Manly/Storm fight

[Patsy]

Is it within the rules? I thought it was against the rules to change a plea you have officially submitted?

i don't think anything was officially submitted until tonight.

At the end of the day they both were equally at fault - Blair wanted a fight - why else did he jog up beside Glen and get in his face.

Glen throws first punch.

Both equally at fault and both same suspension - i call that fair!

Although 3 weeks is a joke - should have been 1-2 weeks.

Hope they are consistent moving forward and every fight from now on attracts 3 week penalty.

 

[Nice Beaver]

In the not-to-unlikely scenario that the two teams meet again in the GF - the irony will not be lost that the guy who was gang tackled and punched on the ground is watching from the stands, yet the 4 dogs will be there lining up on the biggest game of the year.

I hope they don't get that chance...and most people I dare say agree.

Bullshit. Blair would be there on Grand Final day too had he not landed a big upper cut on Lussick while he was held by 3 Storm players in the first fight. But he's not a dog because he's not in a Manly jersey:roll:

 

[juanfarkall]

Anyone notice Kurt Gidley? Anyone? Hellooooo?

Nope, he's always on the phone.

 

[the Lock8]

He didn't change his official plea. He didn't enter a plea until he faced the judiciary tonight. It is the same any player is referred straight to the judiciary, they have until the time they face the judiciary to change what they intend to plead as many times as they like. The information that is given to the media is absolutely irrelevent.

Mate, Manly made it very clear all week they were pleading not guilty. Don't you think it is a bit much of a coincidence even for a Manly supporter. I thought it was ostriches that buried their heads in the sand.

 

[caspersparks]

in all honesty this whole episode has only made me like Manly more...

 

[Beachy Eagle]

Mate, Manly made it very clear all week they were pleading not guilty. Don't you think it is a bit much of a coincidence even for a Manly supporter. I thought it was ostriches that buried their heads in the sand.

The plea was on the bases of poor advice, the NRL had indcated the referee's would conceed that they had erred in sin binning Stewart, the lawyer had indicated he had it from the NRL they would consider both fights in the judiciary hearing. On Wednesday the chairman of the judiciary confirmed that the charge was relating to the second fight only and any error in the initial sin binning was irrelivant. At this point the lawyer believed he had been mislead by the NRL and withdrew his representation.
The Judicary chairman accepted that the lawyer had left stewart high and dry without representation, he approved a extension and asked stewart to return in 24 hours with a new cousel and a new plea, wich he did.
Seriously it is a really poor set of circumstances, but the end result is the right one, 2 players fighting after being sin binned getting the same suspension for the same charge. Early plea's, good behaviour is all irrelivant once you are reffered straight to the judiciary.
All the rest is just anti manly hatred, plain and simple.

 

[the Lock8]

The plea was on the bases of poor advice, the NRL had indcated the referee's would conceed that they had erred in sin binning Stewart, the lawyer had indicated he had it from the NRL they would consider both fights in the judiciary hearing. On Wednesday the chairman of the judiciary confirmed that the charge was relating to the second fight only and any error in the initial sin binning was irrelivant. At this point the lawyer believed he had been mislead by the NRL and withdrew his representation.
The Judicary chairman accepted that the lawyer had left stewart high and dry without representation and asked stewart to return in 24 hours with a new cousel and a new plea, wich he did.
Seriously it is a really poor set of circumstances, but the end result is the right one, 2 players fighting after being sin binned getting the same suspension for the same charge. Early plea's, good behaviour is all irrelivant once you are reffered straight to the judiciary.
All the rest is just anti manly hatred, plain and simple.

Mate, if you believe that story about the lawyer leaving him high and dry, I,ve got a great block of land for you to buy, it's below the high tide mark, but think of the good fishing when the tide is in.

 

[The_Savage_1]

The plea was on the bases of poor advice, the NRL had indcated the referee's would conceed that they had erred in sin binning Stewart, the lawyer had indicated he had it from the NRL they would consider both fights in the judiciary hearing. On Wednesday the chairman of the judiciary confirmed that the charge was relating to the second fight only and any error in the initial sin binning was irrelivant. At this point the lawyer believed he had been mislead by the NRL and withdrew his representation.
The Judicary chairman accepted that the lawyer had left stewart high and dry without representation, he approved a extension and asked stewart to return in 24 hours with a new cousel and a new plea, wich he did.
Seriously it is a really poor set of circumstances, but the end result is the right one, 2 players fighting after being sin binned getting the same suspension for the same charge. Early plea's, good behaviour is all irrelivant once you are reffered straight to the judiciary.
All the rest is just anti manly hatred, plain and simple.

if you believe that you're a farkin tool, i wonder how much old mate got paid to "withdraw" his services.

 

[afinalsin666]

The plea was on the bases of poor advice, the NRL had indcated the referee's would conceed that they had erred in sin binning Stewart, the lawyer had indicated he had it from the NRL they would consider both fights in the judiciary hearing. On Wednesday the chairman of the judiciary confirmed that the charge was relating to the second fight only and any error in the initial sin binning was irrelivant. At this point the lawyer believed he had been mislead by the NRL and withdrew his representation.
The Judicary chairman accepted that the lawyer had left stewart high and dry without representation, he approved a extension and asked stewart to return in 24 hours with a new cousel and a new plea, wich he did.
Seriously it is a really poor set of circumstances, but the end result is the right one, 2 players fighting after being sin binned getting the same suspension for the same charge. Early plea's, good behaviour is all irrelivant once you are reffered straight to the judiciary.
All the rest is just anti manly hatred, plain and simple.

