Pindan Premier Round 8

[GIGS20]

Call me a "Mango" or a "Mungo" I don't care but a "Munga"! That's outrageous!

Manga? Mamba? Manta?

the list goes on!

[westies man]

Yeah fair call Dinky to all of the above and it's not the players at Cott anyone has a problem with, I personally have found them to be all friendly and genuine nice guy's like all other rugby players at all other clubs except that meathead Whittaker.It's the Cott hierarchy that pull all these little stunt's that everyone has a problem with

[Hansie]

RM - you'll find this amusing re the Judiaciary.

a few years back +/- 11 or so, I was asked to be our club's advocate at a judicial hearing for a red card at a game that I witnessed. Red card was for striking, this was before video analysis. I was 110% sure that whilst a swing was made - absolutely no contact was made, in fact the intended victim laughed at the strikee - ref still handed out red card.

Anyway Judiciary gave our poor fella 3 weeks. I was thoroughly pee'd off and then was told by a respected Member;

Hansie - this is no court of Law - there is no presumption of innocence, there is no prosecution and defence - there is no jury. Our job as the judiciary is to interpret the law and implement the punishment as set out in the IRB rulebook. The player is guilty before he even enters the judiciary room, we just deliberate on the remorse and/or explanation of why he did it and then we chat amongst ourselves on the appropriate penalty.

[The InnFORCEr]

A Kangaroo Court

A kangaroo court is "a mock court in which the principles of law and justice are disregarded or perverted".[1] It is essentially where the defendant has already been deemed guilty, and has little if any opportunities to object or defend himself or herself.

[Ecky]

....whilst a swing was made - absolutely no contact was made, in fact the intended victim laughed at the strikee - ref still handed out red card.

So he swung a punch, intending to strike a victim, but missed.

Did that make it ok then? Is it only if it connects that it's bad? Intention has no bearing?

[RumourMonger]

It's the Cott hierarchy that pull all these little stunt's that everyone has a problem

How about this idea for the CRAC Hansie?

Replace the Judiciary come Kangaroo Court with a Public Stoning each week. No women allowed.

First week we could get the Cott coach and Whittaker up there. I'm sure it'd be a sellout.

Another fundraising idea - I hope you're putting all these great suggestions up to your Board connections.

[DinkyDi]

How about this idea for the CRAC Hansie?

Replace the Judiciary come Kangaroo Court with a Public Stoning each week. No women allowed.

First week we could get the Cott coach and Whittaker up there. I'm sure it'd be a sellout.

Another fundraising idea - I hope you're putting all these great suggestions up to your Board connections.

HARRY THE HAGGLER: Stones, sir?

MANDY: Naah. They've got a lot there, lying around on the ground.

HARRY THE HAGGLER: Oh, not like these, sir. Look at this. Feel the quality of that. That's craftsmanship, sir.

MANDY: Hmmm. Aah, all right. We'll have, uh, two with points and... a big flat one.

BRIAN: Could I have a flat one, Mum?

MANDY: Shh!

BRIAN: Sorry. Dad.

MANDY: Ehh, all right. Two points, ah, two flats, and a packet of gravel.

HARRY THE HAGGLER: Packet of gravel. Should be a good one this afternoon.

MANDY: Hehh?

HARRY THE HAGGLER: Local boy.

MANDY: Oh, good.

HARRY THE HAGGLER: Enjoy yourselves.

[Hansie]

Ecky , I actually tried to contest the charge on a technicality saying how can you call it a strike when no contact was made? But you are right and hence you're a ref and I am not capable.

The real purpose of describing my dealing with the judiciary was to make everyone aware that it is not a court of law.

[Ecky]

Yeah, nah, I understand the sentiment behind the contesting attempt, but it was an unbelievably long shot, imo.

Keep up the excellent work -most enjoyable reading almost all of the recent posts in here.

Does anyone high-ranking (or formerly so) know what avenues there are to find out the judiciary results? Are the results "public documents"?

[The Bear]

They should be open and transparent !!

[Piston]

Yeah, nah, I understand the sentiment behind the contesting attempt, but it was an unbelievably long shot, imo.

Keep up the excellent work -most enjoyable reading almost all of the recent posts in here.

Does anyone high-ranking (or formerly so) know what avenues there are to find out the judiciary results? Are the results "public documents"?

If you are referring to the "little" incident you had last week, I heard he got rubbed out till end of 2014!
Posted via Mobile Device

[fulvio sammut]

Who was he from and what did he do?

These riddles are becoming tiresome.

[Ecky]

If you are referring to the "little" incident you had last week, I heard he got rubbed out till end of 2014!
Posted via Mobile Device

I wasn't specifically referring to that, as I have been made aware of the result. I was referring generally, as I am aware of quite a few red cards this year and it got me wondering if there was some central register of the outcomes.

Who was he from and what did he do?

These riddles are becoming tiresome.

"He" is a player from Swan Suburbs. He was sent from the field as a result of intimidatory actions (both physical and verbal) towards an accredited match official. There were certain threats made subsequent to the send off and those threats were partially carried out post match.

In all it was a very eventful afternoon.

[fulvio sammut]

Thanks for the info Ecky.

[RugbyRef]

In a Judiciary, unless proven otherwise, the fact a red card was shown has to be enough to give the affected person the label of already guilty. The Referee has already written a report stating why the player was sent off.

The accused club then has their options:

1, fight the cause that they are innocent and prove why. (Video to show mistaken identity perhaps).

2, admit guilt and hope for a more lenient sanction.

3, fight the cause on a technicality and hope it goes your way (i.e ref report says you punched, but victim claims it was a slap).

I fully support the right for the club to choose which of the three they choose, but I believe if you choose 3, you are almost admitting guilt, but looking for a loophole. Referees are not lawyers, and to use lawyers to analyse their reports to find an avenue for appeal is hardly sporting. The first two, IMHO, are the way teams with a respect for the game and the law/refs will always strive.
Posted via Mobile Device