Kung fu man
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 1,583
- Reaction score
- 1,914
Yep after watching the replay it was all ok up to the penalty then a repeat set and i couldn't see a reason for either after repeated rewinds
News Mahoney and Hetherington confrontation in sheds
- Thread starter bradtalo
- Start date
- Joined
- May 15, 2017
- Messages
- 23,040
- Reaction score
- 42,567
It seems the Bex didn’t work.
Nor do the anger management classes
.Seems I’m not the one ‘sooking’ Chief.
So now your latest effort to avoid being wrong is your post was ‘an exaggeration’. Classic
.Yes, I ‘labelled’ it ‘dissent’ because that’s what Bupa and Klemmer were actually charged with. Funny that.
There’s no trolling in calling out those who are wrong and you’re wrong - you admitted it - begrudgingly.
As for Brittany this ain’t the thread but happy to take it over there because yes, she told plenty of lies and the ‘opinion’ (moreso than the judgement) also said that.
Ready to cool your jets now hothead?
rainman
Kennel Legend
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2008
- Messages
- 9,011
- Reaction score
- 4,000
I actually agree if he hadn’t of given away that penalty for a late tackle against south’s we would probably have won that game
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2016
- Messages
- 16,611
- Reaction score
- 20,785
Wait you actually think that "pointing the finger" is in the rule book, wow!It seems the Bex didn’t work.
Nor do the anger management classes
Seems I’m not the one ‘sooking’ Chief.
So now your latest effort to avoid being wrong is your post was ‘an exaggeration’. Classic
Yes, I ‘labelled’ it ‘dissent’ because that’s what Bupa and Klemmer were actually charged with. Funny that.
There’s no trolling in calling out those who are wrong and you’re wrong - you admitted it - begrudgingly.
As for Brittany this ain’t the thread but happy to take it over there because yes, she told plenty of lies and the ‘opinion’ (moreso than the judgement) also said that.
Ready to cool your jets now hothead?
You actually "think" that my statement confused the charges of "dissent" and " pointing the finger ",in the rule book wow so special.
As far as Brittany goes, no thanks, you've painted on your stripes as far as that topic goes, live in the ditch you dug for yourself.
Trinfly
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2023
- Messages
- 3,279
- Reaction score
- 3,050
Presto and Mann back, David v Goliath and no Ponggaa
- Joined
- May 15, 2017
- Messages
- 23,040
- Reaction score
- 42,567
Eh?
You’re a classic @KarenJackson.
More ducking and weaving than the boxer in your story.
No on Brittany? Coming from the bloke who called the AFP ‘corrupt’? Shame - would love to have a battle of wits on that but I guess it’s unfair to fight the unarmed.
Bulldog1966
Kennel Legend
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2020
- Messages
- 13,120
- Reaction score
- 14,304
So what did he get a week?
Fair enough, play on we won the game easily not that bothered tbh..if he belted him totally different story throw the fn book at him.
Reed probably pushed his buttons enough to get him that fired up i am certain he has that ability.
Fair enough, play on we won the game easily not that bothered tbh..if he belted him totally different story throw the fn book at him.
Reed probably pushed his buttons enough to get him that fired up i am certain he has that ability.
Bulldog1966
Kennel Legend
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2020
- Messages
- 13,120
- Reaction score
- 14,304
Gus also likes Jack he will likely be circumspect about it..maybe.
I honestly don't see this as a massive issue or bringing the game into disrepute really, half or the kennel already reckon its fucked anyway
Trinfly
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2023
- Messages
- 3,279
- Reaction score
- 3,050
100 % footy Gus on Hetho One of kind, his fitness off the charts,
Rang Gus on a Sunday said he was comin to training but missing a bit of bark, four blokes jumped him in a carpark Gus said u ok Hetho said yeah I cleaned them up.
Rang Gus on a Sunday said he was comin to training but missing a bit of bark, four blokes jumped him in a carpark Gus said u ok Hetho said yeah I cleaned them up.
