The Joey Leilua Award

[soc123_au]

There is no excuse- no there's not. Which is why Latrell is will be suspended.

There is no mitigations- yes there are. Its why we have grading system. It's literally why we are argueing, because you don't like how the MRC has interpreted the mitigating circumstances in coming up with their grading.

Jesus f**king christ...

The problem is people are f**king tired of the obvious Souffs bias from the officials. It's sickening. Latrell seems to be the new poster boy. How the f**k can you get suspended for a high shot & then only fined for a later one in the same game? Not to mention the other high shots he has gotten away with over the past few weeks. Some one mentioned Nathan Brown earlier, if he had done any of those shots he would be sitting down for a few weeks on each one. It's bullshit.

 

[Dingo_dan]

The problem is people are f**king tired of the obvious Souffs bias from the officials. It's sickening. Latrell seems to be the new poster boy. How the f**k can you get suspended for a high shot & then only fined for a later one in the same game? Not to mention the other high shots he has gotten away with over the past few weeks. Some one mentioned Nathan Brown earlier, if he had done any of those shots he would be sitting down for a few weeks on each one. It's bullshit.

Because not all high shots are the same.

The one later in the game was careless. It was a lower grade careless. Thats a fine for all players who commit similar offences. What you want is for Latrell Mitchell to be punished differently to everyone else for the head high tackle. Cant you see the hypocrisy there?

Nathan Brown would have copped exactly the same charges for both tackles. He liked woudk have got an extra week for the head strike thanks to priors and he would have been fined for the second tackle.

Mark Nicholls is facing 2 weeks suspension for an innocuous 'crusher' tackle. How does that fit the souths bias. George Burgess, Josh Mcguire and that raiders player all eye gouged last year (and wade Egan this year) and Gurgess copped by far the biggest suspension. How does that fit the souths bias.

In fact Nathan Browns Judiciary problems started when he was a souths player! How does that fit the souths bias.

Yous are getting inside your own heads and creating dramas that aren't there.

 

[SDM]

Poor record at the judiciary should cause loading. But for some players eg. BJ and Nathan Brown. It actually would appear it causes them to get graded higher for offences that poster boys get lower gradings for, even though the incidents are identical.
BJ vs Latrell first incident. Identical, yet different grade. Brown vs Latrell second incident, very similar, if anything the player Brown whacked fell late due to a lower tackler. Different grading.
Latrell has also escaped any charge on some poor shots already this year.

 

[soc123_au]

Because not all high shots are the same.

The one later in the game was careless. It was a lower grade careless. Thats a fine for all players who commit similar offences. What you want is for Latrell Mitchell to be punished differently to everyone else for the head high tackle. Cant you see the hypocrisy there?

Nathan Brown would have copped exactly the same charges for both tackles. He liked woudk have got an extra week for the head strike thanks to priors and he would have been fined for the second tackle.

Mark Nicholls is facing 2 weeks suspension for an innocuous 'crusher' tackle. How does that fit the souths bias. George Burgess, Josh Mcguire and that raiders player all eye gouged last year (and wade Egan this year) and Gurgess copped by far the biggest suspension. How does that fit the souths bias.

In fact Nathan Browns Judiciary problems started when he was a souths player! How does that fit the souths bias.

Yous are getting inside your own heads and creating dramas that aren't there.

It's the high shots that dont even get penalised are the ones that fuel the resentment. Mark Nicholls is just a nuffy being sacrificed at the alter to maintain some semblance of equality. Much like Luke Lewis being sacrificed for a nothing incident so Hayne could get off & play Origin a few years ago.

Latrell seems to be the latest protected species. Since the media were called out for giving him a hard time over the weekend away he is untouchable. Admittedly he isn't the first & sadly wont be the last. It's frustrating.

 

[soc123_au]

double

 

[Dingo_dan]

It's the high shots that dont even get penalised are the ones that fuel the resentment. Mark Nicholls is just a nuffy being sacrificed at the alter to maintain some semblance of equality. Much like Luke Lewis being sacrificed for a nothing incident so Hayne could get off & play Origin a few years ago.

Latrell seems to be the latest protected species. Since the media were called out for giving him a hard time over the weekend away he is untouchable. Admittedly he isn't the first & sadly wont be the last. It's frustrating.

It's funny you say 'protected for his weekend away'.

Latrell didn't have a weekend away. He had been quarantining on that property for several weeks before that all blew up. The fact he got the same punishment as addo-carr (who did leave his quarantine) and a much larger penalty then cleary who it turns out lied repeatedly to the nrl integrity committee, shows that he wasnt 'protected'.

The 'protected' species thing is all in your head

 

[The_Frog]

much larger penalty then cleary

Cleary got suspended for 2 weeks.

 

[soc123_au]

It's funny you say 'protected for his weekend away'.

Latrell didn't have a weekend away. He had been quarantining on that property for several weeks before that all blew up. The fact he got the same punishment as addo-carr (who did leave his quarantine) and a much larger penalty then cleary who it turns out lied repeatedly to the nrl integrity committee, shows that he wasnt 'protected'.

