George Burgess in hot water

[BELMORE]

What did the Bulldogs fans who tossed water bottles at refs get as punishment? Because George Burgess's should be more than that given he is a role model.

10 year ban from all NRL games in Australia

 

[Shnissss]

So the kids understand a suspension but not a fine? This is why I said make him do a public apology. Kids will understand that more than anything.

Correction. A public apology followed by time on the sideline as sufficient incentive to ensure it doesn't happen again. Yes it's about children but it's also about consistency. What's a 20k fine compared to missing a game or 2 for your team? Nothing. Clubs would gladly pay fines than have players suspended any day of the week.

 

[Papa Emeritus]

You guys are being way too outraged over something small.

It's a harsh penalty given the circumstances. I guarantee people would be blowing up if it was a dog's player.

 

[Gallo2014]

If I was one of those fans that threw a bottle and now found out that Gurgess got away with doing the same thing, Id be seeing a lawyer and making a lot of fuss about it. Might even try and get the story on ACA

 

[sgodllubsti]

a dumb thing by a dumb person, burgess will miss the finals and have to wear the claim of letting his team down and costing them a shot at the final, 2 weeks is well deserved

 

[dogluva]

Everyone has their opinion about this incident but I am going to have my two bob's worth now. Some may agree with what I have to say, some won't and that's okay, but I feel I just need to say it.

George Burgess is a PROFESSIONAL rugby league player who has had his share of controversy. Remember his naked selfie that was posted in social media? Just a 'boy being a boy" people said; should be nothing wrong with that a lot would say. What about the time he threw a street sign through the window of a car in Cairns; ah the stupidity of youth, he was angry and not like him people said. Obviously the anger management course that he was to have undertaken in response to the sign throwing has failed him.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-18/burgess-stood-down-following-police-charges/4761600

Now the bottle throwing incident, done during a rugby league game whilst he was sitting on the Rabbitohs reserves bench, retribution for an on field incident involving one of his team mates and the intended recipient of the projectile. Just a player protecting his mate. There is a common link in these incidents : Burgess has been perceived by a lot of the media both printed and telecast as a silly young man who just let the situation at the time influence his actions.

He was punished for those first two incidents, and now he has to take his medicine involving the third.

The bottle throw is being punished under the laws of the game because where and when the incident occurred was during a game and within the boundaries of the playing field . The laws of the game are what needs to be followed. Now , we might not all agree that the punishment fits the crime but there are a few things to be considered.

Firstly remember Black Friday when several fans launched water bottle onto the field showing their displeasure towards the officials who had made decisions during the game that turned it on its head. Media outcry, police involvement, the NRL itself up in arms punishing our club for the recklessness and stupidity of fans. The players did not throw the bottles, the fans did and after an investigation involving the publishing of images of people, who the authorities wished to interview in the hope the culprits could be identified, the guilty people were fined and banned in some cases for 12 months. Punished by the law itself and the NRL.

What is the difference in where and by whom the water bottles were launched and at whom they were directed: Nothing. Water bottles were still thrown at someone and by someone. I just hate all these ex and current players who have come out and said things along the lines of " Not fair to ban him for two games, should not miss a finals game, ridiculous punishment, etc. etc. All these same people were the ones who wanted to lay the boot into our club and have us punished to the full extent after fans threw bottles.

Burgess was sitting on the bench on the sideline nearer than some of the fans who threw bottles at a referee and because he was sitting his aim was not as accurate as it could have been. What would these donkeys in the media be saying now if the bottle had hit Evans in the head; what punishment would they have asked for. The facts are that the intent was there, it was a calculated and deliberate move by the player. Only for the fact that vision of the incident proved beyond doubt that he had done it, he would have thought he had gotten away with it.

