CROSS FORUM NRL 2023 Round 18 Discussion

Sproj

Sproj

Immortal
Senior Staff
Sep 6, 2013
51,737
62,696
He's a good boy. Thank God he didn't call Dave Fifita as his star witness, he'd be doing a ten year stretch.

Fifita: Yeah when he belted that obviously a kid kid, I mean man not kid and he didn’t belt him, just gave a really hard slap, I mean soft movement of arm in that direction. I mean allegedly but I didn’t see it.
 

wizards rage

NZWarriors
You warriors fans still think you’re hard done by? Curren gets two weeks for punching a minor and Walsh got three weeks for swearing near a ref!
How does 4 weeks for Montoya calling another player a f@ggot - with discounting for early guilty plea and remorse, compare to Walsh getting 3 weeks for abusing the ref despite lack of guilt or remorse?

The Warriors penalty is still harder than the Broncos penalty 🤣
 
Cult

Cult

International Rep
Contributor
Oct 17, 2013
12,706
14,454
How does 4 weeks for Montoya calling another player a f@ggot - with discounting for early guilty plea and remorse, compare to Walsh getting 3 weeks for abusing the ref despite lack of guilt or remorse?

The Warriors penalty is still harder than the Broncos penalty 🤣
Lack of proof of guilt too, don't forget that.
 
ivanhungryjak

ivanhungryjak

State of Origin Rep
Contributor
Sep 8, 2009
7,623
8,780
How does 4 weeks for Montoya calling another player a f@ggot - with discounting for early guilty plea and remorse, compare to Walsh getting 3 weeks for abusing the ref despite lack of guilt or remorse?

The Warriors penalty is still harder than the Broncos penalty 🤣
Come on Wiz, it’s 2023, we don’t need to explain that one, do we?
 
Mustafur

Mustafur

State of Origin Captain
Contributor
Jun 13, 2019
9,134
13,336
How does 4 weeks for Montoya calling another player a f@ggot - with discounting for early guilty plea and remorse, compare to Walsh getting 3 weeks for abusing the ref despite lack of guilt or remorse?

The Warriors penalty is still harder than the Broncos penalty 🤣
They could actually prove that Montoya said it at a player, they just Assumed with Walsh and the Panel couldn't even come to a decision, it required the chairman to make him Guilty which he then proceeds with nearly the max penalty.

Kangaroo Court at it's finest.
 

Worried2Death

NZWarriors
They could actually prove that Montoya said it at a player, they just Assumed with Walsh and the Panel couldn't even come to a decision, it required the chairman to make hik Guilty which he then proceeds with nearly the max penalty.
I think we all agree 3 weeks was excessive given the doubt, pretty riduliculous penalty for speaking the Australian language.
 

StuBoot

Silvertails
Worried2Death - NZWarriors said:
I think we all agree 3 weeks was excessive given the doubt, pretty riduliculous penalty for speaking the Australian language.
Okay, so change it around a bit.

He said he called Carrigan a c@nt not the ref.
So Montoya gets 4 for calling a player a derogatory name but Walsh gets 3 because it's directed at the ref.

Both words can be interpreted as an insult but one is deemed more powerful by itself (Montoya's) whereas the other is generally preceded by another descriptive term ( Walsh's).
Said adjective is generally what makes it more direct and offensive.

Walsh got lucky in a way that he just used the simple version, but that also went against him too because there was no specific indicator of who it was directed at plus most teammates wouldn't use that word to each other in a game, might call an opponent one but not a teammate.
 
Mustafur

Mustafur

State of Origin Captain
Contributor
Jun 13, 2019
9,134
13,336
Okay, so change it around a bit.

He said he called Carrigan a c@nt not the ref.
So Montoya gets 4 for calling a player a derogatory name but Walsh gets 3 because it's directed at the ref.

Both words can be interpreted as an insult but one is deemed more powerful by itself (Montoya's) whereas the other is generally preceded by another descriptive term ( Walsh's).
Said adjective is generally what makes it more direct and offensive.

Walsh got lucky in a way that he just used the simple version, but that also went against him too because there was no specific indicator of who it was directed at plus most teammates wouldn't use that word to each other in a game, might call an opponent one but not a teammate.
One is a homophobic slur and the other isn't.

Unless you think calling someone the N word is the same as calling them a C?

Ofcourse imo Montoya probably just said the first thing out of his mouth to insult the guy and just happened to choose wrongly, it wasn't that long ago people said it and no one batted an eye but times have changed.

I don't think Footy players are above not calling their own team mates c*nts, I do that with my mates all the time it's not even an insult, only in the way you frame the sentence you use it in.
 
Galah

Galah

State of Origin Rep
Mar 28, 2019
6,821
10,977
Let's all just come together, forum with forum and agree Curran and Montoya were hard done by. Whilst Walsh on the other hand should be walking the green mile.
6023D911 766D 4635 B786 05C1A5D8D9E3
 

Ref

NZWarriors
OMG there was some absolutely poor, non committed tackle attempts by certain St George, Canterbury and Wests Tigers players.
On my day the points table never mattered.
You just left it all out there game to game.
Their respective seasons are over so they might as well give the whole squad and the Dev players a run.
 

Active Now

  • ChewThePhatt
  • Mick_Hancock
  • Lozza
  • LittleDavey
  • Santa
  • Foordy
  • Hurrijo
  • sooticus
  • barker
  • Allo
  • bb_gun
  • BroncosAlways
  • scobie
  • Alec
Top
  AdBlock Message
Please consider adding BHQ to your Adblock Whitelist. We do our best to make sure it doesn't affect your experience on the website, and the funds help us pay server and software costs.