The 'protected' species thing is all in your head

Cleary copped more than Latrell.

I also didnt say protected from the weekend away, I said since the media went nuts with it. But since you bought it up...

Latrell must have a huge place, pretty sure the beach they were riding on was a fair hike from his property. I didnt see any rego plates on the bikes either. Illegal gun use, the list goes on.

 

[Sphagnum]

Blatant dog shot. Can’t believe anyone would argue it was anything else. Can’t say ‘it’s not his go’ for this merkin either. He does shit like that all the time.

 

[Dingo_dan]

Cleary copped more than Latrell.

I also didnt say protected from the weekend away, I said since the media went nuts with it. But since you bought it up...

Latrell must have a huge place, pretty sure the beach they were riding on was a fair hike from his property. I didnt see any rego plates on the bikes either. Illegal gun use, the list goes on.

You sure Latrell Mitchell was on that beach??

Don't need rego plates on vehicles operated on your own property..

Illegal gun use. Technically yes. But anyone who's owned a gun has let another person fire a round on their property. Its the lowest/most minor gun charge, the equivalent of a parking fine..

Cleary originally got a far less sentence. And only got suspended for all the lying.

 

[Dingo_dan]

Blatant dog shot. Can’t believe anyone would argue it was anything else. Can’t say ‘it’s not his go’ for this merkin either. He does shit like that all the time.

No one is arguing that at all.

In fact he is getting 2-3 weeks suspension for it.

 

[soc123_au]

You sure Latrell Mitchell was on that beach??

Don't need rego plates on vehicles operated on your own property..

Illegal gun use. Technically yes. But anyone who's owned a gun has let another person fire a round on their property. Its the lowest/most minor gun charge, the equivalent of a parking fine..

Cleary originally got a far less sentence. And only got suspended for all the lying.

I dont recall exactly who was on the beach, it's a fair assumption that he was though.

I'm well aware that bikes dont need rego on private property. I was referring to the beach which is a public space.

I'm not going to argue on the gun one. I've been guilty of that myself when I lived out west & had mates from the city visit.

Cleary's offence (found out later to be a fairy tale) was pretty tame in comparison to the weekenders. Once the truth came out he copped his medicine.

 

[Dingo_dan]

I dont recall exactly who was on the beach, it's a fair assumption that he was though.

I'm well aware that bikes dont need rego on private property. I was referring to the beach which is a public space.

I'm not going to argue on the gun one. I've been guilty of that myself when I lived out west & had mates from the city visit.

Cleary's offence (found out later to be a fairy tale) was pretty tame in comparison to the weekenders. Once the truth came out he copped his medicine.

So he wasn't on the beach that knocks the first 2 issues over. We are both gun owners so we know the 3rd is trivial. So you're right, clearing having friends over in a cramped apartment is tame compared to Latrell having family over camping on his big open property...

 

[Vic Mackey]

If you can't see the difference between immediately reacting to someone that's hurt a teammate and taken action immediately against the person who done it
Vs
Waiting 10 minutes and taking action against a totally different person then that says a lot.

Here's a good indicator. If the reaction happens before (or as) the ref is blowing the penalty it's in the heat of the moment.

If it happens well after the ref has dealed with it, it's unprovoked.

Here's another good indicator. Did the reaction happen to the player who committed the original foul?

ok how’s this. Remember the Danny Williams/ Mark ONeil king hit? Danny Williams got 16 weeks for it. However what a lot of people don’t remember was that Mark ONeil was cited for a grapple in the tackle just before it. Williams defence was that he was reacting to it, yet he got 16 weeks. Are you’d saying he should have got 2 weeks?

 

[Dingo_dan]

ok how’s this. Remember the Danny Williams/ Mark ONeil king hit? Danny Williams got 16 weeks for it. However what a lot of people don’t remember was that Mark ONeil was cited for a grapple in the tackle just before it. Williams defence was that he was reacting to it, yet he got 16 weeks. Are you’d saying he should have got 2 weeks?

Are you really comparing Danny Williams to Latrell mitchell?

Jesus f**king christ.

The mental gymnastics in here is amazing

 

[Vic Mackey]

Are you really comparing Danny Williams to Latrell mitchell?

Jesus f**king christ.

The mental gymnastics in here is amazing

I’m using your exact argument on you

Reacting to foul play
Intentional
On opposition player not looking
Flush on the head

The only difference is that Reynolds wasn’t knocked out

 

[Dingo_dan]

I’m using your exact argument on you

Reacting to foul play
Intentional
On opposition player not looking
Flush on the head

The only difference is that Reynolds wasn’t knocked out

You're actually serious?

Wow

 

[Vee]

The intelligence of the average NRL fan is dropping at an astonishing rate.

As opposed to the IQ of superior NRL fans?

 

[Vic Mackey]

You're actually serious?

Wow

ok how is it different?

 

[Dingo_dan]

ok how is it different?

Mark ONeil was a pretty tough guy. Took a lot to knock him out.

If the incidents were similar J Reynolds would still be asleep.

Good joke though, but let's keep the discussion in the realms of reality