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!

Looking back at ancient controversies

84 Baby

Referee
Messages
28,773
Yeah, I didn't think you were blaming him personally, that's more Rhynob level.

The Judicary were the dickheads in both cases, just I think they were more dickheadish in Slaters case. What May did was pretty low key in the scheme of things. What should have happened is he cops 2 weeks or whatever when it came to light for bringing the game into disrepute, then any extra if warranted after court has finished.

IIRC he would have been back to take part in the fisting of your mob GF day if he had of served the suspension when it was handed down, so not a beneficiary at all the way it panned out. (Not that anyone could have forseen that)
Depends if you think the wilful ignoring of clear offences by particular players/teams that has happened for years (albeit the Catler one does top it) or the sudden “captains pick” change in rule application so it’s fair for the fans is more controversial. Either way I don’t think even the smuggest of Smug could deny May/Smug were treated favourably. Whether he got injured later is beside the point.
 

soc123_au

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
18,984
Depends if you think the wilful ignoring of clear offences by particular players/teams that has happened for years (albeit the Catler one does top it) or the sudden “captains pick” change in rule application so it’s fair for the fans is more controversial. Either way I don’t think even the smuggest of Smug could deny May/Smug were treated favourably. Whether he got injured later is beside the point.
I facepalmed when they delayed Mays suspension. It was a terrible look and the idiot who decided that was the way to go should have been publicly flogged. Not because May deserved to miss finals games, as I don't think the crime warranted that, but because it reeked of bias. It should have just been shit timing for May and suck it up.

I just thought you using that as the benchmark as worse then Slaters get of jail free card was odd.
 

84 Baby

Referee
Messages
28,773
I facepalmed when they delayed Mays suspension. It was a terrible look and the idiot who decided that was the way to go should have been publicly flogged. Not because May deserved to miss finals games, as I don't think the crime warranted that, but because it reeked of bias. It should have just been shit timing for May and suck it up.

I just thought you using that as the benchmark as worse then Slaters get of jail free card was odd.
Maybe it isn’t worse but terrible judiciary exonerations aren’t new, just ask NAS or Cunster… wait a second, I’m seeing a pattern here.
Whereas deferring suspension on a whim is a new and exciting way for the NRL to become more corruptible
 

soc123_au

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
18,984
Maybe it isn’t worse but terrible judiciary exonerations aren’t new, just ask NAS or Cunster… wait a second, I’m seeing a pattern here.
Whereas deferring suspension on a whim is a new and exciting way for the NRL to become more corruptible
There has been some shockers over the years. Hayne getting off for a headbutt & Luke Lewis getting sacrificed at the alter to keep QLD quiet was pretty special.
 

Stinkfinger

Juniors
Messages
635
I've addressed that

Having said that I've seen on countless occasions a ref call knock on and then get told by the touchy it was a strip and change the decision.
They change their minds about who put the ball dead pretty regularly too. The difference on this occasion was that the decision was changed as play continued.
 

gerg

Juniors
Messages
2,390
They change their minds about who put the ball dead pretty regularly too. The difference on this occasion was that the decision was changed as play continued.

The bunker does often correct calls which are clearly incorrect. I haven't seen anything that is clear that either the first call or the subsequent correction was the right decision. It was the most 50/50 incident a long time. What I mean is we see calls overturned when there is conclusive evidence that the initial decision was incorrect and there just wasn't enough evidence to overturn it.
 

Valheru

Coach
Messages
18,200
They change their minds about who put the ball dead pretty regularly too. The difference on this occasion was that the decision was changed as play continued.
Correct

The best solution would have been a neutral infringement by the ref and just replay the tackle.
 
Messages
14,585
Yeah, I didn't think you were blaming him personally, that's more Rhynob level.

The Judicary were the dickheads in both cases, just I think they were more dickheadish in Slaters case. What May did was pretty low key in the scheme of things. What should have happened is he cops 2 weeks or whatever when it came to light for bringing the game into disrepute, then any extra if warranted after court has finished.

IIRC he would have been back to take part in the fisting of your mob GF day if he had of served the suspension when it was handed down, so not a beneficiary at all the way it panned out. (Not that anyone could have forseen that)

I don't even think with May's case that the fault was the judiciary, it was (iirc) Abdo being the one saying fans wanted to see star players in finals games so the ban would not apply until the following year. As such its squarely on the NRL Administration in my opinion for that load of guff.
 

soc123_au

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
18,984
I don't even think with May's case that the fault was the judiciary, it was (iirc) Abdo being the one saying fans wanted to see star players in finals games so the ban would not apply until the following year. As such its squarely on the NRL Administration in my opinion for that load of guff.
Fair point, I couldn't remember who's call it was, so used judiciary as a broad term to cover the decision makers. Now that you have pointed it out, I'm not sure if the judiciary proper were even involved given it was off field.
 

Stinkfinger

Juniors
Messages
635
I don't even think with May's case that the fault was the judiciary, it was (iirc) Abdo being the one saying fans wanted to see star players in finals games so the ban would not apply until the following year. As such its squarely on the NRL Administration in my opinion for that load of guff.
They didn't want to punish the team and player for the timing of the courts. which really was fair enough, He could have easily got it adjourned until the season was over but would have likely missed the World Cup. As it was the footy gods had the last say.
 

Latest posts

Top