Sanity prevails..... Sa & Ennis cleared to play

[Danish]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,24309298-23214,00.html


Looks like despite the massive push by the media to have Sa charged for a head clash has fallen through.... Their lesser vendetta against Ennis has also failed.

O'Meley will be free to play with an early plea.


Greet news all round

 

[Lungfish]

I never had a problem with Sa and Ennis but im pretty surprised Omeley didnt at least get a week.

 

[Timmah]

Are people that lazy they can't copy and paste article content? sheesh!

SYDNEY Roosters prop Mark O'Meley has been charged with a high tackle by the NRL match review committee but can escape a ban with an early guilty plea.
O'Meley was charged with a grade one careless high tackle for his shot on St George Illawarra's Jason Ryles in the 11th minute of their game last Friday night.
An early guilty plea would see O'Meley attract 95 penalty points and escape a one-week suspension, clearing him to play Brisbane in their qualifying final on Friday night.
But any further indiscretions by O'Meley this finals series, however minor, would result in at least a one-match ban and possibly more due to the carryover points.
The Roosters can choose to fight O'Meley's charge but would risk a one-match ban if he is found guilty by a judiciary panel.
There were no other charges from the final round of the NRL.

The Sa shot was ordinary and off the ball and worth AT LEAST one week for mine. F*cking disgraceful.

 

[RufusRex]

Yes sanity prevails ...

It is now ok to take out the opposition forwards hitting them off the ball without penalty ...

meanwhile a few years ago Ryles gets suspended for "obstruction" ...

NRL - National Rorters League ...


Thanks to soft c**k judiciary the following is now ok ..

Fast swinging arm with a clenched fist aimed about a foot below a blokes chin with a team mate into the tackle first - Not only will you knock out the opponent you will beat the judiciary on it (Ryan vs Ryles)

Deliberately tackling an opposition player off the ball taking him out of the game and with it giving your side a massive shot in the arm (Sa vs Creagh)

There it is .. the blueprint to winning the Grand Final .. just take out the opposition forwards illegally.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Yes sanity prevails ...

It is now ok to take out the opposition forwards hitting them off the ball without penalty ...

meanwhile a few years ago Ryles gets suspended for "obstruction" ...

NRL - National Rorters League ...


Thanks to soft c**k judiciary the following is now ok ..

Fast swinging arm with a clenched fist aimed about a foot below a blokes chin with a team mate into the tackle first - Not only will you knock out the opponent you will beat the judiciary on it (Ryan vs Ryles)

Deliberately tackling an opposition player off the ball taking him out of the game and with it giving your side a massive shot in the arm (Sa vs Creagh)

There it is .. the blueprint to winning the Grand Final .. just take out the opposition forwards illegally.

Nick Politis was the man on the grassy knoll.

 

[Danish]

Are people that lazy they can't copy and paste article content? sheesh!



The Sa shot was ordinary and off the ball and worth AT LEAST one week for mine. F*cking disgraceful.

Whats less lazy, those who cant be arsed copying and pasting or those who cant be bothered clicking a mouse?


As for Sa's hit.... what exactly was "ordinary" about it?? As far as I could tell Creagh was running a decoy. A decoy's job is to draw the defense off the ball runner. He certainly managed to do that. The fact that both parties clashed heads forcing creagh from the field and giving Sa a number of stitches in his eyebrow should hardly make the act any different.

I wonder, had Hornby avoided the inside cover defender and managed to score due to Sa's poor decision in defence, would anyone give a rats about it??

 

[RufusRex]

actually a decoy is only a decoy if he makes it through the line ... up until the point that he goes in front of the ball carrier he is still a support player ... and a support player can not be tackled off the ball .. plus it wasnt a head clash .. it was the bicep of Sa hitting Creaghs head first which at minimum puts it as a reckless high tackle ... Sa copped the boot of creagh as he was flipping out of control.

