0
Where is the judiciary heading?
As far as I am aware it is comprised of a group of well intentioned older rugby enthusiasts who have done their time as players, spent the next twenty years of their lives as club administrators, still have the passion and fire in their bellies, but want something else to do.
All very well so far. But we have 17 clubs in the competition. Ten playing for high stakes; where local rugby all begins and ends.
Let's just concentrate on those.
Fred was a top player for Nedper. Spent 25 years on the committee after he retired as a player. Spent 5 as club president. He was also a good mate of Joe Bloggs, on the RugbyWA board, and was convinced it would be a good idea to sit on the judiciary tribunal. His election was easily arranged - you nominate, Fred, that twat from Palrock won't be considered, and hey presto Fred is on the tribunal.
So, four weeks into the season, Fred sits on his first tribunal hearing. Palrock player Rangi Smit charged with stomping. Dirty bastard. Video shows what could have been his foot in a position that, if he was a contortionist, it was possible, if his legs were two metres long and bent backwards, possibly, just possibly, it could have happened the way the report says.
Referee is Kim Snurd. Worst ref in the comp. Recipient of a blind pension. Biased as a bowling ball. But he saw it. Yes indeedy do.
Deliberate attack on an innocent player. No excuse. Ran in and jumped on his head out of nowhere, says Kim.
Actually Palrock are playing Nedper next week. Smit is Palrock's best player, will probably win the game for them if he is on the field.
Fred is an honest man. What to do? The video shows it couldn't possibly have happened,, despite what Snurdy says.
Tariff says 8 weeks if found guilty. Logic says it's bullshit. Self interest says if Smit doesn't play next week we'll win. Conscience says the poor saps done nothing to deserve 8 weeks.
What to do, what to do?
Compromise.
One week.
The saps relieved. Fred's conscience is assuaged, Kim has been vindicated. Nedper will have an advantage going into next weeks game.
Win win.
Fair enough?
Or is it better that the Tribunal is constituted by a professional magistrate, with no connection with any club, or indeed with rugby, entrusted to make a reasoned decision. On the evidence. Dispassionately.
Something like the AFL.
How long are we going to be a joke?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by fulvio sammut
