Not a send off... apparently

[leaguerefaus]

The NRL once again proving the send off virtually does not exist anymore https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnSdoOA06Ac

 

[chrismtl]

or this one... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ax5Mhh6EvJM

 

[Browner]

or this one... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ax5Mhh6EvJM

Is he laughing at the injustice of being on report, or being on it at all.

The game motivation seems to be: damage all their players & you win this match, and your other squad members alternate with you for the week off you get !!!, or am I just being a realist? .........sorry I meant to say cynic !

 

[4eyesbetter]

It's got the point where I'd like to see someone sue the NRL for failing to exercise its duty of care to the players, as has now happened to the NFL. (Ideally this would happen without first needing someone to retire due to post-concussion syndrome after one of those high shots, but I'm not optimistic.)

 

[Daftmedic]

WTF did I just watch?
on report?
That game is getting more and more stupid. Two refs ar's and TMO and it goes on report. STUPID

 

[4eyesbetter]

I would just like to remind everyone that the NRL is not the only game in town, and the RFL is happy to see players sent off when they deserve it.

 

[leaguerefaus]

Re: Re : Not a send off... apparently

It's got the point where I'd like to see someone sue the NRL for failing to exercise its duty of care to the players, as has now happened to the NFL. (Ideally this would happen without first needing someone to retire due to post-concussion syndrome after one of those high shots, but I'm not optimistic.)

The NRL has been world-leading in the way it has been enforcing strict concussion rules this year. You'd be clutching at straws to make a case just because they're not sending players off.

 

[leaguerefaus]

Re: Re : Not a send off... apparently

Frizell who performed the high tackle is only facing 2 weeks on the sidelines. Somehow the judiciary saw his tackle as a "careless" grade 5. The charges for high tackles are careless (grades 1-5), reckless (1-5), and deliberate (1-5). Can't imagine how it wasn't viewed as reckless.

The body slam which chrismtl posted has Fifita facing 4-6 weeks.

 

[4eyesbetter]

Re : Re: Re : Not a send off... apparently

The NRL has been world-leading in the way it has been enforcing strict concussion rules this year. You'd be clutching at straws to make a case just because they're not sending players off.

It's one thing to deal with them properly when they happen and another to take action to stop them happening in the first place.

 

[Dixpat]

Re: Re : Not a send off... apparently

Frizell who performed the high tackle is only facing 2 weeks on the sidelines. Somehow the judiciary saw his tackle as a "careless" grade 5. The charges for high tackles are careless (grades 1-5), reckless (1-5), and deliberate (1-5). Can't imagine how it wasn't viewed as reckless.

The body slam which chrismtl posted has Fifita facing 4-6 weeks.

Re Frizell

As I understand it was deemed careless not reckless because

* ball carrier was falling at time of impact i.e. when Frizell lined him up for the tackle his head was higher than when he made contact
* there was no closed fist