Frankas wrote:A clean record means nothing in the NRL, if you brake the rules your punished for it, no matter what your disciplinary record says, there system his a lot more black and white than ours, what seems more like a rainbow, we need one charge for each offence, so fans from all clubs know no club gets preferential treatment for certain players.
Not correct Frankas a clean record DOES mean something in the NRL as they have a 7 year rule. But you arevright that the system is back and white. The NRL in trying to make the disciplinary system fairer operate a system whereby penalties attract a pre-determined amount of points.
The Match Review Committee state the charge i.e. Dangerous Throw then grade it between 1-5. 5 being most serious. So each grade has an amount of points attached to it. So once a player is charged and the offence is graded then the player, the club and all fans know what points the player will get.
So the Sinfield head but would ge graded lesser than the 'Liverpool Kiss' that Big Mal used to great effect over here
Each 100 points a player accrues means he misses 1 game. So if a player is charged and is given a penalty of 250 points for a dangerous throw then he misses 2 games and the remaining 50 is carried to the next offence. So if he is charged again and given another penalty of 50 points then that makes 100 points so he misses 1 more game.
They also have a rule whereby if a player has not been convicted of any charge for 7 years then they get a 25% reduction on the points given for a particular offence.
Early guilty pleas also mean that the points given can be reduced by 25%.
This system is simple and clear and it is one I have got used to in 8 years over here. The RFL one appears muddled and contentious and leads to supporters of one club wanting an opposition player to cop a big ban whilst that players supporters want a lesser ban.
](*,)
