Hypocrisy of brawl
-
Diehard_Storm
- Thunderstorm
- Posts: 576
- Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 2:28 pm
But but but Rose - Brett was only defending his poor brother!
-
Rose Madder
- Thunderstorm
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2004 7:27 pm
- Location: Melbourne
True..silly me
-
steaming stormer
- Tropical Cyclone
- Posts: 4045
- Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:34 pm
- Location: Altona Meadows
Isn't there a panel of multiple people that can be used for the judiciary panel. Given that Manly are involved, I would think they'll try to avoid using the ex manly players.Diehard_Storm wrote:I actually think you'll find that Adam Blair is in the most trouble.storming wrote:glen stewart is in the most trouble! he doesnt get charged and a chance to plea, he just goes straight to tribunal and must be looking at 6+ weeks easily
He has also been referred to the judiciary (meaning the panel believe a grade 5 was insufficient) on top of his grade 2 striking charge.
The only hope Adam has, is that Bellew can successfully argue he was defending himself after first being struck by Glenn Stewart and that this was successful provocation.
Again - with two out of the three judiciary member ex-manly players, we need to have faith that they will put their team allegiances to one side in hearing both cases.
The interesting part for me is that Geoff Bellew, an ex Manly club director, and leagues club board member is representing Blairy not Stewart
I sortof hope Glen Stewart does play because it will really show up the hypocrisy of the judiciary and turn the game into an origin-like affair.
QLDers are still very bitter over Uate being let off and Taylor copping 3 weeks for a similar tackle. They will be gunning for Stewart I reckon. And I will be surprised if a fight does not break out. These two teams will bait each other as much as they can.
[ Post made via iPhone ]
QLDers are still very bitter over Uate being let off and Taylor copping 3 weeks for a similar tackle. They will be gunning for Stewart I reckon. And I will be surprised if a fight does not break out. These two teams will bait each other as much as they can.
[ Post made via iPhone ]
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/b ... 6125901146
Blair pitch project for NRL judiciary hearing Russell Gould
MELBOURNE Storm officials spent todayassembling a defence that limits the penalty for embattled forward Adam Blair who will plead guilty to his contrary conduct charge at Wednesday's NRL judiciary hearing.
He will be at the mercy of the three-man panel after making the plea, with club officials confident he isn't automatically looking at a five-week suspension.
There were reports Blair and Glenn Stewart being referred straight to the judiciary meant their cases were more serious than the maximum grade five and a five-match ban, but Storm officials questioned that.
They were in constant communication with Sydney barrister Geoff Bellew, who will defend Blair, to fully understand the charge.
Already suspended for two weeks for striking, any suspension longer than two weeks would end Blair's Melbourne career. He's joining the Wests Tigers in 2012.
Storm reluctantly accepted its $50,000 fine for last Friday night's brawl at Brookvale Oval, but remained unhappy it paid the penalty for players showing a duty of care to their teammates
Club chief executive Ron Gauci took legal advice before accepting suspensions for Blair (two weeks), Sisa Waqa (one) and Sika Manu (one).
And while conceding the players charged for leaving the bench to get involved in the melee broke the rules, no one was convinced they did the wrong thing.
"We had that discussion about the duty of care ... there was a player being set upon by five Manly players and it is a reasonable action and response for a player to come to that teammate's defence," Gauci said.
"(But) whether we think their actions were reasonable and understandable, coming in to the field of play is a breach of the operational rules."
Gauci would not comment on Blair's case.
The Storm boss wouldn't be drawn on the penalties handed to the four Manly players who jumped Blair when he was brawling with Glenn Stewart.
Storm recalled halfback Cooper Cronk from a two-week injury break for Sunday's clash with the Roosters. Jesse Bromwich and Atelea Vea also come in to replace the suspended players
Blair pitch project for NRL judiciary hearing Russell Gould
MELBOURNE Storm officials spent todayassembling a defence that limits the penalty for embattled forward Adam Blair who will plead guilty to his contrary conduct charge at Wednesday's NRL judiciary hearing.
He will be at the mercy of the three-man panel after making the plea, with club officials confident he isn't automatically looking at a five-week suspension.
There were reports Blair and Glenn Stewart being referred straight to the judiciary meant their cases were more serious than the maximum grade five and a five-match ban, but Storm officials questioned that.
