Judiciary live
- Thread starter Berkeley_Eagle
- Start date
-
We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
voicefromthehill
Bencher
Based on Bellews case they could argue the judiciary are now biased and they need to adjourn a new panel.....,there may be some smarts to this yet
Blair 3 weeks for contrary conduct + 2 weeks from early guilty plea on striking gives him 5 weeks (matches).
Good news for Glenn, he might get away with 2 matches, maximum 3. So back for GF
Good news for Glenn, he might get away with 2 matches, maximum 3. So back for GF
Utility Player
Bencher
This could have been a brilliant tactical move by Manly by getting an adjournment we got to see what Blair got and can plan our next move accordingly.jabroni said:
If Blair had been given 5 weeks plus the 2 as had been forecast what would Glen have gotten with a finding against his not guilty plea.
This way we can work around 3 being the worst he could get and plan our defense on that basis.
Rex
Bencher
From my sitting place, I've formed the opinion that Gallop desperately wants the supposed "bad" headlines. Don't believe what he says, believe what he does.
1. His position alone gives him huge pull with the media, quite apart from News Ltd owning and controlling the NRL. He could use this influence if he chose.
2. Seems he has not done a single thing to reduce the media exposure, and has gone to lengths to increase it, even appearing on TV about it. Just try getting a CEO of another company to appear on TV when there's bad news. They know that out of sight is out of mind. Even the pollies get some minor underling to handle the controversy. And pollies are media tarts.
3. When Kite suggested to the media that if they considered it damaging to kids etc, they could reduce the number of times they showed the fight, Gallop ridiculed the suggestion.
4. He has done nothing that I can see to divert attention away from the fight. He had a wonderful opportunity for a major feel-good story about Billy Slater cradling Wolfman. He ignored it as if it didn't happen and went straight to the brawl.
We know that a beef-up is in the interests of the media companies. But why would a CEO of a rugby League organisation participate in all this if it is supposed bad news?
1. His position alone gives him huge pull with the media, quite apart from News Ltd owning and controlling the NRL. He could use this influence if he chose.
2. Seems he has not done a single thing to reduce the media exposure, and has gone to lengths to increase it, even appearing on TV about it. Just try getting a CEO of another company to appear on TV when there's bad news. They know that out of sight is out of mind. Even the pollies get some minor underling to handle the controversy. And pollies are media tarts.
3. When Kite suggested to the media that if they considered it damaging to kids etc, they could reduce the number of times they showed the fight, Gallop ridiculed the suggestion.
4. He has done nothing that I can see to divert attention away from the fight. He had a wonderful opportunity for a major feel-good story about Billy Slater cradling Wolfman. He ignored it as if it didn't happen and went straight to the brawl.
We know that a beef-up is in the interests of the media companies. But why would a CEO of a rugby League organisation participate in all this if it is supposed bad news?
Masked Eagle
Bencher
voicefromthehill said:
Bit of a stretch. I wouldn't think that would be a good tactic. He just needs to tell his story and what happened. Blair was clearly the instigator and he only got 3 weeks, trying to pull legal swiftys isn't going to impress them. Say what happened, and how it happened so quickly and he'll be fine. Maybe 1 week, but probably 2 and be back when it gets realy serious.
zabble
Reserve Grader
couldn't Glenn still get 5 weeks though given he won't receive a discount for an early 'guilty' plea ?
Anything more than a week or 2 is a joke - he did nothing more than have a one on one stoush, it's not his fault that the other players got involved, that was their choice, not Glenn's - and really, the send off should provide some level of credit or discount from whatever suspension is dished out
Anything more than a week or 2 is a joke - he did nothing more than have a one on one stoush, it's not his fault that the other players got involved, that was their choice, not Glenn's - and really, the send off should provide some level of credit or discount from whatever suspension is dished out
voicefromthehill
Bencher
Fair point, but if there is a smell of being pre judged, ala buying Bellews defence then it is something that seems reasonable to consider. Afterall if the innocent party cops 3 weeks for their part, what will the now guilty (by virtue of judiciary decision) party get.Masked Eagle said:
I cant get a handle on this at all.Brandy,who is one of the few i rate,says Glen would be crazy not to plead guilty as it earns him a week off which was why Blair got 3 and not 4.He think Glen is in real strife.The guilty plea would seem the obvious play as you wouldnt think they would deem Glen worse than Blair so the most he could get is 3 weeks with a plea.
The other factor I suppose is that the panel will know they have put Blair out of the GF (even though he had an extra 2) and does that mean they will look for a penalty that does the same to Glen so there is no furore about bias.Fox just said Manly are staying with the not guilty plea so if they hold him equally to blame he misses GF.
Anyones guess from here.Anywhere between 2 and 5 seems possible.Lets hope 2 to 3.I personally hope they go the guilty route.
Nice little job the QC did on us.I thought we had lost our minds sacking him but now we find he just said it was too hard and quit.wtf??
The other factor I suppose is that the panel will know they have put Blair out of the GF (even though he had an extra 2) and does that mean they will look for a penalty that does the same to Glen so there is no furore about bias.Fox just said Manly are staying with the not guilty plea so if they hold him equally to blame he misses GF.
Anyones guess from here.Anywhere between 2 and 5 seems possible.Lets hope 2 to 3.I personally hope they go the guilty route.
Nice little job the QC did on us.I thought we had lost our minds sacking him but now we find he just said it was too hard and quit.wtf??