Last edited:
bradtalo
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2014
- Messages
- 3,879
- Reaction score
- 6,012
Is Hetho really that good ?. Who has he actually fought ? TPJ would be a lot stronger
Trinfly
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2023
- Messages
- 3,279
- Reaction score
- 3,050
Rang Gus and would say he wanted to fight Gal lol
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2017
- Messages
- 16,030
- Reaction score
- 28,033
He started boxing at a very young age and is a devastating puncher mlx that in with a healthy dose of psychopath and TPJ would be asleep in minutes TPJ has heart of a pea.
DFLWatto
Kennel Participant
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2023
- Messages
- 442
- Reaction score
- 760
On the levels podcast, willie says he knew hethrington for a few years and he can tell he had that smile like hes joking to see his reaction and would probably deck mahoney if he had threw a punch back.
He also said that he knows how to throw hands and should of been in the OG era cos hes essentially, nuts lol
He also said that he knows how to throw hands and should of been in the OG era cos hes essentially, nuts lol
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2016
- Messages
- 25,593
- Reaction score
- 29,228
Paul Kent: The NRL jumped the shark again when charging Reed Mahoney with contrary conduct
Telegraph Sport
The NRL returned to its favourite sport of shark jumping on Monday when Bulldogs hooker Reed Mahoney, for the offence of a smile and a wave, was charged with contrary conduct and will now be $1000 lighter in the pocket.
The plot has officially been lost.
Mahoney was charged for, what, exactly?
On the evidence in, he had a running battle with Jackson Hastings throughout the game and got the opportunity to go one up near the end when Hastings hit the ground after a loose pass.
Mahoney dived onto him but then Jaeman Salmon, spotting Hastings defenceless, gave the big heave-ho and drove his shoulder in to Hastings laying on the ground.
Then the game embarrassed itself in the usual manner.
Big burly men came together and shoved and pushed and jerked on collars with their chests puffed out, not a punch was thrown in anger, and when they were finally quietened down by the little man with the whistle they separated looking fairly well pleased with themselves.
How long the game continues to endure these embarrassing melees is unknown.
There appears to be no embarrassment from headquarters at such scenes.
Personally, for this longtime listener, first time caller, I would much rather see the players throw a few punches, sort each other out, and then get on with the game like they were all friends again, like it used to happen.
But having all but eliminated punching and fighting from the game, head office has left the game half-pregnant, tolerating these ridiculous melees that are perhaps not quite as ugly, but certainly more embarrassing, than the old all-in brawl.
It’s hardly a preferred option.
But then the game jumped the shark when Mahoney was charged.
A tackle after the Hastings incident, Mahoney tackled Jack Hetherington with feeling, hanging on too long in the tackle which is unwise in most instances but particularly when Hetherington is involved.
Hetherington is a throwback.
Born a generation too late, and maybe then some, Hetherington clipped Mahoney and the Bulldogs hooker did what we all would do in similar circumstances, the sane ones anyway, and hung on for his dear old life.
So another melee, chests puffed at 10 paces.
Both teams came together and had their little dance and referee Peter Gough called Hetherington out and sent him to the bin.
Gough had already warned both sides he had reached his tolerance and the next flare-up would see players go.
As Hetherington looked on, somewhat bewildered but with a hot temper percolating, Mahoney, like cheeky halves and hookers have always been known to do, rubbed it in further laughing and waving bye-bye.
Then Gough sent Mahoney off, too.
It was all well handled by the referee.
Then came the back page news.
Hetherington waited up the tunnel and Mahoney neared and he started bouncing on his toes, Roberto Duran in warm-up, and smiling with malicious intent.
It was an assassin’s smile.
When Mahoney came into range Hetherington whacked him in the chest. Whether it was a push or a punch was unclear, but it was sufficient enough for the match review committee to charge him with a grade two contrary conduct.
But then the match review committee jumped the shark.
For reasons that struggle for explanation Mahoney was charged with a grade one contrary conduct.
For a smile and a wave?
