .
 

Dragon David

First Grade
Messages
9,292
I didn't realise that leniency is given to someone who apologises profusely. Have any of our guys done that openly to the ref and at hearings? Was not what Tamou said, said at the time? Did he not get sent off? Didn't he bring the game into disrepute for swearing and giving the ref a gobful? Isn't that downright dissent that should not ever be accepted?

Come the next year we will see and hear other guys swearing and cursing and giving it to the ref. Now that a precedent has been set, these guys know that they can do it and only get a week but feel great for being able to say it. Especially if they have a minor injury that needs a weeks rest to get over. Haha!

Nah! It reeks of "favouritism" and giving in to help Tamou out so that he can play for the Tigers in the last game of the year before he leaves that club. How is it going to play out in future dissent issues?
 

Latest posts

Top