TIRED TIGER wrote:Whilst I don’t condone what our lad did and he will be dealt with by the tribunal.However he received a free for A high tackle not against him for holding the ball, just to clear that up.
What is his record like, has he been reported previously?
I think it’s worth about 8-10. If the Seaton guy wasn’t hurt then it shouldn’t be instant deregistration. I know people will say his intent is obviously very relevant here, however the actual injury seems to carry more weight than intent these days (see Andrew Gaff). If he’s got no prior record that gives him a second shot after a lengthy suspension.
The Big Shrek wrote:I think it’s worth about 8-10. If the Seaton guy wasn’t hurt then it shouldn’t be instant deregistration. I know people will say his intent is obviously very relevant here, however the actual injury seems to carry more weight than intent these days (see Andrew Gaff). If he’s got no prior record that gives him a second shot after a lengthy suspension.
I could live with that but would have no issue if they did deregister.
The Big Shrek wrote:I think it’s worth about 8-10. If the Seaton guy wasn’t hurt then it shouldn’t be instant deregistration. I know people will say his intent is obviously very relevant here, however the actual injury seems to carry more weight than intent these days (see Andrew Gaff). If he’s got no prior record that gives him a second shot after a lengthy suspension.
You should be a lawyer!
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
Interesting to note Rule 10.26 "The League retains the right to withdraw or rescind a player’s registration or transfer" that sits there, for the moment unused
Wazz17 wrote:https://www.dartfish.tv/Player?CR=p132071c307101m4770473 around the 17 minute mark first quarter
17:20 - 17:22.. watching Harris, inspects his right hand and shows the umpire.. why would you show the umpire your hand - unless perhaps you were bitten?
Although Harris might also be in a bit of trouble for the sneaky little right hand jab he lands at 17:04.
Ah good fun, never a dull moment.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
The Big Shrek wrote:I think it’s worth about 8-10. If the Seaton guy wasn’t hurt then it shouldn’t be instant deregistration. I know people will say his intent is obviously very relevant here, however the actual injury seems to carry more weight than intent these days (see Andrew Gaff). If he’s got no prior record that gives him a second shot after a lengthy suspension.
Intentional/High/High is 6-8 weeks, so I reckon they might go the upper end and give him 8. Hopefully he learns a lesson and keeps his nose clean because he's a very good player.
Wasim1 wrote:Depends on who is sitting around the table by the looks of it. Six should have been minimum but maybe they felt sorry for him
Maybe some credit should be given to whoever was representing him at the Tribunal, clearly they were able to prove that the impact was medium and the penalty guidelines do indicate that's a guideline match penalty of 4-6wks.
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
Wasim1 wrote:Depends on who is sitting around the table by the looks of it. Six should have been minimum but maybe they felt sorry for him
Maybe some credit should be given to whoever was representing him at the Tribunal, clearly they were able to prove that the impact was medium and the penalty guidelines do indicate that's a guideline match penalty of 4-6wks.
If he was to punch once instead of 3 times would he have only received 2 weeks? Genuine question
