Tweet
Roosters fighting Marshke's crusher charge....hope 1 becomes zero not 2!
-
-
So they should fight it. No evidence of neck pressure etc. in the style of a 'crusher'.
Looked like they ended up in a 69 position...not sure if that is illegal though. -
Anyone have video of it as Greg Alexander was quoted as saying Benny was just leaning in there in reference to the delayed reporting for the crusher tackle.Comment
-
-
There was nothing in it. Surely he gets off.Comment
-
I feel as though the MRC has been targeting us a lot these past 18 months or so.
We've taken quite a few cases to the juduciary, with a high success rate.Comment
-
-
So they should! I didn't see it but it was called against us so it was clearly absolute bullshyte.
The way I see it (having learned from my previously 'shyte' attitude) is that:
- Having him there against the Drizz (probably the harder of the two games) would give us just that bit more of a fighting chance to beat the farkers. We'll need everybody we can to beat them so it's worth fighting for it.
- If he's suspended against the Merge then so be it. We should still have a good chance against them.Comment
-
Well, when a man and a woman love each other very much...sorry when "two persons" love each other very much they sometimes like to....STOP!....(This post by Jacks Fur Coat has been deemed inappropriate for this timeslot, please login to the Adults Only version of the Chookpen after 10pm weeknites).Originally posted by Thirteen View PostComment
-
-
I watched the game on replay but the camera angle isn't great as I can see Radley but not Marshke's as Radley is blocking him - Obviously they have camera angles from the other side that we can't see to have it put on report. Wait and see
Maybe the Bunker use a magic mirror to alert the ref to which players to place on report each week
Last edited by King Salvo; 04-13-2021, 11:04 AM.Comment
-
I could not see anything conclusive whilst watching the replay/highlights. I think the Roosters know they can fight it at the Judiciary and possibly walk away clear.
From my personal view:
1. Insufficient or lack thereof evidence.
2. No initial notice or sighting from the on-field referee or sideline official(s).
3. Positioning of the attacking Sharks player (Mawene Hiroti) contributed to the awkwardness of the tackle.
4. Victor Radley, who was also involved in the tackle was thought to be the offender, but referee Adam Gee placed Ben Marschke on report. This just proves the lack of clarification and certainty on the incident and reprot charge.
5. Commentary comment from Fox League commentator Greg Alexander 'Brandy' supports the notion that it was not an obvious crusher tackle - Quote "Crusher ?, he was just leaning in over the top there !"Last edited by DP1990; 04-13-2021, 12:12 PM.Comment
-
haha, but more likely they're on magic mushrooms.Originally posted by King Salvo View PostI watched the game on replay but the camera angle isn't great as I can see Radley but not Marshke's as Radley is blocking him - Obviously they have camera angles from the other side that we can't see to have it put on report. Wait and see
Maybe the Bunker use a magic mirror to alert the ref to which players to place on report each week
Comment
-
Does anyone know what time the hearing is and which journalist normally covers it on his Twitter feed?Comment
-
I think Chad Townsend will be there and will update on TwitterOriginally posted by Bruce 38-0 View PostComment
Comment