Matty Rogers / 4 weeks ???

[Nashy]

He committed 4 sins...he was born in Qld
he lifted in the tackle
he plays for a Qld team at the top of a NSW comp
he turned his back on league and played rah rah



surprised he did'nt get life.

In the words of our great English counterparts. You're an absolute twat.


That's as harsh as it gets, but it seems that the NRL are starting to make examples of players this year to really stamp ANYTHING tough out of the game.

 

[Guest]

The Titans were considering pleading not guilty but decided against that decision for fear they may lose and put Matty on side-line for an extra week. If that was the case then why would you plead guilty and question grading if your were still going to get the 4 weeks if grading upheld.
I don't get it. I'm I missing something. :roll:

The penalty was harsh but the whole point as to why he gets an extra week is because he fought the charge at the judiciary. The last thing we need is to have 15 players rocking up to the judiciary every week to fight their charges like the old days, hence why there's a disincentive to do it now. Howl me down but I don't think it's an inherently bad idea.

 

[mick]

It's just like the legal system in general. By pleading guilty and not going to trial for a downgrade or whatever, you get a relevant discount for saving the time, money and hassle. I agree it's a good idea.

 

[bigjim]

The Titans were considering pleading not guilty but decided against that decision for fear they may lose and put Matty on side-line for an extra week. If that was the case then why would you plead guilty and question grading if your were still going to get the 4 weeks if grading upheld.
I don't get it. I'm I missing something. :roll:

The penalty was harsh but the whole point as to why he gets an extra week is because he fought the charge at the judiciary. The last thing we need is to have 15 players rocking up to the judiciary every week to fight their charges like the old days, hence why there's a disincentive to do it now. Howl me down but I don't think it's an inherently bad idea.

You missed my point.
What I'm saying is why would you fight the grading but not plead not guilting, when the outcome is the same for failure.

Since I first asked the question the answer has become clear. Titan officials mistakenly believed Rogers would still get the benefit of a reduction for an early plea. I, for one, would be getting some new counsel.

 

[Guest]

I got your point. The fact is that whether he pleaded guilty or not guilty he was still taking up the time and resources of the judiciary, which is what the NRL are trying to discourage on a wholesale basis as happened in the past.

 

[bigjim]

I got your point. The fact is that whether he pleaded guilty or not guilty he was still taking up the time and resources of the judiciary, which is what the NRL are trying to discourage on a wholesale basis as happened in the past.

So if he's taking up their precious time anyway whether he pleads guilty or not guilty why penalize for asking to consider a downgrading.

The reason the threaten extra time is to discourage those with little or no case wasting their time, not those who have impecable records over a very long career in two codes. He was justified in asking them to consider the grading as most all reasonable supporters of leagues would agree.

 

[Flutterby]

the guy ended up past the horizontal and those are the rules of the game.

I actually think the rules of the game don't make reference to 'past the horizontal', but rather 'in a dangerous position'. The past the horizontal thing is an interpreation that has been brought in to the game supposedly to help officials decide if it is dangerous or not. Personally I don't think all tackles that go past the horizontal are dangerous. Also I agree 4 weeks was way to harsh for Rogers

 

[Kee]

Feel for the Canberra guy who got 3wks and it wasn't even him who did the tackle [icon_ee
Also Finch who got nothing cos of his clean record.Never gets any points against him that is why his record is clean.

So!Rogers got 4wks.Done.He did a spear tackle and he got his dues.If it were Corey or Carrol Hennant or any of the other boys would the Titans care?I think not.Stuff em.

 

[Nashy]

Feel for the Canberra guy who got 3wks and it wasn't even him who did the tackle [icon_ee
Also Finch who got nothing cos of his clean record.Never gets any points against him that is why his record is clean.

So!Rogers got 4wks.Done.He did a spear tackle and he got his dues.If it were Corey or Carrol Hennant or any of the other boys would the Titans care?I think not.Stuff em.

You missed the point. It's set a bad precedent for all clubs / players in the game.

 

[Emma]

the guy ended up past the horizontal and those are the rules of the game.

I actually think the rules of the game don't make reference to 'past the horizontal', but rather 'in a dangerous position'. The past the horizontal thing is an interpreation that has been brought in to the game supposedly to help officials decide if it is dangerous or not. Personally I don't think all tackles that go past the horizontal are dangerous. Also I agree 4 weeks was way to harsh for Rogers

Taken too literally, sorry - I don't mean that's why he was suspended, I just mean that the way the tackle ended up is against the rules of the game and that's why he was suspended. 4 weeks too harsh? Probably, but worth more than a week imo.