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

News: NRL warns against judiciary sledging

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by ManlyBacker, Mar 6, 2009.

  1. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    +972 /7
    <p>The NRL insists it is not trying to censor the game despite warning players and officials they risk fines for criticising the judiciary system.</p><p>Following last year's defamatory press conference by Melbourne coach Craig Bellamy which earned the Storm a record $50,000 fine, the NRL has moved to re-educate players and officials about what can and cannot be said in the media regarding judicial incidents.</p><p>Officials are warned against making prejudicial comments and, much like the guidelines for talking about referees, they are not allowed to suggest impropriety, bias or unfairness when discussing judiciary matters.</p><p>NRL chief operating officer Graham Annesley has provided clubs with a list of acceptable and unacceptable statements, but says policing public comment is difficult and will be done on a case by case basis.</p>

    <a href="http://www.silvertails.net/news/Sea-Eagles/nrl-warns-against-judiciary-sledging.html">Read the full article</a>
  2. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    +972 /7
    See in the article:
    "Under the new system Storm captain Cameron Smith would not have missed last year's grand final as the 27 week period between his first and second offence would have eroded his carryover points.

    But the NRL is adamant the rule was not linked to Smith's case - even though it put the unfairness of carryover points into a harsh perspective.

    "This is not the Cameron Smith rule," said Annesley

    Of course it is the Cam Smith rule.  :mad:
  3. DSM5

    DSM5 Well-Known Member

    +516 /0
    If it wasn't, they wouldn't have changed their system.  Not a bad move however.  'Earning' is always a better behavioural change policy than 'removing'.  Anyway, even had Smith played we would have smashed the wet.  Their time has passed.  It's the era of the Eagle.     
  4. Fluffy

    Fluffy Well-Known Member

    +5,631 /205
    they also made a brett stewart rule after the 07 final

    crocker would have been sent had that happened in 08 as it was unnecessary contact with the head
  5. Rex

    Rex Well-Known Member

    +2,376 /60
    "It seemed unfair when we reviewed it, there was a particular anomaly that when you get to 12 months all your points disappear but when you're almost at 12 months they are still on your record."

    Anamoly???  Pfft.  That's called a penalty period.  It is an anomoly when a criminal has his freedom restricted on the last day of his emprisonment and is then free the very next day?  It is an anomoly when a good behaviour bond period expires? It is an anomoly when the points system on driving offences means that points exist one day and expire the next?

    This is the Cameron Smith rule, no doubt.

Share This Page