Official Wighton bite

Psycho Doggie

Psycho Doggie

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
18,335
Reaction score
26,244
Doogie said:
And Analsley on why he wasn't sent off.

"Some high tackles are sent off, some aren't. Some high tackles are sent to the sin bin, some aren't," he said during his weekly briefing.

"The officials have to make a decision based on what evidence they believe they have in which to make that decision.

"Obviously the officials yesterday made the decision based on the evidence they thought they had. Now that doesn't mean they were right or wrong, and ultimately whether the player will be guilty or not guilty. A player could go through a hearing and be found not guilty.

"For any incident in our game, there is no predetermined outcome. It's a matter for the match officials to take what they believe to be the appropriate action based on the information they have at that time."

Just seems so random.....
Click to expand...
Maybe because it is? Or at least, close enough to random to effectively be random.
 
Doogie

Doogie

Kennel Lizard Lord
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
9,923
Reaction score
12,427
Psycho Doggie said:
Maybe because it is? Or at least, close enough to random to effectively be random.
Click to expand...
You ever heard before of a guy showing a bite mark (you can see it on tele so must have been obvious), the 'victim' claiming he was bitten, all the bots lining up and the culprit not being sent?

TBH, I reckon it was the game state and magnitude that was the deciding factor. I'll guarantee that if the score was 30-nil on a mid season game he's gone.
 
Psycho Doggie

Psycho Doggie

Kennel Immortal
Joined
Mar 25, 2014
Messages
18,335
Reaction score
26,244
Doogie said:
You ever heard before of a guy showing a bite mark (you can see it on tele so must have been obvious), the 'victim' claiming he was bitten, all the bots lining up and the culprit not being sent?

TBH, I reckon it was the game state and magnitude that was the deciding factor. I'll guarantee that if the score was 30-nil on a mid season game he's gone.
Click to expand...
He was definitely bitten, but it was at least somewhat his own fault. I don't know what the bunker randoms had to say to the on field random, but if they said something about the forcefeeding aspect of the tackle I could kind of understand it. I agree, the situation of the game was a factor, but it is impossible for sure to tell how much of a factor, same as the question of IF the bunker randoms deemed that some of the fault was the idiot who decided it was a good idea to headlock a guy around his mouth, if it was a factor, it is impossible to say its weighting.
 
SPEARTAKVIDREFS

SPEARTAKVIDREFS

Kennel Addict
Joined
May 16, 2009
Messages
6,802
Reaction score
8,406
Doogie said:
And Analsley on why he wasn't sent off.

"Some high tackles are sent off, some aren't. Some high tackles are sent to the sin bin, some aren't," he said during his weekly briefing.

"The officials have to make a decision based on what evidence they believe they have in which to make that decision.

"Obviously the officials yesterday made the decision based on the evidence they thought they had. Now that doesn't mean they were right or wrong, and ultimately whether the player will be guilty or not guilty. A player could go through a hearing and be found not guilty.

"For any incident in our game, there is no predetermined outcome. It's a matter for the match officials to take what they believe to be the appropriate action based on the information they have at that time."

Just seems so random.....
Click to expand...
And confirms why there is no consistency
 
Doogie

Doogie

Kennel Lizard Lord
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
9,923
Reaction score
12,427
Psycho Doggie said:
He was definitely bitten, but it was at least somewhat his own fault. I don't know what the bunker randoms had to say to the on field random, but if they said something about the forcefeeding aspect of the tackle I could kind of understand it. I agree, the situation of the game was a factor, but it is impossible for sure to tell how much of a factor, same as the question of IF the bunker randoms deemed that some of the fault was the idiot who decided it was a good idea to headlock a guy around his mouth, if it was a factor, it is impossible to say its weighting.
Click to expand...
Apart from jammer, every biting I can remember involves an arm across the face. So how does anyone split intent on that?

Typical nrl, justifying the fck up after the fact.
 
TwinTurbo

TwinTurbo

Kennel Legend
Gilded
Joined
Oct 22, 2018
Messages
9,459
Reaction score
15,720
My view is that a true bite requires 2 set of teeth marks, one from the upper and one from the lower. From the limited viewing it looked to me like 1 only crescent of marks, from the upper, which could be the mouth guard. That to me indicates that the arm was pushed/forced into the upper row of teeth covered by the mouth guard. That's not a bite and unless there is a picture of 2 sets of teeth marks (or 1 set of teeth marks and 1 mouth guard) there's no way that he can be found guilty of biting.


Always a Bulldog
 
Doogie

Doogie

Kennel Lizard Lord
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
9,923
Reaction score
12,427
TwinTurbo said:
My view is that a true bite requires 2 set of teeth marks, one from the upper and one from the lower. From the limited viewing it looked to me like 1 only crescent of marks, from the upper, which could be the mouth guard. That to me indicates that the arm was pushed/forced into the upper row of teeth covered by the mouth guard. That's not a bite and unless there is a picture of 2 sets of teeth marks (or 1 set of teeth marks and 1 mouth guard) there's no way that he can be found guilty of biting.


Always a Bulldog
Click to expand...
Pretty big set of teeth then.
1694494383411.png
 
Doogie

Doogie

Kennel Lizard Lord
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
9,923
Reaction score
12,427
GA45 said:
What did he get?
Click to expand...
No decision yet. Prosecution is talking 4 weeks. Defense is saying 3 weeks as Travis Heads batting coach.

No one argued he bit him, its whether it was intentional or not. And in the video apparently there's some chew chew.
 
G

GA45

Kennel Addict
Joined
Apr 28, 2017
Messages
6,689
Reaction score
8,158
Doogie said:
No decision yet. Prosecution is talking 4 weeks. Defense is saying 3 weeks as Travis Heads batting coach.

No one argued he bit him, its whether it was intentional or not. And in the video apparently there's some chew chew.
Click to expand...
Tosser :tearsofjoy:
 
R

Rod67

Kennel Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
2,304
Reaction score
2,004
CroydonDog said:
3 games.

Can he claim PM's xiii, all stars, trials etc?
Click to expand...
As he’s now joined Soufffs, you betcha he and the club will, especially after a long off season. Most will forget and include those games in his suspension.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top