Roberts contrary conduct

[LittleDavey]

Yeah. I would have marched in the way of liking heaps of stuff on Facebook!

They did us a solid. Any other game, he would have sat out.

Yep for sure. And it means they'll hold it over any player of ours that gets to the judiciary for the next 5 years too haha...pack of grubs!

 

[tommy]

Yeah they did us one solid, for a game we were playing another Qld team. Cameron Smith had to sit out a GF for something innocuous because they were playing Manly. They are always doing the NSW teams solids. My favourite one was when Jarryd Hayne headbutted Billy Slater, so they changed what the definition of a headbutt was for the trial. And then once the game had been played they changed it back to what it was before.

 

[Allo]

Yeah they did us one solid, for a game we were playing another Qld team. Cameron Smith had to sit out a GF for something innocuous because they were playing Manly. They are always doing the NSW teams solids. My favourite one was when Jarryd Hayne headbutted Billy Slater, so they changed what the definition of a headbutt was for the trial. And then once the game had been played they changed it back to what it was before.

Like trying to pull Sam's head off his shoulders? It was fair for the crime and context - when Melbourne and their wrestling with the chicken wings and chokes were at their worst. It finally came to a head (heh) and Melbourne deserved it for turning the game into the grind-y, wrestle-y bullshit it had become. The only downside was it gifted Manly a title. Everything came off for them that day. *****.

 

[Browny]

'Something's going to snap': wrestling guru - League - Sport - BrisbaneTimes

very innocuous tackle lol

 

[subsbligh]

Yeah they did us one solid, for a game we were playing another Qld team. Cameron Smith had to sit out a GF for something innocuous because they were playing Manly. They are always doing the NSW teams solids. My favourite one was when Jarryd Hayne headbutted Billy Slater, so they changed what the definition of a headbutt was for the trial. And then once the game had been played they changed it back to what it was before.

Yeah mate have to disagree. That Smith thing was just desserts for a year of systematic dirty and dangerous play.

At that was barely the worst incident in that game or all year.

 

[tommy]

Ok innocuous wasn't the right word but what do you think would have happened if it was Gallen who did it the game before a GF.

 

[Morkel]

 

[broncos4life]

After this week if he takes the early guilty plea he is as dumb as he looks... and he looks pretty fucking dumb.

 

[Rally Towel]

After this week if he takes the early guilty plea he is as dumb as he looks... and he looks pretty fucking dumb.

Word.

Dyed his hair too,for reasons unknown. Maybe so the opposition are too busy laughing at him?

 

[Morkel]

Will they even bother to charge him?

 

[Big Pete]

I don't have an issue with the Ethan Lowe incident.

If you watch the footage, he's trying to get back into line, he looks up sees the referee and tries to brush past him. We've seen instances like this over the years with pocket referees getting in the way and it means nothing.

 

[Astro]

I don't have an issue with the Ethan Lowe incident.

If you watch the footage, he's trying to get back into line, he looks up sees the referee and tries to brush past him. We've seen instances like this over the years with pocket referees getting in the way and it means nothing.

I get your point, and i agree with it big pete, there was nothing in it. But, the only thing the NRL is consistent about is getting it wrong. So who the fk knows what decision they will make, because either way they will look stupid.

 

[GCBRONCO]

Consistency Calls From Bennett - Broncos

WAYNE Bennett has called for some common sense and consistency in the wake of the furore that erupted over contact with referees this week.
Broncos' centre James Roberts this week took an early guilty plea on a charge for patting a referee on the chest, purely to rule out any chance of being suspended.
Bulldog David Klemmer had nothing to lose in contesting his similar charge as he was going to be out for two weeks whether he was found guilty or took an early plea.
Roberts looked the loser when Klemmer got off the charge.
Bennett said the Broncos had no choice but to plead guilty even though they thought Roberts did not deserve to take a guilty plea.
"It is always an issue, consistency," he said.
"We kind of give ourselves a black eye in the game and I don't know why we do it.
"I thought the decision was right for Klemmer when he went to the judiciary.
"We accepted the Roberts plea not because we though he had done anything, but because it was convenient.
"They made it convenient rather than being fair.
"If he lost the case before the judiciary he misses a week with us.
"That's what they have done that for, so you don't go down there (to the judiciary).
"That's the unfair part of it.
"You should have that right and if you are found guilty you shouldn't get loaded up (with points).
"Otherwise we would have gone down there last week."
Bennett said a general warning to players before the competition started could have avoided the topic.
If a player had subsequently offended after a warning about it, there would be little sympathy for players who offended.
"It could have been solved easily," said Bennett.
"If they thought it was an issue why didn't they advise us all, to tell all our players just to remind them.
"It's like gambling - we remind them they can't gamble (on rugby league).
"I didn't see what David Klemmer did was offensive, and I didn't see that what James Roberts did was offensive.
"What we don't want is people hitting referees or patting them on the head like we saw 20 years ago.
"That's not what we want.
"But if they think it has been happening a bit too often and they have done nothing about it, why don't they tell us first?
"I didn't know this was happening.
"It's a bit like the shoulder charge - it all needs a bit of common sense and sometimes that's not too common."

 

[KnToad]

JAMES Roberts has dealt with his charge for touching a referee and moved on - even if he can't remember the incident.
Roberts took an early guilty plea on the contrary conduct charge after he was caught lightly patting the ref on the chest.

The thing that irks me about this is that Roberts now has carryover points with the judiciary that might come back and bite him later in the season when it really matters because the club decided not to fight the charge at the judiciary. I don't blame the club though. With all the noise about the "Crackdown" by the NRL on touching the refs you would be forgiven for thinking they wouldn't have had a snowflakes chance in hell at the judiciary if they chose to fight it.
Then the Bulldogs go fight the charge for Klemmer who's incident was far worse than Roberts' and he gets off.
So now Klemmer walks away scott free and Roberts has carryover points.
So much for the crackdown by the NRL - the whole thing is a joke that has left our guy with a possible future issue - I wonder if the Broncos would have got the same outcome at the judiciary had they chosen to fight it?