It had nothing to do with the tunnel incident, NRL officials say, but for his conduct on the field.
It might be the most embarrassing charge ever laid.
With deeper thoughts, though, it highlights how cautious the match review committee is in regard to public reaction.
Charging Mahoney was the safe but weak solution.
It was a pre-emptive charge to head off any damning reaction to the tunnel incident while privately declaring Mahoney was at no actual fault in the incident, should that come up.
Examine Mahoney’s on-field behaviour in isolation and there has never been another player charged for it in the history of the game.
Back in the prehistoric age the ARL, which was then running the game, understood the ugly look all-in brawls were giving the game and the move to eliminate them was as simple as immediately sending off the third man in.
Two players might come together and fight, and the crowd would get their elicit thrill, but the third man in provoked the fourth man and the fifth man and suddenly mums were shielding their children’s eyes.
The NRL could eradicate the melee by simply sin-binning the third player who thinks it’s a good idea to puff his chest out and go shirt-grabbing.
The melee does not cover any of them in glory.
But players have become conditioned to enter as a show of support for a teammate and it has now reached pandemic proportions.
Bring back the third man in rule and save the match review committee from embarrassing itself, and the game, like it did when it charged Mahoney on Monday.
Telegraph Sport
The NRL returned to its favourite sport of shark jumping on Monday when Bulldogs hooker Reed Mahoney, for the offence of a smile and a wave, was charged with contrary conduct and will now be $1000 lighter in the pocket.
The plot has officially been lost.
Mahoney was charged for, what, exactly?
On the evidence in, he had a running battle with Jackson Hastings throughout the game and got the opportunity to go one up near the end when Hastings hit the ground after a loose pass.
Mahoney dived onto him but then Jaeman Salmon, spotting Hastings defenceless, gave the big heave-ho and drove his shoulder in to Hastings laying on the ground.
Then the game embarrassed itself in the usual manner.
Big burly men came together and shoved and pushed and jerked on collars with their chests puffed out, not a punch was thrown in anger, and when they were finally quietened down by the little man with the whistle they separated looking fairly well pleased with themselves.
How long the game continues to endure these embarrassing melees is unknown.
There appears to be no embarrassment from headquarters at such scenes.
Personally, for this longtime listener, first time caller, I would much rather see the players throw a few punches, sort each other out, and then get on with the game like they were all friends again, like it used to happen.
But having all but eliminated punching and fighting from the game, head office has left the game half-pregnant, tolerating these ridiculous melees that are perhaps not quite as ugly, but certainly more embarrassing, than the old all-in brawl.
It’s hardly a preferred option.
But then the game jumped the shark when Mahoney was charged.
A tackle after the Hastings incident, Mahoney tackled Jack Hetherington with feeling, hanging on too long in the tackle which is unwise in most instances but particularly when Hetherington is involved.
Hetherington is a throwback.
Born a generation too late, and maybe then some, Hetherington clipped Mahoney and the Bulldogs hooker did what we all would do in similar circumstances, the sane ones anyway, and hung on for his dear old life.
So another melee, chests puffed at 10 paces.
Both teams came together and had their little dance and referee Peter Gough called Hetherington out and sent him to the bin.
Gough had already warned both sides he had reached his tolerance and the next flare-up would see players go.
As Hetherington looked on, somewhat bewildered but with a hot temper percolating, Mahoney, like cheeky halves and hookers have always been known to do, rubbed it in further laughing and waving bye-bye.
Then Gough sent Mahoney off, too.
It was all well handled by the referee.
Then came the back page news.
Hetherington waited up the tunnel and Mahoney neared and he started bouncing on his toes, Roberto Duran in warm-up, and smiling with malicious intent.
It was an assassin’s smile.
When Mahoney came into range Hetherington whacked him in the chest. Whether it was a push or a punch was unclear, but it was sufficient enough for the match review committee to charge him with a grade two contrary conduct.
But then the match review committee jumped the shark.
For reasons that struggle for explanation Mahoney was charged with a grade one contrary conduct.