The NRL itself has made a rod for its own back in this make no mistake about that. Fans of the game have been saying for quite some time ( and we are amongst them) that the inconsistencies in the judicial system of the game has a lot to answer for. Players being suspended for different lengths of time for exactly the same infringement, some not being suspended at all, high profile players being allowed to get away with speaking to officials in an unsatisfactory manner whilst others are punished for it. The media is whinging about the fact that a player head butts someone and gets minimal to no punishment, a shoulder charge goes unpunished so the rules change, a penalty is given for one incident and not another. Now they want to basically defend Burgess and ask that the punishment be lessened. Contrary conduct is covered by the laws of the game and so he should be punished by those laws. All the NRL are doing here is applying the punishment commensurate with the incident and the rules that govern it.

I don't believe that players should be able to plead out and accept a lesser punishment for accepting responsibility and not fighting the charge. What does need to be addressed however is the correct description of the infringement and the charges being laid. In the legal system the description of the crime is one of the most important things because if the wording or phrasing is wrong it can mean someone can get away with a lesser charge or indeed not be charged at all.

A clear message needs to be sent to these guys that there are just certain things you cannot and should not do. I hate the fact that they want to use every single excuse in the world once they are charged with something, better to not have done it at all in the first place. Wait for the first incident of this type in junior footy to occur and see what is said then. Kids will have a ready made excuse that they were only doing what their idol in the NRL has done.

Rant over.

 

[Endeavour]

Everyone has their opinion about this incident but I am going to have my two bob's worth now. Some may agree with what I have to say, some won't and that's okay, but I feel I just need to say it.

George Burgess is a PROFESSIONAL rugby league player who has had his share of controversy. Remember his naked selfie that was posted in social media? Just a 'boy being a boy" people said; should be nothing wrong with that a lot would say. What about the time he threw a street sign through the window of a car in Cairns; ah the stupidity of youth, he was angry and not like him people said. Obviously the anger management course that he was to have undertaken in response to the sign throwing has failed him.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-18/burgess-stood-down-following-police-charges/4761600

Now the bottle throwing incident, done during a rugby league game whilst he was sitting on the Rabbitohs reserves bench, retribution for an on field incident involving one of his team mates and the intended recipient of the projectile. Just a player protecting his mate. There is a common link in these incidents : Burgess has been perceived by a lot of the media both printed and telecast as a silly young man who just let the situation at the time influence his actions.

He was punished for those first two incidents, and now he has to take his medicine involving the third.

The bottle throw is being punished under the laws of the game because where and when the incident occurred was during a game and within the boundaries of the playing field . The laws of the game are what needs to be followed. Now , we might not all agree that the punishment fits the crime but there are a few things to be considered.

Firstly remember Black Friday when several fans launched water bottle onto the field showing their displeasure towards the officials who had made decisions during the game that turned it on its head. Media outcry, police involvement, the NRL itself up in arms punishing our club for the recklessness and stupidity of fans. The players did not throw the bottles, the fans did and after an investigation involving the publishing of images of people, who the authorities wished to interview in the hope the culprits could be identified, the guilty people were fined and banned in some cases for 12 months. Punished by the law itself and the NRL.

What is the difference in where and by whom the water bottles were launched and at whom they were directed: Nothing. Water bottles were still thrown at someone and by someone. I just hate all these ex and current players who have come out and said things along the lines of " Not fair to ban him for two games, should not miss a finals game, ridiculous punishment, etc. etc. All these same people were the ones who wanted to lay the boot into our club and have us punished to the full extent after fans threw bottles.

Burgess was sitting on the bench on the sideline nearer than some of the fans who threw bottles at a referee and because he was sitting his aim was not as accurate as it could have been. What would these donkeys in the media be saying now if the bottle had hit Evans in the head; what punishment would they have asked for. The facts are that the intent was there, it was a calculated and deliberate move by the player. Only for the fact that vision of the incident proved beyond doubt that he had done it, he would have thought he had gotten away with it.

