OFFICIAL 2023 TEAM UPDATE: SECOND BEST

Watch this space for latest injuries, suspensions and training updates.

GRAND FINAL



SUSPENDED

INJURED

Willison: ankle, season over.



LATEST JUDICIARY
 
So based of this case the C bomb is now common vernacular
 
Get us Johnnie Cochran!
Dig up
 
The whole defence reminds me so much of having to bullshit my way out of trouble in boarding school.
And in that case a report of the incident from the teacher would hold the most sway... which it should in this as well... except in this case the teacher doesn't even know what was said.
 
My only query is that reyno said on insta that walsh was talking to a player on the other team.
Yep, this one's a real fly in the ointment for Team Bullshitters.

Correct mchunt, but in the absence of any other evidence at all, three witnesses saying the same thing are better than none. Regardless of how credible they are..
Depends whether they can clearly smell the poo poo.
 
Er, people lose court cases every day on the grounds of not being credible.

Be honest: do you really believe Walsh's story, or do you want to believe it?
what the heck kind of argument is that?
 
From Fox, not NRL.com

Defence’s closing argument​

None of the NRL’s case is based on what the referee said…. The referee’s report is first port of call.
Not once did the NRL’s address refer you to the referee’s report.
 

Defence’s closing argument​

None of the NRL’s case is based on what the referee said…. The referee’s report is first port of call.
Not once did the NRL’s address refer you to the referee’s report.

You done fucked up, Knowles
 
And in that case a report of the incident from the teacher would hold the most sway... which it should in this as well... except in this case the teacher doesn't even know what was said.
I fancied myself a supreme bullshit artist at school. I usually succeeded in lying my way out of strife. No idea whether they knew I was lying but realized I'd snookered them. Probably.
 
My only query is that reyno said on insta that walsh was talking to a player on the other team.
That's the thing, even in criminal trials you never get every witness to corroborate exactly. It's actually evidence that they hadn't colluded at the point of reyno making that statement. The fact is, nobody is saying it was directed at the referee. Regardless of who he was talking to
 
what the heck kind of argument is that?
It's not an argument, it's how it works when you're accused of something and you try to talk your way out of it.
 

Defence’s closing argument​

None of the NRL’s case is based on what the referee said…. The referee’s report is first port of call.
Not once did the NRL’s address refer you to the referee’s report.




Shouldn't that be the only evidence required in a case like this??
 

Unread

Active Now

  • Broncorob
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.