For a smile and a wave?
It had nothing to do with the tunnel incident, NRL officials say, but for his conduct on the field.
It might be the most embarrassing charge ever laid.
With deeper thoughts, though, it highlights how cautious the match review committee is in regard to public reaction.
Charging Mahoney was the safe but weak solution.
It was a pre-emptive charge to head off any damning reaction to the tunnel incident while privately declaring Mahoney was at no actual fault in the incident, should that come up.
Examine Mahoney’s on-field behaviour in isolation and there has never been another player charged for it in the history of the game.
Back in the prehistoric age the ARL, which was then running the game, understood the ugly look all-in brawls were giving the game and the move to eliminate them was as simple as immediately sending off the third man in.
Two players might come together and fight, and the crowd would get their elicit thrill, but the third man in provoked the fourth man and the fifth man and suddenly mums were shielding their children’s eyes.
The NRL could eradicate the melee by simply sin-binning the third player who thinks it’s a good idea to puff his chest out and go shirt-grabbing.
The melee does not cover any of them in glory.
But players have become conditioned to enter as a show of support for a teammate and it has now reached pandemic proportions.
Bring back the third man in rule and save the match review committee from embarrassing itself, and the game, like it did when it charged Mahoney on Monday.
Kung fu man
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 1,583
- Reaction score
- 1,914
And if your aunty was your uncle she'd have balls
Kung fu man
Kennel Enthusiast
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2020
- Messages
- 1,583
- Reaction score
- 1,914
Examine Mahoney’s on-field behaviour in isolation and there has never been another player charged for it in the history of the game.
I was just about to post these exact words, fight it to the end id say to the club and then note every time there is a small melle on field if anyone gets the same charge, i doubt it! In fact go back and see a few far worse incidents and see who got charged i bet you its zero!
I was just about to post these exact words, fight it to the end id say to the club and then note every time there is a small melle on field if anyone gets the same charge, i doubt it! In fact go back and see a few far worse incidents and see who got charged i bet you its zero!
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2014
- Messages
- 24,103
- Reaction score
- 25,748
This argument holds fuck all weight lol. Buzz is like Mahoney gets fined because he's the most penalised player in the comp over the last 2 years and they are catching up with him... Then when it's time to assess if one of the most suspended players over the last few years should get more than 1 week and he scoffs at it haha. Old man should give it away asap
Has anyone ever been cited for niggling? Why did he get charged? Was it for the push? I dont even know why he got sin binned? was it to even it out? The way I saw it Knights were niggling because they couldnt fathom the loss, running in niggling. Did mahoney get under their skin most likely definitely did, and got a player with white line fever to snap. To me that is a psychological break down. Nothing wrong with that. If fans can boo opposition teams why cant players niggle each other.
What makes that contrary conduct? If that is the case why not just get the players to wear tape over their mouth? And how are these charges made on the fly? The game is falling apart. Hearing that they want to eliminate long kick offs too. Yes I get it it is a brutal sport and the kick off is probably the biggest impact possible. But it is what makes the game a spectacle. Imagine going to Vegas next year and no one can put a hit on or rattle someone like the raiders fullback the other day. It will turn into a game that is unrecognisable. And to be honest not being able to niggle or get into someones head is another soft AF citing and charge. Unless it was racial it a war out there. If someone cracks because they have no discipline then so be it. Cant penalise the opposition because that player had no control.
What makes that contrary conduct? If that is the case why not just get the players to wear tape over their mouth? And how are these charges made on the fly? The game is falling apart. Hearing that they want to eliminate long kick offs too. Yes I get it it is a brutal sport and the kick off is probably the biggest impact possible. But it is what makes the game a spectacle. Imagine going to Vegas next year and no one can put a hit on or rattle someone like the raiders fullback the other day. It will turn into a game that is unrecognisable. And to be honest not being able to niggle or get into someones head is another soft AF citing and charge. Unless it was racial it a war out there. If someone cracks because they have no discipline then so be it. Cant penalise the opposition because that player had no control.