Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Dexter, post: 2694171, member: 1978"] They really seem to grade things on outcomes. [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]In the match review committee’s official guidelines, it states: ‘‘When required to ascribe a grading for an offence, the match-review committee shall have regard to ... Whether an opposition player was injured in the incident giving rise to the charge.’’[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial]As Glenn Jackson explained in the [FONT=inherit]Sydney Morning Herald[/FONT] last year: ‘‘Effectively, the match reviewers cannot charge a player as a result of the injuries, but once he is charged, they can attach a higher grading as a result of them.’’[/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Arial] [/FONT][/COLOR] This discussion has been had a few times on here but they should grade the tackle no matter what with the aim of prevention not how bad the injury was. A good example was the spear tackle on Boyd in state of origin a few years ago compared to Mackinnon. That should have got 6 months minimum but was graded as a 2 whereas we all know the circumstance on Mackinnon . [IMG]http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/y/g/i/d/image.gallery.galleryLandscape.620x414.yg9r.png/1276695299733.jpg[/IMG] [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 45 (members: 0, guests: 45)