What's new
By:
Advanced search…
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!

Sam Burgess served with show cause notice

Captain Apollo

Captain Apollo

Coach
Messages
15,440
siv said:
A lot of argument is around the process but I think it's the people not process that is the prime problem

But we should scrap loading

Robinson complains about media influence

Graham says it's a lottery

Kent says there no accountability in the MRC

Others just put their hands up in confusion over the inconsistency

But the real issue is the MRC
- no referee no video ref in reviews
- no ability for clubs to requests incidents to be reviewed
- no quality assurance process for charges set too low(Or not all) or too high
- MRC report not made public
- no maximum term for appointees

Current process is subjective and open for corruption

E.g. if the MRC doesn't lay a charge because a team is too slick ???? NO ONE can reverse this

And they are untouchable

Even Greenburg says you shouldn't question their integrity

But even a high court judge can be removed from a case

Its become a boys club and MRC members have passed their use by dates

I am not that worried about the Judicary appeal process. That seems to be working. But should have a ex referee on board. Not just ex players
Click to expand...

You actually nailed it in one comment "Current process is subjective". Guess what?! So pretty much is our entire legal system. Police have the discretion whether to lay charges or not. prosecutors have the option to pursue the case in court or drop it. That is not necessarily "corruption" at all. It is acknowledging that sometimes there is no use pursuing the charge as you have insufficient evidence to get a conviction so no charges are pressed, or the case is dropped. Happens all the time.

Also judgements are subjective based on how people interpret the evidence presented to them., The people in "hysteria" about the judiciary and the MRC are ones basing it all on their own perceptions, thoughts and feelings. I could make a very strong case for them being subjective and not objective at all.

Ability for clubs to requests incidents to be reviewed. Why? The NSWRL had this years ago and all it did was lead to tit for tat citings which is why it was done away with.

Quality assurance process? Have no idea what you are talking about.

MRC report not made public? So what? The NRL is not a government instrumentality. There are lots of things they don't make public.

Maximum terms? Term limits are not always the answer. It in fact can lead to more instability and unpredictability as you are always having to get new appointees up to speed on how the process works.

As to judges being removed from a case, it is not easy at all.

I will agree with you about the composition of the MRC and the judiciary panel members. It does appear based on what has been published that they are now all ex-players, as are the judiciary panel members (i.e. those who decide on whether they are guilty or not guilty). Bringing an ex-referee into both might give a different perspective.
 
madunit

madunit

Super Moderator
Staff member
Messages
62,358
siv said:
A lot of argument is around the process but I think it's the people not process that is the prime problem

But we should scrap loading

Robinson complains about media influence

Graham says it's a lottery

Kent says there no accountability in the MRC

Others just put their hands up in confusion over the inconsistency

But the real issue is the MRC
- no referee no video ref in reviews
- no ability for clubs to requests incidents to be reviewed
- no quality assurance process for charges set too low(Or not all) or too high
- MRC report not made public
- no maximum term for appointees

Current process is subjective and open for corruption

E.g. if the MRC doesn't lay a charge because a team is too slick ???? NO ONE can reverse this

And they are untouchable

Even Greenburg says you shouldn't question their integrity

But even a high court judge can be removed from a case

Its become a boys club and MRC members have passed their use by dates

I am not that worried about the Judicary appeal process. That seems to be working. But should have a ex referee on board. Not just ex players
Click to expand...
The MRC is not the issue, because you can go to the judiciary and fight their charges and get off or get downgraded, which happens a lot.

The problem is the NRL stating that fines need to be a form of punnishment for some acts, with the focus being on ensuring players aren't getting suspended.

Scrap the fines, f**k what the media says. If a player has done wrong, suspend them. Simple.
 
S

siv

First Grade
Messages
6,748
madunit said:
The MRC is not the issue, because you can go to the judiciary and fight their charges and get off or get downgraded, which happens a lot.

The problem is the NRL stating that fines need to be a form of punnishment for some acts, with the focus being on ensuring players aren't getting suspended.

Scrap the fines, f**k what the media says. If a player has done wrong, suspend them. Simple.
Click to expand...

So when everyone - fans, Media players etc expect a Grade 2 charge and the MRC lays NO charge ?

You can't keep letting the MRC do this

Feels like they are out at the toilet or making a coffee while the video is playing past incidents
 
Last edited:
W

Wily Ole Dog

Juniors
Messages
1,600
1170166870177009664
 
M

Maximus

Coach
Messages
13,690
Perth Red said:
Just increase the fines for these one and two game bans. $5k first charge then increase $5k every subsequent charge. I can guarantee by the time players are getting to $30k+ they will cut the sht out! Save bans for the really serious stuff.
Click to expand...

A fine system disproportionately affects young and fringe players on low contracts. They shouldn't be punished because a few high profile players are grubs who consistently break the rules.

And if there is no deterrent, what is to stop someone from going to Brown and Mau that they will pay the 5k fine if Munster and Smith are on the receiving end of a 'reckless' high tackle this week. Both storm players miss the rest of the game and there is no repercussions for the eels. Then they take out Cronk and Keary next week and all good they are in a grand final as there is no longer an issue being a repeat offender.
 
W

Wily Ole Dog

Juniors
Messages
1,600
no name said:
Anything from this year?
Everyone knows the MRC and judiciary are inconsistent.

The fact that Thug Burgess constantly throws himself in front of these unpredictable processes is his own stupid fault.
Whinge more Sammy Boy.
Click to expand...


Given they’re inconsistent and unpredictable and incompetent, with a corrupted thought process is why he’s usually in front of them
 
S

Someguy

First Grade
Messages
7,139
The MRC need to take a leaf out of channel 9’s book when they made every effort not to show, replay or even acknowledge the squirrel grip Sam performed on Chambers.

If they all could just get on the same page and pretend nothing happened then we could have far less controversy when a random act of foul play is committed by a high profile player.

If the media or fans then turn against this approach simply find a grubby act from a no name raiders player and make a big deal about it to deflect criticism.
 
mave

mave

Coach
Messages
13,867
Josh McGuire x 3
Hudson Young x 2

2019.

There is your inconsistencies , especially involving a high profile player, double especially cause SOO was potentially affected.

But as we all know, consistency is over-rated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Top