Grand final judiciary

[Number6]

Same issue every year with SOO and finals. Manufactured drama that sells papers but makes the game look like amateur hour. Another example of short term media at the cost of respect and long term interest for the game. Instead of talking about lawyers and technicalities surely better for the game to talk about the guys legendary career or hype the game?

Said it before but think players should have exemptions from grade 1s for big games or my preference is a 250 points before ruled out for for GF and 200 for finals and SOO. Make them pay a big fine (I.e 25% of that weeks equivalent pay for grade 1 and double penalties for another in 12 months and maybe a ban for 3rd offence) and an hour of community service for each point they need to skim. For me grade 1 shouldn’t be anything other than this anyway. If club tries to reimburse player for the fine club gets huge penalty I.e 10x the fine for first offence, maybe 50x for next offence in 2 years. At moment week of is arbitrary anyway in terms of effect (I.e if injured anyway who cares or maximised if for a big game) and defeats purpose of putting best players on the park every week to sell the product. And every offence becomes a good news story with joe blonks visiting sick kids or doing coaching clinics.

If don’t do community service in reasonable time their ban is multiplied 4 times and all pay docked until done. For retiring players - they get paid till November anyway I think so withhold equivalent weeks pay for each 40 hour week of service.

As for the judiciary how much money would it save for clubs and the game to remove the lawyers and hearings for grade 1s? Spend some of it with good review committee so more players could be cited consistently, they can write a letter for their statement and appeal to judiciary only if they wish to out of their own pocket for grade 1s. Maybe 50% if fines go to charity of the year. Should still be an ok deterrent having to do 50 hours community service (half of 100 if take early plea) and have some hope of making players more rounded people rather than sitting on the sidelines stewing or partying.

But of course too logical so never going to happen on NRL.

 

[Morkel]

Changing the rules and gradings will just mean that players for desperate teams will be more willing to resort to foul play to win a game, knowing they’ll be safe to play if they make it through.

The Hodges case is different, in that Feki can not argue that he milked it. It is a clear cut shoulder charge, and if it is enough to rule a player out of a regular game, then it’s enough to rule Slater out of the grand final.

 

[Number6]

Changing the rules and gradings will just mean that players for desperate teams will be more willing to resort to foul play to win a game, knowing they’ll be safe to play if they make it through.

The Hodges case is different, in that Feki can not argue that he milked it. It is a clear cut shoulder charge, and if it is enough to rule a player out of a regular game, then it’s enough to rule Slater out of the grand final.

You’re assuming they think about the penalty when they do the foul? Grade 1s should be by definition minor careless events in the heat of the moment. Do u think Slater was thinking about shoulder charges and next week or just find a way to stop a try? Similarly if he plays in the GF since he can longer be suspended will he just take someone’s head off with a stiff arm with 2 minutes to go if game is one the line?

Deterrents are far less effective than we think as is the broken glass theory. It’s more important to impose a social norm and change the equation so calculated fouls cost more at the time of offence not a week later (I.e penalty try + sin bin).

Rubbing out Slater for his last game and a GF doesn’t achieve anything good unless u are a Roosters fan (whereas friends tackle seemed reckless and far more unsafe).

 

[Super Freak]

Rubbing out Slater for his last game and a GF doesn’t achieve anything good unless u are a Roosters fan (whereas friends tackle seemed reckless and far more unsafe).

It says that the NRL are serious about shoulder charges not being allowed and they don't care who does it or what the occasion is, you will be suspended if you do it.

We've already seen what can happen when a shoulder charge goes wrong. It can lead to death. This isn't some minor issue.

Slater has been around long enough to know that a shoulder charge isn't the only option in that situation.

 

[Morkel]

You’re assuming they think about the penalty when they do the foul? Grade 1s should be by definition minor careless events in the heat of the moment. Do u think Slater was thinking about shoulder charges and next week or just find a way to stop a try? Similarly if he plays in the GF since he can longer be suspended will he just take someone’s head off with a stiff arm with 2 minutes to go if game is one the line?

Deterrents are far less effective than we think as is the broken glass theory. It’s more important to impose a social norm and change the equation so calculated fouls cost more at the time of offence not a week later (I.e penalty try + sin bin).

Rubbing out Slater for his last game and a GF doesn’t achieve anything good unless u are a Roosters fan (whereas friends tackle seemed reckless and far more unsafe).

