Raidersfan wrote:OK guys here is my take ... and I've tried this on my wife OK !!
Have a look at the video ... use the slider to slow it down ... Wighton's left arm (the one pointing up) hits Edwards on the chest ... try doing that on your partner and check where your right arm/shoulder is ... it is impossible for his right shoulder to have hit Edwards.
.
Can confirm that my shoulder didn't hit, head smashed her in the chin accidentally and she called the police.
Raidersfan wrote:OK guys here is my take ... and I've tried this on my wife OK !!
Have a look at the video ... use the slider to slow it down ... Wighton's left arm (the one pointing up) hits Edwards on the chest ... try doing that on your partner and check where your right arm/shoulder is ... it is impossible for his right shoulder to have hit Edwards.
.
I've just given the wife a grade 5 shoulder charge mate.
3rd Battalion Royal Australian Regiment..Old Faithful
#emptythetank
Raidersfan wrote:OK guys here is my take ... and I've tried this on my wife OK !!
Have a look at the video ... use the slider to slow it down ... Wighton's left arm (the one pointing up) hits Edwards on the chest ... try doing that on your partner and check where your right arm/shoulder is ... it is impossible for his right shoulder to have hit Edwards.
.
I've just given the wife a grade 5 shoulder charge mate.
Woodgers wrote:Totally gutted. For the player and the club. As others have said, we 100% have to fight it. If we lose Jack for the year then we play those cards but we've at least got to back the player here. Season right in the balance this week.
The fact that 87% of NRL fans are disagreeing with the decision, is more than enough to suggest an over-turning of not only Jack Wighton's charge, but the employment of everyone a part of the MRC.
They couldn't be more wrong, on a number of levels. Be it consistency, their view of the tackle or the ridiculous severity of the charge.
Canberra Raiders fullback Jack Wighton could miss rest of season over shoulder charge
Raiders fullback Jack Wighton faces a season-ending ban for his shoulder charge on Tigers back-rower Joel Edwards after the NRL sensationally charged him with a grade two offence on Monday.
The NRL took the unprecedented step of providing a detailed explanation why Wighton was facing a four-week ban on the eve of the finals and the saga threatens to shatter his premiership dreams.
Before Wighton was charged by the judiciary, Canberra hooker Josh Hodgson said: "It would be a shame to see him miss, he's a fantastic player and has been immense for us. He's a massive part of our team."
Kryptonite wrote:I guess the boys need to stay positive and use the HIDEOUS BIAS as motivation to now take the NRL's biggest prize and shove it fair up their arses!
You can be certain Sticky is using this to further cultivate a siege mentality among his troops leading into the finals.
No doubt but having to travel to Sydney in the middle of the week and not being able to train with a finalised team until Thursday is a big hindrance. Whether he gets off or not the NRL have done a number on our prep.
Exactly my thoughts. I think Jack will get off based on the outrage and the evidence posted so far, but I don't think the mental distraction and disruption to the team setup can be underestimated here. The team's been banging on about how we keep the same routine week after week, well the NRL know well and good that they've just **** our weeks preparation.
This has ruined my day and put me in the foulest of moods
Sent from my E6653 using Tapatalk
The spiral of silence refers to the idea that when people fail to speak, the price of speaking rises. As the price to speak rises, still fewer speak out, which further causes the price to rise, so that fewer people yet will speak out, until a whole culture or nation is silenced. This is what happened in Germany.
If you do not speak, you are not being neutral, but are contributing to the success of the thing you refuse to name and condemn.
The fact that they came out and attempted to provide an explanation in advance worries me greatly. It's as though they know the whole thing is bull **** but they're prepared to double down on it anyway.
The judiciary is in Sydney. It's made up of former players, and frankly, I can't see how they wouldn't let him off the charge, because it would be completely inequitable and unjust to do otherwise.
Perhaps the judiciary have a preconceived view of Jacks tackling style ( absolutely smashing the ball runner) which has affected their judgement in this case.
It was a STUPID tackle given the context of the game and what he had to loose. Yes I agree he deserves to get charged for it but if Wightons going down, surely Ennis has to too. The NRL cannot be this inconsistent at this time of year. I feel if he fights it he will get let off or theirs going to be a few pitchforks going around.
Raidersfan wrote:OK guys here is my take ... and I've tried this on my wife OK !!
Have a look at the video ... use the slider to slow it down ... Wighton's left arm (the one pointing up) hits Edwards on the chest ... try doing that on your partner and check where your right arm/shoulder is ... it is impossible for his right shoulder to have hit Edwards.
.
Ever since this post there's been a surge in AVO applications.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Ok so I've had a little bit of time to cool down now. I can see this getting downgraded at minimum, and a chance of Jack getting off altogether - public opinion does play a part, the Judiciary often overturn MRC decisions (Maloney springs straight to mind), and given the fact Ryan James has broken a jaw and a back and not missed a game, we are in with a shout. Given the amount of still frames etc that we have been able to produce on short notice, I am confident a legal team can come up with a great argumen.. However, its hard to be confidant that we will win, given recent inconsistencies.
However - If Jacks charges are dropped, or he only misses a week, this could be the point in time that galvanizes us into becoming premiers. This is all out war now, us against the world. This is exactly the kind of motivating factor that can focus us into absolutely destroying teams this finals series.
DarkRaider wrote:The fact that they came out and attempted to provide an explanation in advance worries me greatly. It's as though they know the whole thing is bull **** but they're prepared to double down on it anyway.
ON the local ABC station the guy there who as been on ABC for as long as I can remember (I can remember his voice from way back in the SuperLeague days when there would be updates on the court case) said exactly that ... on the lines of the NRL have pre-empted the Raiders defence of the case and that of the media.
What I find difficult to understand is that there is a rule (I think) that previous cases can not be used as evidence. Why are they therefore particularly noting the Ennis incident with respect to justifying Wighton's case.
I'm not sure if the Raiders can legally challenge this .. I'm sure they have a few people in high places that will advise them.
Lucky the judiciary gives 2 chances these days. If it's not a straight out dismissal it will then be a downgrade. If the raiders are treated the same as the rest of the NRL that is.....
Allow me to go back to the beginning of all this for just a minute and ask a question - are the three criteria used in Beuttner's explanation written anywhere official?
Last edited by Leebola on September 5, 2016, 4:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.