They were in constant communication with Sydney barrister Geoff Bellew, who will defend Blair, to fully understand the charge.
Already suspended for two weeks for striking, any suspension longer than two weeks would end Blair's Melbourne career. He's joining the Wests Tigers in 2012.
Storm reluctantly accepted its $50,000 fine for last Friday night's brawl at Brookvale Oval, but remained unhappy it paid the penalty for players showing a duty of care to their teammates
Club chief executive Ron Gauci took legal advice before accepting suspensions for Blair (two weeks), Sisa Waqa (one) and Sika Manu (one).
And while conceding the players charged for leaving the bench to get involved in the melee broke the rules, no one was convinced they did the wrong thing.
"We had that discussion about the duty of care ... there was a player being set upon by five Manly players and it is a reasonable action and response for a player to come to that teammate's defence," Gauci said.
"(But) whether we think their actions were reasonable and understandable, coming in to the field of play is a breach of the operational rules."
Gauci would not comment on Blair's case.
The Storm boss wouldn't be drawn on the penalties handed to the four Manly players who jumped Blair when he was brawling with Glenn Stewart.
Storm recalled halfback Cooper Cronk from a two-week injury break for Sunday's clash with the Roosters. Jesse Bromwich and Atelea Vea also come in to replace the suspended players
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... .html#poll
'I'm the victim': Stewart pleads not guilty over fight Greg Prichard
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... z1WaP1paEB
'I'm the victim': Stewart pleads not guilty over fight Greg Prichard
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... z1WaP1paEB
Since when does the 'victim' throw the first punch?
Ok he may be able to argue that he didn't throw any in the first blue, and stiff shit if the ref got the sin-binning wrong. Which I don't agree with, the ref got it right. They were both 3rd men in.
And that is why Stewart was not charged with striking.
As for the mellee, which is what the contrary conduct charge is about. Stewart threw the first punch, Blair retaliated. If their is any justice in the NRL judiciary then Stewart should cop the full wrath. He's the aggressor and he thinks he can pull the wool over their eyes, which shows complete contempt, arrogance and no remorse for his actions.
Blair on the other hand has accepted the initial striking charge and is remorseful for reacting to being king-hit near the touch line. It is he who should receive leniency at the contrary conduct hearing.
But that's assuming an impartial hearing.
[ Post made via iPhone ]
Ok he may be able to argue that he didn't throw any in the first blue, and stiff shit if the ref got the sin-binning wrong. Which I don't agree with, the ref got it right. They were both 3rd men in.
And that is why Stewart was not charged with striking.
As for the mellee, which is what the contrary conduct charge is about. Stewart threw the first punch, Blair retaliated. If their is any justice in the NRL judiciary then Stewart should cop the full wrath. He's the aggressor and he thinks he can pull the wool over their eyes, which shows complete contempt, arrogance and no remorse for his actions.
Blair on the other hand has accepted the initial striking charge and is remorseful for reacting to being king-hit near the touch line. It is he who should receive leniency at the contrary conduct hearing.
But that's assuming an impartial hearing.
[ Post made via iPhone ]
They can't be serious. Of course he had a choice - he should have kept walking.Earlier yesterday, the Herald spoke to Stewart's lawyer, Christopher Branson, SC, who made it clear he believed there was good reason to contest the charge that could end Stewart's season if he is found guilty. It can't be denied that Stewart threw punches, but the argument will be he had no choice.
manly have used another ploy for tonights hearing.They have asked for an adjournment of stewarts case.Can they do that?Blairs case is going ahead. Can they do that?
Manly really seem to have no shame in all of this. They want to stuff around the hearing tonight so they sack their representative, Stewart comes out and says he`s the victim, and this guy sounds really contrite too
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 1jlfx.html
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... 1jlfx.html
-
mystormboys
- Player Sponsor
- Posts: 834
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 4:28 pm
How many ways can you spell TOOLWoody wrote:Manly really seem to have no shame in all of this. They want to stuff around the hearing tonight so they sack their representative, Stewart comes out and says he`s the victim, and this guy sounds really contrite too
smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/best-day-of-my-life-nrl-brawler-20110831-1jlfx.html
-
waveydavey
- Squall
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 6:16 pm
You would have to think that after all the bluster Gallop has come out with about this being a bad look for the game, that Lussick would be fined for bringing the game into further disrepute by uttering this type of shit. Probably won't happen though!!