That's the problem - they're not thinking about the penalty when they commit the act. They should! Players have been warned, repeatedly, about shoulder charges, and have even had that specific scenario (coming across to hit a winger) discussed thoroughly, and reiterated that shoulder charges are not permitted in that scenario. So why wouldn't he have taken note? Because Slater is an arrogant dirty **** who has had numerous of his foul-play-based actions outlawed, and yet he himself rarely, if ever, has been charged for them. About time a charge stuck, it'd be poetic him missing out on a grand final in his final season after the bullshit he's pulled throughout his career.

 

[ivanhungryjak]

Slater has been around long enough to know that a shoulder charge isn't the only option in that situation.

He should have done this.

 

[Super Freak]

He should have done this.

Exactly that. And there have been many examples of tackles like those in the NRL over the years. Moses Mbye vs Titans Round 14 2015 is one of them.

You just need to hit them with enough force that it knocks them off-balance which can be achieved by simply wrapping the arms around.

This nonsense I keep hearing on twitter that he "had no choice" is exactly that, nonsense.

 

[Thelmus]

I can't see why no one sees an issue with suspensions where an offence is deemed worthy of being banned for several games but not one munute (sometimes not even a penalty) in the game where it is committed.
It encourages both recklessness with the guilty party, danger to his victim and sheer cowardlyness by the officialdom, afraid to make any decision that may impinge on a match result.
It is a symptom of adopting an American system of repercussions, that itself was designed to be toothless from the srart in the sport it was borrowed from (nfl)
If we really wanted foul play stamped out, the game it was committed would need serious repercussions.
Since a send-off as we know it now is almost never used, yet multi-game suspensions happen every week (the incident it springs from always impinges the victim from the game than the guilty team), there must be a rethink.
I suggest a solution in a "send-off" where the player sent off is replaced as part of the mix, and the continued use sin-binning of minor infringes.
Where teams cause a penalty in their defensive 20 metres, a sin bin happens until a change of possession/score.
We need refereeing with teeth, but also cibsistancy. So called "policing" to keep the game flowing does not work and is destroying its integrity, leading to a lottery of referee indecisiveness where everyone loses.

 

[Dexter]

Exactly that. And there have been many examples of tackles like those in the NRL over the years. Moses Mbye vs Titans Round 14 2015 is one of them.

You just need to hit them with enough force that it knocks them off-balance which can be achieved by simply wrapping the arms around.

This nonsense I keep hearing on twitter that he "had no choice" is exactly that, nonsense.

That is exactly what he would have done if Feki had tried to beat him down the line as in that vid.

Feki tried to stop and beat him back inside .

 

[Dash]

That is exactly what he would have done if Feki had tried to beat him down the line as in that vid.

Feki tried to stop and beat him back inside .

Slater charged into him. All he had to do was charge into him with his arms out, or better still bend his back and make a proper tackle. Instead he chose to shoulder charge like he always does.

 

[mieko]

That is exactly what he would have done if Feki had tried to beat him down the line as in that vid.

Feki tried to stop and beat him back inside .

Feki didn’t try to beat him inside, he was bracing himself for the inevitable slater shoulder cause he didn’t get himself into the try scoring position. He wasn’t going to beat him for speed and just stroll over untouched, he should have been diving for the line and lowering his body height. He was basically upright and trying to beat slater by speed to score.
Slater should have been making a proper tackle and easily would have forced him over the sideline except went for the bulldozer play. That woman is perfect example of how to do it or gregan on Wilson anyone.

 

[Nashy]

Billy Slater has for his entire career, twisted the rules to suit him. I mean, this is a **** that as of last week, was still jumping to take a ball, and flinging his boots out to stop anyone from tackling him.

I really hate this love him because he's a QLD player shit too. They should sit him down for the final, so he has the rest of his life to remember that being a grubby **** his entire career, backfired on him for the most important game of his career.

 

[Number6]

Slater charged into him. All he had to do was charge into him with his arms out, or better still bend his back and make a proper tackle. Instead he chose to shoulder charge like he always does.

If Slater tries to go front on with arms he risks taking his own head off more than Feki’s doing what he did And tackle would have more likely been ineffective.

This wasn’t a cocked shoulder front on (both players vectors into each other) shoulder charge that the rule was designed for. Yes it could still go wrong like every tackle in the game so unless I want national Oztag league then that isn’t an argument. Don’t see it as a high risk event. For me if the rule is no shoulder charge deserves a minor penalty. But I imagine his lawyer will argue it is a shoulder to shoulder contest if saying a shoulder charge and put his hand on him so not a shoulder charge at all then top it off with pulling all the heartstrings and sentimentality. Not to mention commercial risk in rubbing out a legend for his last game. It’s really no win situation NRL keeps creating for itself. The only way NRL comes out of this without too much negative publicity after the game is if Roosters win despite Slater having a blinder.

