Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Brigg Rover

Meli grading

63 posts in this topic

Personally, I think Rangi Chase on the Featherstone player last season was worse.  Did that player ever play again once he'd recovered from his broken jaw?

 

Off topic I know but Tangi Ropati has been playing for the Auckland Vulcans this season - the New South Wales Cup team of the Warriors. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing clear about any of that, sorry. I've read it a few times and still have no idea.

Just to be clearer, if a player does something illegal which could only have one possible outcome than it is considered intentional. So when a player is charged with doing something intentionally it does not mean they deliberately set out to injure someone.

With Meli it means no one is necessarily suggesting he deliberately wanted to attack Hall's head by saying he should be charged with an intentional stiff arm, but in the language of the disciplinary committee it is considered intentional if they feel there was no other possible outcome from him sticking his arm out other than hitting Hall above the shoulders.

Basically intentional means something different to the disciplinary committee than how it is normally used by everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a theory, reasonably knowledgeable about inner-workings, a bit annoying at times and emphasis on JtbC, are you James Child? You are aren't you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can ban Meli for as long as they like, I seriously doubt he will play again this season and with him being OOC he wont be getting a new contract for Saints, especially as Jodie Broughton's agent having confirmed he's spoken to Saints about a move to LP for next season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wilkin is one dirty sly scrote even worse than ryan bailey, he ran in against widnes when ben cross was being held by other saints players to smack ben, just a shame he isn't playing next week i am sure ben would want a word with him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wilkin is one dirty sly scrote even worse than ryan bailey, he ran in against widnes when ben cross was being held by other saints players to smack ben, just a shame he isn't playing next week i am sure ben would want a word with him

They could have a chat after the game if Ben wants a word. Or are you suggesting something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems Wilkin has copped two games and Gardner one! 

With four for Meli and a £500 fine for our coach who called the ref 'dumbo in the middle' on Sky after the Catalans game.  This of course follows on from Brown's second in command being fined £500 for abusing the ref after the Salford game.

 

I feel embarrassed by this behaviour which has appeared since Brown came on board. I hope this is now the end of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With four for Meli and a £500 fine for our coach who called the ref 'dumbo in the middle' on Sky after the Catalans game.  This of course follows on from Brown's second in command being fined £500 for abusing the ref after the Salford game.

 

I feel embarrassed by this behaviour which has appeared since Brown came on board. I hope this is now the end of it.

 

Not a good day at the office! I also feel embarrassed at what's gone on. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clearer, if a player does something illegal which could only have one possible outcome than it is considered intentional. So when a player is charged with doing something intentionally it does not mean they deliberately set out to injure someone.

With Meli it means no one is necessarily suggesting he deliberately wanted to attack Hall's head by saying he should be charged with an intentional stiff arm, but in the language of the disciplinary committee it is considered intentional if they feel there was no other possible outcome from him sticking his arm out other than hitting Hall above the shoulders.

Basically intentional means something different to the disciplinary committee than how it is normally used by everyone else.

Isnt the term 'virtual certainty'

So if you perform an act and don't intend the outcome but it is a virtual certainty that the outcome is going to happen then the act is classed as intentional, which forms the mensrea which finds him guilty of the offence.

Well that's the rule in criminal law and I'd imagine it's transferred into RL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 games is disgraceful. That really isnt enough to send out a strong message.

i cant remember the last time the disciplinary sent out a strong message to anyone. They are good with minor offences - but if that is only wirth 4 games then i suspect we'll never see a ban higher than that for high tackles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 games is disgraceful. That really isnt enough to send out a strong message.

So what Meli did is equivalent/not as bad (early guilty plea) as the offences that Bailey is currently suspended for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what Meli did is equivalent/not as bad (early guilty plea) as the offences that Bailey is currently suspended for?

 

Cant comment on the Bailey incident as i have not sen it.

Meli is the worse one i have ever seen and thats after watching RL at all levels.

 

It deserved a ten match ban.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if it had been gaz hock it would have been considerably longer,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what Meli did is equivalent/not as bad (early guilty plea) as the offences that Bailey is currently suspended for?

IIRC Bailey is banned for two offences (2 matches each I think) so the disciplinary have deemed it to be worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to say that only getting the minimum ban for that grading is very poor. I believe a minimum of 6 games should have been given for that tackle.

What would be very interesting is if Mr Sadler could use his contacts in Oz to see how they would grade and ban that tackle, just as a comparision. We often talk about us being soft in this Country and harder in Oz, could we try and find out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC Bailey is banned for two offences (2 matches each I think) so the disciplinary have deemed it to be worse.

I meant the combined offences from Bailey i.e. a 2 match and a 3 batch ban (reduced to 2) are effectively deemed as worse than the offence from Meli - 5 v 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant the combined offences from Bailey i.e. a 2 match and a 3 batch ban (reduced to 2) are effectively deemed as worse than the offence from Meli - 5 v 4

Don't get me wrong, I think Meli's sentence was too lenient but you are comparing two events v one

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I understand the reasoning behind the ban the annoying thing is that Meli will be out for longer with the injury that he sustained in the tackle than the ban and we also have Gardner banned for one game and Welham who he injured in the tackle out for weeks.  Where is the justice in that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes more sense to compare the Wilkin incident to the second of Baileys as they were very similar, and both received the same ban. So that seems consistent!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I'm getting at is that it's a horror 'tackle' and should be suitably punished. If it were Bailey, Hock or another player with a reputation then I think the punishment would have been harsher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I'm getting at is that it's a horror 'tackle' and should be suitably punished. If it were Bailey, Hock or another player with a reputation then I think the punishment would have been harsher

 

Dont agree at all.

 

The punishment would likely have been harsher had it been a player with a poor disciplinary record (note i didnt use the word reputation because this is largely irrelevant). If a player has a history of poor tackles, and previous bans etc then the punishment would be worse and rightly so.

 

It was a bad tackle, no doubt about that, but i reckon the 4 games came from the fact that I dont think Meli has a bad previous record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont agree at all.

 

The punishment would likely have been harsher had it been a player with a poor disciplinary record (note i didnt use the word reputation because this is largely irrelevant). If a player has a history of poor tackles, and previous bans etc then the punishment would be worse and rightly so.

 

It was a bad tackle, no doubt about that, but i reckon the 4 games came from the fact that I dont think Meli has a bad previous record.

Our opinions differ

 

I agree that Meli has a good disciplinary record (and my choice of wording was to assist my argument) but if we're bringing that in, despite his reputation, Bailey's disciplinary record isn't that bad.

 

You can be an angel with a perfect disciplinary record but if you take someone's head off then to me, 4 games isn't sufficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017