The NRL itself has made a rod for its own back in this make no mistake about that. Fans of the game have been saying for quite some time ( and we are amongst them) that the inconsistencies in the judicial system of the game has a lot to answer for. Players being suspended for different lengths of time for exactly the same infringement, some not being suspended at all, high profile players being allowed to get away with speaking to officials in an unsatisfactory manner whilst others are punished for it. The media is whinging about the fact that a player head butts someone and gets minimal to no punishment, a shoulder charge goes unpunished so the rules change, a penalty is given for one incident and not another. Now they want to basically defend Burgess and ask that the punishment be lessened. Contrary conduct is covered by the laws of the game and so he should be punished by those laws. All the NRL are doing here is applying the punishment commensurate with the incident and the rules that govern it.

I don't believe that players should be able to plead out and accept a lesser punishment for accepting responsibility and not fighting the charge. What does need to be addressed however is the correct description of the infringement and the charges being laid. In the legal system the description of the crime is one of the most important things because if the wording or phrasing is wrong it can mean someone can get away with a lesser charge or indeed not be charged at all.

A clear message needs to be sent to these guys that there are just certain things you cannot and should not do. I hate the fact that they want to use every single excuse in the world once they are charged with something, better to not have done it at all in the first place. Wait for the first incident of this type in junior footy to occur and see what is said then. Kids will have a ready made excuse that they were only doing what their idol in the NRL has done.

Rant over.

I agree with you. The people on Black Friday have absolutely no excuse for what they did. The fact that the bottles didn't hit anyone made no difference. The fact that they were angry or upset or frustrated made no difference. You don't throw bottles fullstop. We all know what the media think of them. So how can people now defend Burgess. Dave Smith himself said "there is no place in the game for behaviour like that EVER. Expect a strong response where it is due"

You can either throw bottles at people or you can't.(George Burgess can but Bulldogs fans can't)

You can either shoulder charge or you can't.(Kane Evans can but Willie Mason can't)

You can either swear at the ref or you can't.(Kade Snowden, Nathan Peats, Jonathan Thurston can but David Klemmer can't)

You can either speak in a dissenting and disrespectful manner to the ref or you can't. (Jonathan Thurston, Paul Gallen, Mitchel Moses, James Roberts can but James Graham can't)

You can either knee someone in the head or you can't. (Aaron Gray can but Sam Kasiano can't)

You can either throw a ball at another players head or you can't. (Michael Ennis can but Kane Evans can't)

You can either touch the ref or you can't. (Corey Norman can but Steve Matai can't)

None of the above have been adjudicated with any consistency this year by the on field match officials, the MRC, the judiciary, the media or the NRL. This is just scratching the surface.

NRL needs an overhaul very, very quickly but that isn't going to happen anytime soon with the three stooges Grant, Smith and Greenberg in charge.

 

[The DoggFather]

F*** the gronk, 1 week or 2 it doesn't matter because the Sharks will finish them off this week.

 

[Interestingg]

UNSUCCESSFUL at judiciary and will miss 2 games (if they can even make it that far)

 

[CrittaMagic69]

Should have headbutt him, would have got off free tbh.

 

[The DoggFather]

UNSUCCESSFUL at judiciary and will miss 2 games (if they can even make it that far)

Eat it scum bag!

You'll be missing Rd 1 next year.

 

[Wolfmother]

Should have headbutt him, would have got off free tbh.

exactly. 2 weeks is a fair call

 

[Boxer]

lol dogs supporters got a longer suspension !

 

[Wolfmother]

lol dogs supporters got a longer suspension !

it would be a different story if he threw a water bottle at a spectator,at the end of the day he's a footballer attacking another footballer onfield ,Throwing a water bottle or headbutting another 'player' arent all that different.

 

[Cook]

Great news, suck it up bitches..

 

[sultanofsydney]

the whole judiciary system needs an overhaul: loading, carry over points blah blah blah blah stupid as far as I'm concerned this is how it should be

still use a simplified points system and grading system

grade 0 0 points but a fine always the same
grade 1 100 points 1 week ban
grade 2 200 points 2 week ban

and so on and so forth

the only loading should be for the same charge and adding a week per charge to the ban

no early plea

 

[K E]

Souffs really needed him this week. The sharks pack will destroy theirs.