Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Wolfie, post: 2849240, member: 8770"] Like i said, i dont think Sammy should have been charged in the first place. But explain to me how its different. Did they say Sam targeted a players pre exsisting injury? Yes they did, and they found him guilty of doing it, saying it wasnt in the spirit of the game. Thats an indisputable fact. You can look up his charge and the ruling they handed down to find out. Did JT have a shoulder injury going into the game, again, yes he did, another indisputable fact. Did they target it, absolutely they did. They just decided to leave him alone after he re-injured it :D I know it wont happen, and i dont think it should, but i believe the NRL set a very dangerous precedent by charging Thiaday in the first place. If a player takes the field, he is fit enough to play imo so he shouldn't get special treatment. So by the NRL ( stupid i might add ) logic, you cant target any player with injury. It was a joke ruling in the first place, but as usual, they havent been consistent with it. Tbh, i dont think they ever could. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 49 (members: 0, guests: 49)