As for argument about need big penalties agree if u do that has to be done that instant. Operant conditioning research is very clear if you punish you do it straight away to discourage behaviour not at some point maybe down the line. People argue if death penalty is worth it as a deterrent so why would maybe missing a game of footy be more powerful than that? But if you do want a deterrent in the judiciary it’s better to have a penalty such as fine and community service consistently applied rather than the obvious reluctance to consistently penalise the Slaters, Smith’s and co rather than coming down on them hard once every few years to send a message...

 

[Number6]

Billy Slater has for his entire rules twisted the rules to suit him. I mean, this is a **** that as of last week, was still jumping to take a ball, and flinging his boots out to stop anyone from tackling him.

I really hate this love him because he's a QLD player shit too. They should sit him down for the final, so he has the rest of his life to remember that being a grubby **** his entire career, backfired on him for the most important game of his career.

Storm sitting out a GF made him a less powerful or ‘grubby’ player... rest is spite which I don’t have any respect for. Slater has played hard with the rules (more specifically the enforcement of them), don’t recall him trying to hurt people with illegal tactics although the foot to hands would be my greater concern. If you have a problem with this suggest it is is the administration and media creating the wrong incentives as much as Slater.

Be nice if we could enjoy watching the best players play instead of a mediocre grand final held by an organisation that advertises how great mediocrity is for the game or a media drama fest for another storm in a teacup...

 

[Nashy]

Storm sitting out a GF made him a less powerful or ‘grubby’ player... rest is spite which I don’t have any respect for. Slater has played hard with the rules (more specifically the enforcement of them), don’t recall him trying to hurt people with illegal tactics although the foot to hands would be my greater concern. If you have a problem with this suggest it is is the administration and media creating the wrong incentives as much as Slater.

Be nice if we could enjoy watching the best players play instead of a mediocre grand final held by an organisation that advertises how great mediocrity is for the game or a media drama fest for another storm in a teacup...

I don't have respect for a player who has constantly used his feet to his advantage while the NRL look the other way, and he and his team claim "Herp derp, it's just his technique", fine, change it.

He deserves to be sat on his arse, and not play in his final game ever, because the douchebag performed a shoulder charge, and I have absolutely no doubt, that if this was Mr Noname player X, who didn't have half the league on the end of his member, we wouldn't be having this discussion. He's a grub, and he's been called out for it, and the message that will be sent is that if you have a big name, it's ok to bend the rules.

 

[Super Freak]

If Slater tries to go front on with arms he risks taking his own head off more than Feki’s doing what he did And tackle would have more likely been ineffective.

What?

How does he not risk the same with a shoulder charge? But it's quite simple, you don't get your head in that position. It's really not that hard to do.

As for the tackle being ineffective. All he had to do was hit him with enough force to knock him off-balance which can be achieved by simply making a normal tackle.

 

[Kimlo]

Slater will be out.

He broke a very black and white rule. There is no grey area. 200 points, Feki can't say he milked it.

It doesn't matter that it's a grand final, or that he's a good bloke, or that he does charity on the side, or that he's an incredible player. All that matters is the rule is broken, and he has no defence for it.

If Slater is let off, that would be the most blatant corruption by the judiciary I have ever seen. They removed the separation rule thanks to Ennis, this isn't a lifting tackle where you can argue angles. The rule is stupidly simple.

He can watch Melbourne (hopefully losing) from the side lines.

 

[Jedhead]

Billy has given me some great moments to cheer whilst playing for Queensland. His chip and chase try in origin was breathtaking. He has given the NRL a star throughout his playing days too, but it was still a shoulder charge. Billy had time to effect a ball and all tackle in the hope of taking Feki over the sideline but he knew his build and strength would not be enough for the robust physique of Feki so he chose to resort to a play he knew was illegal and try his luck.

It was a professional foul and stopped what looked like a certain try. The ref could have made a 'HARRIGAN' like call and ruled a penalty try as well as giving Billy ten in the bin.

Instead Cronulla were denied a try that could have changed the outcome of the game and Billy was allowed to stay on the field. The rule does not state 'east/west' or 'north/south' shoulder charge, it simply states that a shoulder charge is illegal. Billy's actions were that of a desperate fullback pulling off a shoulder charge as a last resort and should be dealt with accordingly.

It is really unfortunate that we probably won't get to see him play his last game in a GF but it was Billy who made the tackle not the NRL judiciary. If he doesn't do the tackle he doesn't give them the chance to wipe him out. If he had my sense of fair play he'd man up and admit that.