Napa sin bin

[Valheru]

The MRC get it right 100% of the time do they?

they get it right more than the referees.

You ignored my other point that even if reckless was the correct description, no other reckless tackles this year or for the last few years that I can remember have been sin binned.

 

[Clifferd]

I think Grimes is taking the piss now

 

[Frank_Grimes]

they get it right more than the referees.

But they don't always get it right, and have been described as not getting it right in this instance by the CEO.

You ignored my other point that even if reckless was the correct description, no other reckless tackles this year or for the last few years that I can remember have been sin binned.

It's not a valid argument against a rule to point out that the rule hasn't been enforced lately.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Of course they don’t. But you and a few others have argued vehemently that it was so obviously, blatantly, intentionally reckless yet no charge. Where is the outcry, where is the controversy in the media? It’s not there because most reasonable RL followers deem it to be an accidental headclash. Napa has played a 100 odd first grade games and has never had an issue in leading with his head. Yet now he intentionally tries to take an opponent out with a flying headshot on the 4th tackle with the game on the line. Get a grip.

I don't think you understand the difference between 'intentional' and 'reckless'.

 

[Valheru]

But they don't always get it right, and have been described as not getting it right in this instance by the CEO.



It's not a valid argument against a rule to point out that the rule hasn't been enforced lately.

The CEO is not the authority on whether the MRP got it right or wrong though. He is just offering an opinion, a wrong opinion in this case.

And yes, it is a valid argument. Either a reckless tackle will be punished with a sin binning or it won't. It can't be a discretionary thing otherwise what is the point of having a lineation between careless, reckless and intentional.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

The CEO is not the authority on whether the MRP got it right or wrong though. He is just offering an opinion, a wrong opinion in this case.

And yes, it is a valid argument. Either a reckless tackle will be punished with a sin binning or it won't. It can't be a discretionary thing otherwise what is the point of having a lineation between careless, reckless and intentional.

So, per the NRL laws:

PLAYER MISCONDUCT
A player is guilty of misconduct if he:

2. ‘When affecting or attempting to affect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally,
recklessly or carelessly’

Sin Bin
The six main reasons for a player to be temporarily suspended for ten minutes are:

6. Foul Play*
* Foul Play – A player will be sin binned for foul play in circumstances where, in the opinion of the Referee, the foul play does not warrant sending off, but is serious enough to place the player on report, and the player injured from the foul play is unlikely to take any further part in the game.

You're upset because they got it right.

 

[Valheru]

So, per the NRL laws:

PLAYER MISCONDUCT
A player is guilty of misconduct if he:

2. ‘When affecting or attempting to affect a tackle makes contact with the head or neck of an opponent intentionally,
recklessly or carelessly’

Sin Bin
The six main reasons for a player to be temporarily suspended for ten minutes are:

6. Foul Play*
* Foul Play – A player will be sin binned for foul play in circumstances where, in the opinion of the Referee, the foul play does not warrant sending off, but is serious enough to place the player on report, and the player injured from the foul play is unlikely to take any further part in the game.

You're upset because they got it right.

Nope, you are just ignoring my points.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Nope, you are just ignoring my points.

You're arguing against your own points...

 

[Valheru]

You're arguing against your own points...

No I'm not

 

[siv]

Sorry but there are many many people who dont think it was a simple head clash

 

[Clifferd]

I love how Napa’s tackling technique didn’t injure anyone against the Titans

 

[blaza88z]

Sorry but there are many many people who dont think it was a simple head clash

There isn't any doubt it wasn't, like I said.. you'll see over a hundred head clashes this year and you'll be able to count on one hand the amount that look like the one that Napa put on Sims

 

[Frank_Grimes]

I love how Napa’s tackling technique didn’t injure anyone against the Titans

I guess by that logic, if I ever drive recklessly and crash my car injuring someone I can just point to the fact that I've never done it before, and didn't injure someone the following weekend. Perfect defence.

 

[Maximus]

they get it right more than the referees.

You ignored my other point that even if reckless was the correct description, no other reckless tackles this year or for the last few years that I can remember have been sin binned.

That's because your point that nobody was sin binned last year makes you a moron. As I pointed out to you earlier in the thread, sin bins have only been allowed for foul play starting this year, so of course nobody got sin binned for it before.

As I also pointed out to you earlier in the thread, and has just been posted again with the rule, the ability to sin bin depends on the result. How many of those reckless tackles resulted in the player missing the rest of the game? Sezer was fine after Burgess' so not that one. I can't remember any others.

 

[typicalfan]

Sutton on the field said the act was deliberate when he sent him and based his binning of him around that.

 

[some11]

I hope he breaks some blues player's jaw with his poor technique and gets sent off.

Just another geniused Queenslander that should be despised by all proud New South Welshmen.

 

[Danish]

Straight shoulder charge to the head in the parra vs Knights game.

No sin bin

 

[Zadar]

Straight shoulder charge to the head in the parra vs Knights game.

No sin bin

Why would it be? it wasn’t an accidental head clash like Napa’s. It was a deliberate hit with the outlawed shoulder charge. Big difference there, and the game wasn’t on the line for the broncos.

Play on.

 

[some11]

Dumb f**k has done it again.

 

[phonetic]

Should have been sent off. The guy is going to kill someone one day.