The McKinnon incident debate

[Bucking Beads]

a 7-11 week suspension for that tackle is embarrassing for the game IMO.

 

[broncos4life]

That's ridiculous. 2 would have been more than sufficient

 

[Kimlo]

Hes been found guilty apparently, looking at 7-11 weeks suspension. Pardon my French, but that is absolute bullshit.

I agree, I think 2 weeks would have been fair, it's not an 11 week ban type of tackle. Poor guy.

 

[Super Freak]

Hopefully this sends a message to the other players in the comp.

 

[Anonymous person]

Correct me if I'm wrong but if he gets even like 9 weeks wont that be in about the top 4 or 5 longest suspensions ever handed out by the NRL?

 

[Super Freak]

Correct me if I'm wrong but if he gets even like 9 weeks wont that be in about the top 4 or 5 longest suspensions ever handed out by the NRL?

No.

18, 17, 12, 11, 10 are the top 5.

 

[jarro65]

Hes been found guilty apparently, looking at 7-11 weeks suspension. Pardon my French, but that is absolute bull****.

That's what the prosecution are asking for...doesn't mean that's what he's going to get though.

 

[Anonymous person]

The nrl is asking for five weeks for the actual tackle! In what world was that worth 5 weeks suspension if he doesn't get injured!?!?! Theyre then asking for a further 6 weeks because of the extent of the injury.

This is just beyond a joke. The actual tackle didn't even warrant a penalty, let alone 5 weeks. A regular classic spear tackle doesn't even get you 5 weeks for crying out loud!! Fucking nrl just have to prove how stupid they are at every opportunity.

 

[Bucking Beads]

7 weeks is too much but it is a small price to pay when you think that Alex McKinnon will probably never walk again.

 

[Unbreakable]

Rubbish penalty, 2-3 weeks was a perfectly fine punishment.. gives him a stint on the sidelines, shows that the NRL has common sense and common decency, I can guarantee that if it were up to McKinnon he wouldn't be giving McLean 11 weeks on the sideline for an accident, even with the extent of his injuries.

 

[Nashy]

Bunch of fucking dickheads.

 

[Big Pete]

Harsh but it's pretty clear the judiciary was concerned about sending a message with this. To the casuals, I can see 2-3 weeks being seen as a slap on the wrist for somebody who paralyzed another player.

The problem is there is no consistensy and tackles that were far worse didn't receive the penalty they should have.

Too little, much too late.

 

[Foordy]

that penalty is way to harsh ... 1-2 weeks max is what he should have gotten. I know there was a devastating injury, but a b ig part of the reason he was injury was the 2 other 100kg+ guys in the tackle. i mean the tackle was barely past the horizontal. now for the NRL to show any kind of consistency they will need to hand out 7 weeks suspensions every time a similar tackle occurs and that is crazy.

Injury really shouldn't come into it unless it is serious deliberate foul play (e.g a king hit)

 

[Kaz]

I was expecting him to get 1-2.

Getting 7 weeks is way to harsh, they factored in the injury that McKinnon suffered.

 

[Broncoman]

Just living with the fact that his tackle ended the career of a young man and dramatically changed his life forever would be enough punishment in itself. I could understand a 1 or 2 week suspension but 7 is a bit over the top.

It was a tragic accident not intentional in any way shape or form

 

[Harry Sack]

Absolute crock of shit and I hope he doesn't get that long, as someone already pointed out that's just what they've asked for. With regards to sending a message, if the injury to McKinnon isn't a strong enough fucking message then I highly doubt a couple of extra weeks on the sideline will have much of an effect. 5 weeks for the tackle alone? Get....fucked.

 

[Foordy]

Absolute crock of shit and I hope he doesn't get that long, as someone already pointed out that's just what they've asked for. With regards to sending a message, if the injury to McKinnon isn't a strong enough fucking message then I highly doubt a couple of extra weeks on the sideline will have much of an effect. 5 weeks for the tackle alone? Get....fucked.

he actually got 7 weeks panel apparently came back in 10 mins ... the fix was in

No Cookies | The Courier-Mail

the NRL prosecutor asked for the tackle to be considered a grade 3 dangerous throw (525 demerit points) and add a further 600 demerit points on top due to the seriousness of the injury to Mckinnon

 

[broncos4life]

IMO two weeks was enough but at the same time I can understand how they came to that punishment. They were saying on nrl 360 that they try to run the judiciary in the same process as a court of law, where they take out the emotion and just look solely at facts.

If you think of this like a negligence case to me it becomes understandable. A negligence case is like a formula of does the persons training/knowledge hold them higher than the average joe, should they have known not to do what they did and what is the consequence of them doing what they had been trained not to do. With that in mind I can see how they get 7 weeks.

Yes there was no malice or intent in the tackle, yes there have been far worse tackles that have received no punishment. But removing all that and all the emotion, the player knew that any lift can go awry and through performing the lift he lead directly to a player potentially never walking again