I've fired off the email below to the NRL. Not that it'll do any good or I'll get a response.
Hello,
I am a Sharks fan who is absolutely disgusted at the lenient penalty handed out to Martin Tapau today by the Match Review Committee. However, I think a fan of any club would be disgusted at this decision.
I would like to know how this decision was arrived at and what factors were taken into account. Martin Tapau had absolutely no regard for the welfare of Jack Bird he had ample time to pull out of the tackle as Bird had long dropped the ball. Video footage shows Tapaus teammate Dylan Walker right next to him, pulling back when he realised Bird was no longer in possession. Tapau should have done the same.
In my opinion the grading of the charge should have been a Grade 1 Reckless Tackle at the very least. He should also have been sent from the field.
To have him banned for just one game whether he pleads guilty or not is an injustice and the wrong message is being sent to players. We have a player who touches a referee getting the same amount of time and while I agree that referees should not be touched by the players, this tackle should produce a far greater penalty that what it has done.
Does the NRL have the power to upgrade this charge? What will Mr Greenberg be saying to not just Cronulla fans but all Rugby League fans about the total lack of consistency within the Match Review Committee. Something has gone horribly wrong here and Mr Greenberg needs to take steps to ensure that future charges are consistent.
From this point onwards it would seem that any player sent to the judiciary on a high tackle will only have to use this tackle as evidence and argue they should get a similar sentence.
Could someone please respond to this email and let me know what course of action is going to be taken.
Kind regards,
