Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JWH charged for his crusher tackle yesterday

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Lip
    replied
    Originally posted by Random Rooster View Post
    So this is what i wrote the day before the Canberra game on another thread....

    Im more concerned about the present. Every round im seeing crusher tackles that are a lot worse than the one Joseph Manu got cited for and subsequently his appeal denied. What i don't get is sometimes its deemed a penalty or sometimes a accident. Manu's crusher tackle was called by every commentator as being accidental and soft..... no one believed he would get cited.When he got cited no one believed the appeal would be turned down at the judiciary. Then i think back to Latrells appeal failing at the judiciary last year in the semi finals, Slater getting off at the judiciary....and somehow the judiciary letting Maloney off last week.

    If im being paranoid/or one eyed someone tell me i am please! I think i trust Sean Garlick as much as the pigeon meat he puts in his pies


    So can i ask you all again.....am i paranoid or one eyed??? I think JWH should go and fight the charge but its like sending a horse to the knackery.....you end up shot, chopped up and served in a Garlo's pie. The only "luck" we had was when Napa wasn't cited last year for his tackle on McCullough-but even then Jewberg complained he should have been.
    “Jewberg” really

    Leave a comment:


  • Arties Pie
    replied
    I say fight the charge and the club bring as much attention to the inconsistencies of the MRC to the media, if he sit's out the week so be it, as people here have stated better now rather than latter when it could really matter.

    Leave a comment:


  • Random Rooster
    replied
    So this is what i wrote the day before the Canberra game on another thread....

    Im more concerned about the present. Every round im seeing crusher tackles that are a lot worse than the one Joseph Manu got cited for and subsequently his appeal denied. What i don't get is sometimes its deemed a penalty or sometimes a accident. Manu's crusher tackle was called by every commentator as being accidental and soft..... no one believed he would get cited.When he got cited no one believed the appeal would be turned down at the judiciary. Then i think back to Latrells appeal failing at the judiciary last year in the semi finals, Slater getting off at the judiciary....and somehow the judiciary letting Maloney off last week.

    If im being paranoid/or one eyed someone tell me i am please! I think i trust Sean Garlick as much as the pigeon meat he puts in his pies


    So can i ask you all again.....am i paranoid or one eyed??? I think JWH should go and fight the charge but its like sending a horse to the knackery.....you end up shot, chopped up and served in a Garlo's pie. The only "luck" we had was when Napa wasn't cited last year for his tackle on McCullough-but even then Jewberg complained he should have been.

    Leave a comment:


  • crikey chris
    replied
    Originally posted by Thirteen View Post
    These carry over points could cost us later in the season. Another minor charge added to this offence could mean Jarred misses important games.
    Exactly.
    Would rather Jared miss next week, than for some other minor charge around in the semis or origin time.
    Going to the judiciary is a 50/50 call, especially with Sean Garlick on the panel. Our recent record is not too flash.

    Leave a comment:


  • ism22
    replied
    Originally posted by Hawkeye View Post
    I sometimes think that the guilty plea, take the carry over points and play the weekend, often comes back to bite you later on. A small infringement at seasons end means the carry over points makes you miss a semi final. As happened to Latrell in the prelim final v Vermin last year.
    Fair point. One tactic could be that even if you think you did it... you challenge it, cop the suspension and plead guilty when charged during the finals.

    IMO it's a BS system.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Axe
    replied
    Originally posted by Johnny Tobin View Post

    I didn't think it has to be intentional. He got him into the dangerous position and that should have been enough.
    Agree 100%, especially if they charged Manu last year in exactly the same circumstance. At the time the nrl argued it is the tacklers responsibility whether intentional or not

    but as we’ve all said so many times, the nrl is inconsistent with every decision. Management on the fly

    Leave a comment:


  • Team Evil
    replied
    These carry over points are so bad, for such an innocuous charge he could now miss a final. If we didn't have so many injuries I would rather he just missed the next game.
    In regards with Toups tackle I don't think it was intentional either but he then had two players apply pressure when he was in a helpless position.
    And what about Rapana , coming in with the knees, so blatant unnecessary contact on Ikuvalu.

    Leave a comment:


  • Johnny Tobin
    replied
    Originally posted by Louis N View Post
    I agree Hawkeye about JWH strategy.

    I don't think Oldfield's was intentional with Toups. Daniel's head got caught under and the real damage came from the weight of the third man in.
    I didn't think it has to be intentional. He got him into the dangerous position and that should have been enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thirteen
    replied
    These carry over points could cost us later in the season. Another minor charge added to this offence could mean Jarred misses important games.

    Leave a comment:


  • Thirteen
    replied
    Originally posted by Jacks Fur Coat View Post
    This one seems more based on reputation. Tubular Bells is a "nice guy".

    It's a shame Jareds last name isn't Bargearse.
    Surely he could stick a Burgase between Waerea and Hargreaves.
    Jarred Waerea-Burgarse-Hargreaves. JWBH. I like it!

    Leave a comment:


  • Jacks Fur Coat
    replied
    This one seems more based on reputation. Tubular Bells is a "nice guy".

    It's a shame Jareds last name isn't Bargearse.

    Leave a comment:


  • RoosterChick
    replied
    The thing is once the match review committee charges a player there is a 50-50 chance to the outcome. After Joeys charge which was a joke I think JWH should take the early guilty plea. We need him next week cause I don’t think Cords will play.

    Leave a comment:


  • Rooster_6
    replied
    I'd say challenge it but given that Joey Manu got suspended earlier this year there's no point.

    They've got no clue what they're actually charging players for.

    If it's accidentally putting a players neck in a dangerous position then why wouldn't Oldfiled (not that he did anything wrong) get charged too. It's just pot luck with these crusher charges.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jacks Fur Coat
    replied
    That's quite stunning...surely the Canberra tackle on Toups was worse.

    Leave a comment:


  • zac
    replied
    Originally posted by Bansai Pipeline View Post
    Unbelievable.

    Won't beat the Broncs without him.
    If he takes the early guilty plea, he plays.

    I'm not sure I understand why Oldfield wasn't sin binned for the Toops tackle. Toops was clearly not going to take any further part in the game, so if Oldfield was put on report, then I thought the new rule was he should have been sin binned for 10 mins.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X