What the...

[Coxy]

Check this article from AAP:

BRISBANE centre Justin Hodges has been cleared to play South Sydney on Friday night after accepting an early guilty plea for a dangerous throw.
Hodges accepted the 93 demerit points on offer for his grade one charge from last weekend’s 26-24 loss to the Gold Coast.

But he has a one-week ban hanging over his head with the carryover points, and it could come back to haunt the Test star with the representative period looming.

That's the same for ANY player who accepts a plea and carry over points. It's only an issue if he stuffs up again!

Why even mention it. Just ridiculous.

 

[spoonbled]

because he's a Bronco. Have to make things seem worse all the bloody time.

 

[Nashy]

Agree with it actually. Hodges is known to do some pretty stupid and risky things on the field that he doesn't get caught doing.

He'll want to watch himself if he wants to play in this test.

 

[pennywisealfie]

itd be cool if he got the suspension for the test or origin so we dont miss him at all hehe. id hate it so much if he fucked up in round 25....

 

[bigjim]

First of all, I'd like to say I think Hodges got what the tackle deserved. A slap on the wrist.

But I honesly think the judiciary needs to take a hard look at themselves.

If the Hodges tackle was four weeks different in severity to the Matty tackle I'll eat my boot.

I don't mind the punishment, but it needs to fit the crime and be consistant.

I'm even more puzzled now [icon_shru

 

[Kaz]

Rogers was punished for going to Union. [icon_razz1

I'm fine with that.

 

[bigjim]

Rogers was punished for going to Union. [icon_razz1

I'm fine with that.

Yey, but he should be congratulated for seeing the error of his ways and returning.

Ever heard of the prodigal son. [icon_pray.

 

[Professor47]

This is getting ridiculous though, dangerous tackles that are not 'dangerous tackles' are getting charged and its all over the shop.
Rogers getting charged for his tackle has set a nasty precedent, a very nasty precedent, and I am not looking forward to the reprimands of that.

 

[Coxy]

This is getting ridiculous though, dangerous tackles that are not 'dangerous tackles' are getting charged and its all over the shop.
Rogers getting charged for his tackle has set a nasty precedent, a very nasty precedent, and I am not looking forward to the reprimands of that.

Problem is they haven't even stuck to the precedent they set. They're now distancing themselves from it with such remarkable logic as "it was similar, but different".

 

[Russo]

This is getting ridiculous though, dangerous tackles that are not 'dangerous tackles' are getting charged and its all over the shop.
Rogers getting charged for his tackle has set a nasty precedent, a very nasty precedent, and I am not looking forward to the reprimands of that.

Problem is they haven't even stuck to the precedent they set. They're now distancing themselves from it with such remarkable logic as "it was similar, but different".

Probably was a different panel of ex-players that sat last week to this week, forwards last week and backs this week to look after one of their own [icon_wink

 

[Guest]

I personally would have rather seen him contest it. If he wins, no point, if he loses, well we are only playing souths

 

[mick]

Rogers was punished for going to Union. [icon_razz1

I'm fine with that.

Yey, but he should be congratulated for seeing the error of his ways and returning.

Ever heard of the prodigal son. [icon_pray.

[icon_non

After the mountains of **** he wrote slagging off league in his newspaper column after his defection, the scum should never have been allowed to return. Farking bogan.