StuBoot said:Chip and Chase said:I don't understand that decision. Dugan was knocked senseless and had a decent split in his melon, so it would have been difficult to argue no high contact.
It appears the technicality was that he was charged with "striking" which infers intent. They argued successfully against that and the charged was overturned. He couldn't then be charged with high tackle or contact to the head. That lacks common sense from the judiciary, but it seems the NRL judiciary is run along the lines of common law, where common sense and technicalities mean jsutice is not always served.
We have refs that are bordering on incompetent and now the match review commitee stuff up. It's not the judiciary's fault - they can only adjudicate on the charge as it's written and Mini's counsel only have to defend what he's charged with, not what he should've been charged with.
As C & C said, he was charged with "X" - not guilty. They can't then say we'll charge you with "Y".
Yes, the law's an ass sometimes.
Maybe in the future they will start multi-charging the accused (probably another Manly Player) so that they can end up with a guilty verdict of some description so that then they will be able to hang them.