How wasnt Thurston sent off

[king_sirro]

Player laying on the ground, he comes over and KICKS him in the heads causing facial injuries, if thats not a send off offence what is?

 

[system]

He's a koala mate.

Love your av. :smiley:

 

[Geo]

I know….Origin.....different rules for different players....JOKE

 

[innsaneink]

On report…guess he'll be watching from a bench come sunday....awww shucks

 

[Guest]

Hopefully the judiciary see it for what it was. I can't believe Gould is saying it was a reflex action, he deliberately stuck his leg out and Williams came up with blood on his mouth. A dirty act from a constantly whingeing player.

 

[Balmain_Bug]

He will be watching Sundays game from home.

 

[innsaneink]

Hopefully the judiciary see it for what it was. I can't believe Gould is saying it was a reflex action, he deliberately stuck his leg out and Williams came up with blood on his mouth. A dirty act from a constantly whingeing player.

So youre saying you think he intended to kick williams in the mouth as opposed to trying to kick the ball out?

 

[Guest]

Hopefully the judiciary see it for what it was. I can't believe Gould is saying it was a reflex action, he deliberately stuck his leg out and Williams came up with blood on his mouth. A dirty act from a constantly whingeing player.

So youre saying you think he intended to kick williams in the mouth as opposed to trying to kick the ball out?

That's not what I'm saying, but he went in with his foot before anything else which in itself is dangerous and against the rules. Williams got up dusty, whether it was from Thurston's foot I don't know, but something got him.

 

[innsaneink]

He deserved a kick in the head the way hes marking Inglis….he should never play again

 

[Guest]

He deserved a kick in the head the way hes marking Inglis….he should never play again

Inglis has made him look like a park footballer tonight. Jennings has struggled defensively too. And as much as I dislike Whatmough, he's really got stuck into Qld tonight.

 

[king_sirro]

He deserved a kick in the head the way hes marking Inglis….he should never play again

He should never have been picked for game two let alone given another go after his debut performance. He's so overrated it isnt funny. The selectors should be shot.

 

[JRD]

Didnt merritt get suspened this year for using his foot when somebody was scoring a try?

 

[Danos]

In the context of the game. Penalty was sufficient.

 

[Zaibatsu]

In the context of the game. Penalty was sufficient.

Agree.

Penalty and move on, he collected the player in the face with his boot - yes, but it was never intentional, the exact same as a player falling into a tackle and being hit high, the penalty is justified but the intent non-existant.

Some people love to over-react, it comes as no surprise however that the Tigers play the Cowboys this week, I suppose that is having no effect on people's opinions on a Wests Tigers forum??

 

[innsaneink]

Same as the fact Thurstons a QLDer, as you are?

 

[Zaibatsu]

Same as the fact Thurstons a QLDer, as you are?

Just calling it how I see it Ink, if it was Brett Kimmorley then I'd make the same call.

 

[Ryan]

Didnt merritt get suspened this year for using his foot when somebody was scoring a try?

Yeah he did. He got one match for leading with his feet into Joel Reddy.

Tonight, Thurston deliberately kicked into a player. And whether he was aiming for his head or not, he connected and left him bloodied.

I don't give a sh*t if he's playing the Mighties this week, kicking is a cat act and there's no place for it in the game. I don't care if he was going for the ball (which still doesn't make it legal). I can't see him being suspended though as some superstars seem to get off a easier then players not of the same calibre. And post Origin and International judiciary meetings seem to go real quick, with the emphasis on player's being not guilty for offences and made available for their next club game.

 

[Craegus]

In the context of the game. Penalty was sufficient.

Agree.

Penalty and move on, he collected the player in the face with his boot - yes, but it was never intentional, the exact same as a player falling into a tackle and being hit high, the penalty is justified but the intent non-existant.

Some people love to over-react, it comes as no surprise however that the Tigers play the Cowboys this week, I suppose that is having no effect on people's opinions on a Wests Tigers forum??

I am a NSW supporter and a Wests Tigers supporter,

BUT

I have only just seen the incident, and I am being impartial here (I would prefer that Thurston plays, just so we can have a good contest on Sunday),

Thurston had the intent to displace the ball from a player attempting to score a try by using his foot.

The contact with the face may be an accident but, the rules of the game state that this action is illegal, as it can cause serious injury to the player attempting to score the try as they are unable to protect themself in the motion of scoring a try.

Thurston has a case to answer.

 

[LARDS]

In the context of the game. Penalty was sufficient.

Agree.

Penalty and move on, he collected the player in the face with his boot - yes, but it was never intentional, the exact same as a player falling into a tackle and being hit high, the penalty is justified but the intent non-existant.

Some people love to over-react, it comes as no surprise however that the Tigers play the Cowboys this week, I suppose that is having no effect on people's opinions on a Wests Tigers forum??

Thurstons free to play the Tiges.
You were right.
Looks like you blokes should be on the judicary.
(But I wouldn't take that as a compliment)

 

[diedpretty]

Maybe i saw this wrong or maybe i'm not as biased as some people on here - it looked as though Thurston was trying to disloge the ball from Butterfingers by kicking at it - yes that is a penalty and a reportable offence but it didn't look like he intentionally tried to kick him in the face - also later in the game Gidley saved a try by going in with his knees and dislodging the ball