Gifty may now change plea to guilty as I was under the impression that it was QC's idea to plead not guilty and the club wasn't happy with it.
ManlyBacker
Winging it
You do realise we are talking about Manly? Actually the judiciary were very fair with the Matai 'tripping' charge so who knows. Deep down if Blair is gone until after the GF then Gifty will possibly get the same (and I know Blair copped an extra 2 weeks). Just saying....
To Susan and those suggesting they know far better than the club how to run this thing –
Have you viewed ALL the available camera angles?
Have you interviewed Glen and other Manly players who are possible witnesses?
Have you got expert legal advice on how the process works?
No? Then exactly what are you basing your judgments on? Surely not media speculation? Maybe just 'the vibe' ??
Gimme a break.
Have you viewed ALL the available camera angles?
Have you interviewed Glen and other Manly players who are possible witnesses?
Have you got expert legal advice on how the process works?
No? Then exactly what are you basing your judgments on? Surely not media speculation? Maybe just 'the vibe' ??
Gimme a break.
I think a not guilty verdict is acheivable, but thats not to say it will happen. i see the argument going something like this;
mr stewart showed with his behavour in the first flare up that he wasnt interested in fighting mr blair, but to simply stop him from inflicting more injury on his team mate. When leaving the field Mr stewart and mr blair came together again. At this point they jostled a little. mr stewart then placed his open hands on mr blairs shirt front, to put a bit of space between the two of them. at this point mr blair grabbed mr stewarts jersey. Mr stewart was now unable to get away from mr blair, and having seen what mr blair had recently done to mr lussick, was quite reasonable in his beleif that mr blair was about to strike him and had no alternative but to defend himself from such an attack.
mr stewart showed with his behavour in the first flare up that he wasnt interested in fighting mr blair, but to simply stop him from inflicting more injury on his team mate. When leaving the field Mr stewart and mr blair came together again. At this point they jostled a little. mr stewart then placed his open hands on mr blairs shirt front, to put a bit of space between the two of them. at this point mr blair grabbed mr stewarts jersey. Mr stewart was now unable to get away from mr blair, and having seen what mr blair had recently done to mr lussick, was quite reasonable in his beleif that mr blair was about to strike him and had no alternative but to defend himself from such an attack.
Just an opinion SE8 just like yours so give me a break too.What do you base your opinion on-the nice smooth ride leading up to the enquiry!
There will be a real subconscious feeling from the panel that if Blair misses then maybe they will want Glen to miss.
He will not get less than 3 weeks IMO and I am clinging to that hope.3 will be great for us as we need him to win GF and he needs to plead guilty to get the 3.Do you really think Manly will be shown mercy.
And that aint negative.Its reality and 3 weeks will be great result for the club.
There will be a real subconscious feeling from the panel that if Blair misses then maybe they will want Glen to miss.
He will not get less than 3 weeks IMO and I am clinging to that hope.3 will be great for us as we need him to win GF and he needs to plead guilty to get the 3.Do you really think Manly will be shown mercy.
And that aint negative.Its reality and 3 weeks will be great result for the club.
You may be right but we are just guessing. Which is not a sound basis to criticise the club at this stage. I reckon the not guilty has been a great strategy so far, it has got everyone I know scratching their heads and acknowledging that well yes, true, he shouldn't have been binned, and yes Blair did look quite menacing when he came and stood right over him, etc etc. Most are still saying Glenn is guilty but they have turned their minds to matters that are in his favour.
As to the subconscious of the panel, well I wouldn't know. But they are ex-players, and I reckon they can tell the difference between 2 situations. It is the NRL prosecutor asking for the draconian penalties, the panel clearly rejected that, I reckon there is every chance they will come in with a reasonable decision for Glenn, hopefully 2-3 weeks max. Hopefully...
As to the subconscious of the panel, well I wouldn't know. But they are ex-players, and I reckon they can tell the difference between 2 situations. It is the NRL prosecutor asking for the draconian penalties, the panel clearly rejected that, I reckon there is every chance they will come in with a reasonable decision for Glenn, hopefully 2-3 weeks max. Hopefully...
susan said:
Did Glenn Stewart run in unprovoked into the first melee laying upper cuts into a player being held by 3 opposition players ?
Did Glenn Stewart run towards an opposition player who was walking off to the sin bin, confront him with verbal abuse and grab hold of him in a violent manner ready to cause another fight ?????
NO he didnt did he. So why would he be suspended for any of his actions. He shouldn't have even been in the bin in the first place if it wasn't for the gross incompetence of Badger and co.
Masked Eagle
Bencher
drower said:
You still plead your innocence. Just as Blair had already pleaded guilty to the charge, the case of the hearing then is for him to justify his actions like so the panel can decide on the punishment.
I'm a bit in Susans camp. There is no way Glenn will get off scott free. Where I differ is I can see him getting less than Blair. Put your case forward and state the reasons for your actions and hope the panel see Blair as the aggressor. Its unrealistic to hope for him to not miss any game time considering the punishments already handed out to others who did next to nothing.
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 23 | 10 |
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 14 | 10 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 48 | 8 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 28 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 25 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 8 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 38 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 21 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 37 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -13 | 6 |
|
5 | 2 | 3 | -15 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -36 | 6 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -5 | 4 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -7 | 4 |
|
5 | 0 | 5 | -86 | 2 |
|
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 2 |