 

[Slippers]

actually a decoy is only a decoy if he makes it through the line ... up until the point that he goes in front of the ball carrier he is still a support player ... and a support player can not be tackled off the ball .. plus it wasnt a head clash .. it was the bicep of Sa hitting Creaghs head first which at minimum puts it as a reckless high tackle ... Sa copped the boot of creagh as he was flipping out of control.

get your eyes checked. It was a head clash.

 

[coolumsharkie]

actually a decoy is only a decoy if he makes it through the line ... up until the point that he goes in front of the ball carrier he is still a support player ... and a support player can not be tackled off the ball .. plus it wasnt a head clash .. it was the bicep of Sa hitting Creaghs head first which at minimum puts it as a reckless high tackle ... Sa copped the boot of creagh as he was flipping out of control.

Yep!

 

[coolumsharkie]

get your eyes checked. It was a head clash.

I hope he doesn't go to the same place you did.

 

[Illegal Immigrant]

actually a decoy is only a decoy if he makes it through the line ... up until the point that he goes in front of the ball carrier he is still a support player ... and a support player can not be tackled off the ball ..

I thought that was the rule too, obviously it's not.

I wonder how many sides will target players off the ball in the finals now the MRC have confirmed it is legal.

 

[Tommy Smith]

Indeed, sanity prevails.

Any suspension handed out to Sa would have been a joke and proof that the softy-brigade had won the battle for Rugby League.

And O'Meley should appeal. There was nothing in that hit on Ryles, who was well on his way to the ground when hit.

 

[Slippers]

I hope he doesn't go to the same place you did.

I'm assuming you have all only seen the behind angle then. Watch the aerial shot.

 

[Danish]

actually a decoy is only a decoy if he makes it through the line ... up until the point that he goes in front of the ball carrier he is still a support player ... and a support player can not be tackled off the ball .. plus it wasnt a head clash .. it was the bicep of Sa hitting Creaghs head first which at minimum puts it as a reckless high tackle ... Sa copped the boot of creagh as he was flipping out of control.

Initial contact with the bicep indeed :sarcasm:

 

[marshall stalin]

An absolute disgrace with Omeley being charged for what basically was a slight tap and as for Sa there was nothing at all in it - another slight tap.

It's getting to stage that even womens netball will become more physical than mamby pamby rugby league.

i can see it know in the not too distant future a nrl touch football comp replacing the tackle version

 

[RufusRex]

well first contact there is the bicep but hitting lower on creagh than i had thought ... where are the next few shots?

 

[thug jimmy]

Sa's shot was a dog act. He deserved atleast 1 week. You cant tackle a player without the ball, let alone smash him into the middle of next week while he's not even looking.

Whilst you can argue Creagh was getting in position to receive the ball - he didn't get it, or even look like getting it. What Sa did was dirty and cheap.

One can only rely on the rugby league gods to get their own back.

 

[JT_]

The fact is that if Creagh knew Sa was about to make contact with him he wouldnt of been poleaxed into next tuesday.

 

[avsterooster]

People who want Sa suspended are a bunch of serious wimps and are the people that are transforming our game into touch footy.

I mean please... 5m out from your line in pouring wet weather, the threat of inside balls and getting caught with your feet stuck in the turf.

Obviously with creagh running a strong line he was going to put his body on the line. A head clash resulted in creagh being knocked out but its a CONTACT sport people... this stuff happens.

Had they gone second man and scored no one would of said a thing.
Had SA not made that contact and creagh got the ball it would of been try time and a towelling for SA.

He did what any right minded NRL player would do.

Those who think differently:
1. Get your eyes checked
2. Enroll at your nearest netball club
3. Turn it up you pansies.

 

[thug jimmy]

as for Sa there was nothing at all in it - another slight tap.

It's getting to stage that even womens netball will become more physical than mamby pamby rugby league.

lets see your reaction when pearce is fked up in the same way.

there's nothing wrong the physicallity of the hit. it's the fact creagh never had, or looked like receiving the football.