1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

I cannot believe what I am reading about Glenn Stewart

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by cf2 is back, Aug 31, 2010.

  1. cf2 is back

    cf2 is back Active Member

    +49 / 0
    There are only two possible versions of Glenn Stewart's clash with Anasta:

    1) Glenn sees Anasta coming and thinks "I'm gonna smash Anasta for no reason whatsoever cos I feel like being a thug and here he comes so I strike him in the head with my elbow on purpose and knock him out"

    2) Glenn sees Anasta and he are going to crash into each other and all he can think in a split second is "Crikey look out" and as such out of pure SELF DEFENCE instinctively raises his arm up which accidentally clashes with Anasta. Bit like if the bloke next to you at the pub suddenly goes to hit you the first thing you do in self defence is throw your arm up to block your own face (not hit theirs).

    The media have of course convinced themselves and everyone else it's version 1. I will walk backwards to Newcastle if that's true. Another pathetic media beat up. There is no freaking way it was ANYTHING other than self defence reflex action. Tell me when has Glenn Stewart decided to smash anyone illegally? Never.

    Meanwhile Conn smashes Kite unconscious, which might have been reckless rather than intentional, but nonetheless the damage to Kite was plain for all to see, and he gets 1 week. That'll do me.

    And don't even start me on the 8 point joke turning point. Lyon falls on SKD's back and gets that. Full joke. And of course Finch now admits it was a mistake AGAIN and no case to answer.

    Finch and his pathetic band of useless refs have to be sacked it's out of control.
  2. Darren

    Darren Well-Known Member

    +507 / 20
    the tackle was pretty bad, lucky he didn't break Anasta's cheeckbone/jaw

    The Stewarts haven't had a good 2009/2010
  3. Berkeley_Eagle

    Berkeley_Eagle Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan 2016 Tipping Competitor

    +2,115 / 14
    Maybe we can use the video refs are ****ed and the players are getting frustrated defence

  4. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    +971 / 7
    I see that smh article as just more Manly bashing BE.

    The important info out of it is:
    "Manly legal counsel Geoff Bellew will today advise the Sea Eagles on whether they should contest the charge after studying video footage of the incident. It is thought Bellew is more likely to seek a downgrade of the charge and a lesser suspension at the judiciary, rather than attempt to clear Stewart of an offence for which some thought he should have been sent off. Anasta is not among them and he yesterday said he held no ill feeling towards Stewart."
  5. bob dylan

    bob dylan Well-Known Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    +4,409 / 130
    I dont think they could mount a defence for that tackle. As Darren said above its lucky Braith didnt get his jaw or cheek smashed.

    For what its worth, I just hope Glenn apologised to Anasta after the match.
  6. Chip and Chase

    Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    +6,282 / 44
    Clumsy effort and deserves a decent suspension. If a Manly player was on the receiving end of something like that you'd be baying for blood.
  7. ayjay007

    ayjay007 Well-Known Member

    +83 / 0
    Got to agree.
  8. WAMF

    WAMF Well-Known Member

    +408 / 0
    Got to agree.

    Anyone that thinks he doesn't deserve a suspension for that high elbow/cocked forearm needs to give away watching footy because you have absolutely no clue.
  9. MissKate

    MissKate Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +1,022 / 7
    Does anyone remember what grading luke o'donnell and ben cross got for their leading with a forearm.  I didn't think either was a grade 5 (I think that is a special grading for Manly offences).  Both o'donnell and cross went in front on with plenty of malice unlike Glenn.  I reckon a downgrade is the way to go.
  10. ads

    ads Well-Known Member

    +28 / 1
    I thought the other two were referred directly without grading? Or am I thinking of different incidents?
  11. mosto

    mosto Well-Known Member Premium Member

    +992 / 10
    I think this will be downgraded. To me, the fact that Stewart looks away before contact indicates there was no malicious intent, but the fact he connected fairly solidly with his elbow means it deserves punishment. If an early guilty plea to grade 5 means 4 weeks, I'm hoping a guilty plea to a downgrade will be 2/3 weeks. I think that's the best we can hope for and 3 weeks would be about right IMO
  12. cf2 is back

    cf2 is back Active Member

    +49 / 0
    My singular point of this post was I could have sworn it looked like a 100% reflex accident with zero intent, particularly as Glenn wasn't even looking at Anasta.

    But obviously you all think it was in fact an intentional strike with the elbow and therefore deserving suspension.

    That'll do me.
  13. Kiwi Eagle

    Kiwi Eagle Moderator Staff Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    +2,425 / 31
    Accidental, intentional, whatever, doesn't really matter to me

    He hit a bloke that had passed the ball, with a raised forearm, right in the chops. Cut and dried case, 4 weeks is about right
  14. mickqld

    mickqld Sack Greenslime 2016 Tipping Competitor

    Gold Coast
    +3,755 / 57
    It's not so much arguing about 4 weeks or not. It's comparing it to so many other incidents that have gone either unpunished or much lighter sentences. I think it deserves 3 weeks not 4 but its just bull**** that so many other offences dont attract the same punishment.Once again inconsistent NRL bull**** that always seems to penalise us more than most other clubs.
  15. King

    King Active Member

    +53 / 3
    Couldn't agree more Mick, it deserved a few weeks but 4-6 is over the top. I saw it as careless but not intentional.
  16. WAMF

    WAMF Well-Known Member

    +408 / 0
    The fact that it's not being contested by Stewart, is in itself, an admission of guilt.
    Add to that the club would have received legal advice from Bellew and clearly, the outcome was never going to be good for Glenn.
    4 weeks is about right. The only reason he wasn't sent off was because Conn wasn't sent from the field late in the first half.
  17. King

    King Active Member

    +53 / 3
    The only reason Conn wasn't sent off was because we were leading by 14. Conn's tackle on Kite changed the game. Kite was destroying the Roosters. When he left the field we lost our go forward. Kite is almost back to his best.
  18. StuBoot

    StuBoot Well-Known Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    +796 / 7
    How about we get Harrigan & Hampstead jobs on the match review commitee!
    With their recent efforts they would let him off as they "didn't actually see Anasta's head leave his neck and as the footage was a bit blurry, we'll give him the benefit of the doubt".

    Seriously though, imo, both Conn & Glenn should've been sent, 3 weeks each.
    Same with Petero.

Share This Page