Blair ought to be acquitted

[bb_gun]

Are you fucking serious? How could they charge Blair and not charge Papalii, that's beyond a joke!

 

[Super Freak]

That replay shows it should have been a grade 1.

 

[Stix]

Changed my mind on this now... At first I thought it was a late hit and pretty much a shoulder charge but after watching a heap of times and then listening to that tosser admit it was a head clash BUT "he had his shoulder dropped to the side" I'm pretty pissed off that he's gone for 2 weeks. REALY sick of the inconsistency. I actually think the Ryan James knee to Cozza's ribs was worse than what Blair did but Parkers not a pussy and got the f**k up and played the ball!

 

[Porthoz]

I understand why the Broncos did it, as there is no way to trust anything out of the judiciary will be guided by common sense, but I wish they had fought the charge and exposed the ridicule of it.

 

[GCBRONCO]

To be honest I don't think it would even highlight that, I remember a few years back the Broncos challenged a charge against Thaiday, when they went it took them only a matter of minutes to decide, found him guilty and that was it and nothing really came of it.

 

[big k]

Plus side is Joe O gets two weeks at the business end of the season to get some more experience.

 

[Waynesaurus]

Ummmmm.....errrrrrrr.......hmmmmmmmm.....Am I missing something? :hmmmm:

Kane Evans errrrmmm.....'tackle' on Kasiano............................No case to answer apparently.:bike:

FIVE PLAYERS CHARGED BY MATCH REVIEW COMMITTEE | Rugby League Week

Roosters forward Kane Evans was not charged for his shoulder charge on Bulldogs prop Sam Kasiano, with the panel deeming an on-field penalty as sufficient.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g_RNPmyicE

 

[I bleed Maroon]

Again, they make it up on a week by week basis. It is amateur hour.

 

[tommy]

no contact with the head would be their reasoning I assume

 

[Super Freak]

no contact with the head would be their reasoning I assume

Yeah. I'm guessing they would rule that there was no contact with the head and there was no whiplash.

And that's the ridiculous part.

 

[Foordy]

no contact with the head would be their reasoning I assume

the rule book doesn't mention contact with the head in regards to a shoulder charge ... it only talks about arms being tucked by the side and making no attempt to wrap the arms around the attacking player.

what Evans did was a clear, text book version of a shoulder charge.

 

[tommy]

Yeah. I'm guessing they would rule that there was no contact with the head and there was no whiplash.

And that's the ridiculous part.

the rule book doesn't mention contact with the head in regards to a shoulder charge ... it only talks about arms being tucked by the side and making no attempt to wrap the arms around the attacking player.

what Evans did was a clear, text book version of a shoulder charge.

well in that case it must be because he's a Rooster? . Been going on since we joined the comp . No point in rocking the boat now I guess .

 

[Super Freak]

Yep, the MRC didn't suspend him because there was no forceful movement of the head or neck and there was no contact with the head.

So, what they're saying is, you can perform a shoulder charge and not get suspended for it if you don't make contact with the head and there is no forceful movement of the head or neck.

I know what Broncos should do on Friday...

 

[Huge]

I was angry at the double standards when I saw the no case to answer verdict . Nothing's changed. I'm still pissed even after I allowed myself time to think about it. *****...ANYTHING TO **** THE BRONCOS

 

[johnny plath]

I was angry at the double standards when I saw the no case to answer verdict . Nothing's changed. I'm still ****ed even after I allowed myself time to think about it. ****S...ANYTHING TO **** THE BRONCOS

I have no issue with Evans getting off or seeing it as double standards, I think that since the no shoulder rule came in its been about auto penalty for a shoulder charge, but possible suspension if there is contact with the head. We should have challenged Blairs charge, rather than whinging about it. All I can think is that Benny thought Blair needed a rest, so why go to the effort. I'd hope at a more crucial stage we would challenge that, cos I still don't see anything other than a head clash, but I don't see it as a Broncos conspiracy.

 

[Huge]

The shoulder charge is banned, yeah ? So, as people have been suspended for it Evans should have at least copped a one match ban. You're entitled to your view but I don't agree that he should get off scot free.

 

[Foordy]

Evans apparently received a "concerning act" notice from the MRC. (the equivalent of a written warning at most other jobs)

 

[Morkel]

The shoulder charge is banned, yeah ? So, as people have been suspended for it Evans should have at least copped a one match ban. You're entitled to your view but I don't agree that he should get off scot free.

By their own rules, injury can't determine whether a player is charged or not, it can only affect the suspension time. It's bullshit.