If it was just the lawyers screwing around, my repect for Manly drops considerably.
I like to believe that it was Manly maneuvering behind the scenes, seeing what Blair would get. Because it is genius, and i respect genius.

 

[Beachy Eagle]

Mate, if you believe that story about the lawyer leaving him high and dry, I,ve got a great block of land for you to buy, it's below the high tide mark, but think of the good fishing when the tide is in.

if you believe that you're a farkin tool, i wonder how much old mate got paid to "withdraw" his services.

Yes Yes, sorry i forgot it is all just a big pro-manly conspiracy
Conspiracy... conspiracy :crazy:

 

[Cloudsurfer]

The plea was on the bases of poor advice, the NRL had indcated the referee's would conceed that they had erred in sin binning Stewart, the lawyer had indicated he had it from the NRL they would consider both fights in the judiciary hearing. On Wednesday the chairman of the judiciary confirmed that the charge was relating to the second fight only and any error in the initial sin binning was irrelivant. At this point the lawyer believed he had been mislead by the NRL and withdrew his representation.
The Judicary chairman accepted that the lawyer had left stewart high and dry without representation, he approved a extension and asked stewart to return in 24 hours with a new cousel and a new plea, wich he did.
Seriously it is a really poor set of circumstances, but the end result is the right one, 2 players fighting after being sin binned getting the same suspension for the same charge. Early plea's, good behaviour is all irrelivant once you are reffered straight to the judiciary.
All the rest is just anti manly hatred, plain and simple.

yadda, yadda, yadda....quit while you're ahead (in your own eyes at least) cos you are making a fool of yourself

 

[Didgi]

:lol: The Manly fans claiming to be factual and unbiased.

 

[Beachy Eagle]

:lol: The Manly fans claiming to be factual and unbiased.

Lets all run with the conspiacy theories, its more fun for the week minded.
Like the say "read the papers tomorrow" he got 3 weeks, how he got there is irrelivant.

 

[afinalsin666]

Lets all run with the conspiacy theories, its more fun for the week minded.

Wanna know who's week minded? Manly and Storm.

 

[nqcowboy87]

no they weren't

Stewart started the sideline shit and should have got more

exactly, and even though he wasnt cited for the initial fight the fact that he threw the first punch and invovled in that sideline fight he should have gotten at least equal to what blair got, and having watched it again i dont think blair as some people have suggested deliberately ran off the field so he could start something with stewart and its pretty hard to see how it actually started

 

[Didgi]

Lets all run with the conspiacy theories, its more fun for the week minded.
Like the say "read the papers tomorrow" he got 3 weeks, how he got there is irrelivant.

:lol: It's very relevant.

 

[Beachy Eagle]

exactly, and even though he wasnt cited for the initial fight the fact that he threw the first punch and invovled in that sideline fight he should have gotten at least equal to what blair got, and having watched it again i dont think blair as some people have suggested deliberately ran off the field so he could start something with stewart and its pretty hard to see how it actually started

They both got the same for the second fight... The only charge that was reffered to the judiciary. They were both found guilty of the same charge for THAT fight and recieved the same suspension
Why is that so hard to understand?????

 

[El Diablo]

ole Beachy is making more posts today then he has in the last year :lol:

 

[Beachy Eagle]

ole Beachy is making more posts today then he has in the last year :lol:

Sorry i don't have time to make 53000+ posts!

 

[big_matt]

Is it an NRL precedent that two guys in a fight ALWAYS get the same penalty? I don't see why in this example everyone is saying that because those two guys ended up fighting they should both be punished in exactly the same way.

Don't get me wrong: I'm a Storm fan but know Blair is no angel, and accept he should have been punished for the stupid uppercut he put on Lussick (and given some form of punishment for the Stewart fight).

But just looking at the Blair/Stewart fight:

Glenn Stewart threw the first punch (at Blair's face) and then cocked his arm to start throwing the second one. I think its unrealistic to assume that Blair could have avoided those actions turning into a fight between them. There is no way any human would just stand there and let another person repeatedly punch you in the face. Apparently Blair said 'Let's get it on' but the facts are that if Stewart doesn't actually throw then there probably isn't a fight - there would maybe be a bit of shoving etc. I think its ridiculous that Manly even argued that Blair had sworn at Stewart so that means Stewart automatically had to start throwing punches. Doesn't make sense.

In other sports (say ice hockey) the punishments clearly reflect who caused the fight to happen and who threw first. They recognise that if someone attacks you its normal to fight back or try and grab them. Not sure why the NRL thinks that both people in this case must be exactly equally culpable. I'm not saying Blair shouldn't have been punished, I just don't understand why it MUST be 3 weeks each and the process will get bent whatever way to suit that outcome.

Anyway, the thing that annoys me most about this whole incident isn't Blair or G. Stewart, it's that Brett Stewart only got one week for running 40m to be third man into a fight and cowardly rabbit punching Blair when he couldn't defend himself. That's the sort of stuff that can cause permanent injury much more easily than two guys facing each other trading punches. After all the talk from the NRL of '3rd man into fight being heavily punished' they allowed those actions to besically go with no punishment.