| Citing commission - how it should be done. [message #1005713] |
Mon, 08 May 2006 23:40 |
|
|
http://www.nrl.com.au/Judiciary/tabid/271/Default.aspx
|
|
|
| Re: Citing commission - how it should be done. [message #1005715 ] |
Tue, 09 May 2006 00:44 |
|
"Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
news:445fbac6$0$25133$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
> http://www.nrl.com.au/Judiciary/tabid/271/Default.aspx
I've always thought a more formalised approach is the way to go with citing
and penalties for foul play. The NRL system has the benefit that it makes it
harder to argue inconsistency but still leave large areas to argue about in
RSRU if it adopted eg should a player have been cited or not, that was a
grade 3 offence not a grade 2, the Aus/SAs/NZers always get the charge level
downgraded etc. One thing I don't like about the NRL system is the reduction
in penalty for an early guilty plea.
Interestingly on the news last night some Melb RL player got 14 weeks for a
similar but slightly worse tackle than Gregan but I think I heard that the
RL player had appeared before the judiciary many times before.
|
|
|
| Re: Citing commission - how it should be done. [message #1005719 ] |
Tue, 09 May 2006 01:20 |
|
"dechucka" <dechucka [at] vomithotmail.com.au> wrote in message
news:445fc9b3$0$3291$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
> news:445fbac6$0$25133$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>> http://www.nrl.com.au/Judiciary/tabid/271/Default.aspx
>
> I've always thought a more formalised approach is the way to go with
> citing and penalties for foul play. The NRL system has the benefit that it
> makes it harder to argue inconsistency but still leave large areas to
> argue about in RSRU if it adopted eg should a player have been cited or
> not, that was a grade 3 offence not a grade 2, the Aus/SAs/NZers always
> get the charge level downgraded etc. One thing I don't like about the NRL
> system is the reduction in penalty for an early guilty plea.
>
> Interestingly on the news last night some Melb RL player got 14 weeks for
> a similar but slightly worse tackle than Gregan but I think I heard that
> the RL player had appeared before the judiciary many times before.
>
>
I dont think Crockets tackle was a bad as Gregans
|
|
|
| Re: Citing commission - how it should be done. [message #1005722 ] |
Tue, 09 May 2006 01:34 |
|
"Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:445fd240$0$3294$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "dechucka" <dechucka [at] vomithotmail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:445fc9b3$0$3291$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>> news:445fbac6$0$25133$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>> http://www.nrl.com.au/Judiciary/tabid/271/Default.aspx
>>
>> I've always thought a more formalised approach is the way to go with
>> citing and penalties for foul play. The NRL system has the benefit that
>> it makes it harder to argue inconsistency but still leave large areas to
>> argue about in RSRU if it adopted eg should a player have been cited or
>> not, that was a grade 3 offence not a grade 2, the Aus/SAs/NZers always
>> get the charge level downgraded etc. One thing I don't like about the NRL
>> system is the reduction in penalty for an early guilty plea.
>>
>> Interestingly on the news last night some Melb RL player got 14 weeks for
>> a similar but slightly worse tackle than Gregan but I think I heard that
>> the RL player had appeared before the judiciary many times before.
>>
>>
>
> I dont think Crockets tackle was a bad as Gregans
I only saw it twice on the news and the impression I got was it looked worse
but it is probably not worse arguing about. What would be great is some
consistency within RU not consistency with other codes and maybe Uncle
bully's suggestion has merit, with a bit of tweaking
|
|
|
| Re: Citing commission - how it should be done. [message #1005728 ] |
Tue, 09 May 2006 03:21 |
|
"dechucka" <dechucka [at] vomithotmail.com.au> wrote in message
news:445fd593$0$3294$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:445fd240$0$3294$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> "dechucka" <dechucka [at] vomithotmail.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:445fc9b3$0$3291$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>
>>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>>> news:445fbac6$0$25133$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>> http://www.nrl.com.au/Judiciary/tabid/271/Default.aspx
>>>
>>> I've always thought a more formalised approach is the way to go with
>>> citing and penalties for foul play. The NRL system has the benefit that
>>> it makes it harder to argue inconsistency but still leave large areas to
>>> argue about in RSRU if it adopted eg should a player have been cited or
>>> not, that was a grade 3 offence not a grade 2, the Aus/SAs/NZers always
>>> get the charge level downgraded etc. One thing I don't like about the
>>> NRL system is the reduction in penalty for an early guilty plea.
>>>
>>> Interestingly on the news last night some Melb RL player got 14 weeks
>>> for a similar but slightly worse tackle than Gregan but I think I heard
>>> that the RL player had appeared before the judiciary many times before.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I dont think Crockets tackle was a bad as Gregans
>
> I only saw it twice on the news and the impression I got was it looked
> worse but it is probably not worse arguing about. What would be great is
> some consistency within RU not consistency with other codes and maybe
> Uncle bully's suggestion has merit, with a bit of tweaking
>
The NRL's method is not perfect but its so far in front of what Rugby has .
Its funny, Rugby Union is suppose to be professional yet we have this
completely amateur set-up for a judiciary.
|
|
|
| Re: Citing commission - how it should be done. [message #1005729 ] |
Tue, 09 May 2006 03:26 |
|
"will s" <spamcrap [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:445fee89$0$3283$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "dechucka" <dechucka [at] vomithotmail.com.au> wrote in message
> news:445fd593$0$3294$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>
>> "Will_S" <spam [at] ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:445fd240$0$3294$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>
>>> "dechucka" <dechucka [at] vomithotmail.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:445fc9b3$0$3291$5a62ac22 [at] per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>>>>
>>>> "Uncle Bully" <wakeupcall [at] optushome.com.au.REMOVE> wrote in message
>>>> news:445fbac6$0$25133$afc38c87 [at] news.optusnet.com.au...
>>>>> http://www.nrl.com.au/Judiciary/tabid/271/Default.aspx
>>>>
>>>> I've always thought a more formalised approach is the way to go with
>>>> citing and penalties for foul play. The NRL system has the benefit that
>>>> it makes it harder to argue inconsistency but still leave large areas
>>>> to argue about in RSRU if it adopted eg should a player have been cited
>>>> or not, that was a grade 3 offence not a grade 2, the Aus/SAs/NZers
>>>> always get the charge level downgraded etc. One thing I don't like
>>>> about the NRL system is the reduction in penalty for an early guilty
>>>> plea.
>>>>
>>>> Interestingly on the news last night some Melb RL player got 14 weeks
>>>> for a similar but slightly worse tackle than Gregan but I think I heard
>>>> that the RL player had appeared before the judiciary many times before.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I dont think Crockets tackle was a bad as Gregans
>>
>> I only saw it twice on the news and the impression I got was it looked
>> worse but it is probably not worse arguing about. What would be great is
>> some consistency within RU not consistency with other codes and maybe
>> Uncle bully's suggestion has merit, with a bit of tweaking
>>
>
> The NRL's method is not perfect but its so far in front of what Rugby has
> . Its funny, Rugby Union is suppose to be professional yet we have this
> completely amateur set-up for a judiciary.
Totally agree. 2 matters that concern me with NRL system ( and I have only
picked this up from the sports news so may well be wrong ) is the discount
for an early plea ( I mentioned this before ) and the increased penalty for
having appearing in front of the judiciary before only applies to the same
offence and only goes back a couple of years.
|
|
|
