3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. Good old Harrison House!

they were great days. and mondays (or was it tuesday?) nights were a highlight. 

 

12 minutes ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

they were great days. and mondays (or was it tuesday?) nights were a highlight. 

 

Could have been tuesdays??

always waited for the radio updates at about 11pm from “The Hanging Judge” 

27 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Could have been tuesdays??

always waited for the radio updates at about 11pm from “The Hanging Judge” 

at least with Busse, you pretty much knew what you were going to get. the current generation of players get off lightly by comparison. 

46 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. Good old Harrison House!

they were great days. and mondays (or was it tuesday?) nights were a highlight. 

 

They need to hire actual legal experts who have some vague notion of how to apply precedents and evidentiary standards.  Preferably people with absolutely no connection to any club.  That way we may actually see consistent and unbiased decisions. 

On 15/12/2017 at 11:10 AM, poita said:

If appropriate penalties were applied for disgraceful acts, then there would be sufficient deterrent to reduce the number of cases coming before the MRP / tribunal.

Allowing players to get away with a week's holiday for punching an opponent in the head is why there are so many cases to review, and hence the opportunity is there for inconsistency. Provide proper deterrents, and the number of cases to review will drop markedly.

Ultimately I don't care who is on the MRP, if they are capable of making fair, rational decisions. However I doubt that Michael Christian is the answer given his history. I would like to know what made him the best person for the job.

I'm not sure what history you are referring to. But one thing will become obvious - he's going to have to have a thick skin. I would expect that he knows that and, in itself, having someone who knows he's going to be criticised but is still prepared to take on the responsibility may not necessarily be a bad thing.

On 12/17/2017 at 12:07 AM, DeezNuts said:

I suspect differentiating between what is reckless and what is deliberate is the hardest part. The impact and location should be fairly easy to adjudicate. Panel or no panel doesn't matter if there is consistency.

Correct. With the recently adopted 'head protection rule', it was clear - whether deliberate or not - that contact to the head was to be penalised, instantly. We then had a situation where the players, themselves, worked out that by 'ducking' and 'craning, at times', head contact could be enabled and made look terribly serious when it was not. Certain Port Adelaide 'stars' initiated this rule bending to good effect. I just wonder what 'reckless' and 'deliberate' might mean. Soon, we will have a legalised 'scrum' as seen in rugby ... 

On 12/17/2017 at 10:27 AM, dieter said:

An ex E Coli Wobbler to boot.

The only CHB  i've seen fall asleep during a game......

48 minutes ago, willmoy said:

The only CHB  i've seen fall asleep during a game......

Tell us more...

2 hours ago, dieter said:

Tell us more...

Full Back who ran off his man a lot actually. Cannot remember why i put the rest in though.  Wrong, other than boring.....