Mitchells worse than BJ

[GNR4LIFE]

Of course the media have to take some blame for not turning up the heat. They had a field day with BJ, spread his face all over the back page of most eastern state rags and gave him prime time on television making him out to be a thug. Yet with Latrell they basically accept the league’s ruling. The NRL will do nothing unless they are shamed

Spot on....one is a thug act and the other is defending his teammate....what a spin!!!!

If either of them were on the street they would've both been locked up.....but Mitchell's is the true meaning of coward punch because reynolds wasn't even facing the same way

But you can make an argument LM was defending his teammate. Who was BJ defending when he cheap shotted Edwards?

 

[OzLuke]

Of course the media have to take some blame for not turning up the heat. They had a field day with BJ, spread his face all over the back page of most eastern state rags and gave him prime time on television making him out to be a thug. Yet with Latrell they basically accept the league’s ruling. The NRL will do nothing unless they are shamed

Spot on....one is a thug act and the other is defending his teammate....what a spin!!!!

If either of them were on the street they would've both been locked up.....but Mitchell's is the true meaning of coward punch because reynolds wasn't even facing the same way

But you can make an argument LM was defending his teammate. Who was BJ defending when he cheap shotted Edwards?

Nobody.....but can people argue that the the feeling for a teammate would be more than seeing your brother knocked out?So in effect if BJ had have taken Api out instantly it would've only been a two week penalty? Then BJ's just unlucky that he kept his cool at the start. Don't get me wrong I'm not condoning his brain snap, but clearly the NRL see it differently.

 

[Tigers_Tale]

When is the NRL going to get serious about this spoilt brat , Mr Mitchell, he has been hiding behind the fact that his is Aboriginal for so long, Firstly the Roosters pampered him, and they have a bit to answer for as well, as I feel they instigated this behaviour that Mr Mitchell displays. Mr Mitchell just keeps on pushing the buttons like any kid will do and see how much he can get away with. Bennett and Souths , their taking it to another level, Clearly shown when you see old man Bennett hugging Mr Mitchell when he was crying. The NRL , referees , media basically just slap him on the wrist each time Mr Mitchell does an indiscretion. In this recent game against the Tigers, sure he shows a few bits of individual brilliance, however during the game he runs in and hits Reynolds in the head with intent then takes him to the ground and follows through, he also shoves Lawrence in the face , which was just ignored by the referee, and then he finally gets penalised for another high shot preventing a try. This should have been deemed as a prefessional foul, when most players would have been sin binned, however we do at least receive a penalty. The judicial system gives Mr Mitchell a small fine and 2 weeks. This was alot worse than what BJ did. Also, its unbelievable how the media treat Mr Mitchell, they are all so quiet.

 

[Russell]

https://www.nrl.com/news/2020/07/13/graham-annesley-weekly-football-briefing---round-9/

He does these every week. Goes into a lot of detail about why LM vs BJ grading different.

Not saying I agree but have a look. It’s quite early in the video

I can't stomach to watch it, Annesley is as convincing as Donald Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon.

My eyes were bleeding.... his justification was pathetic. As he spoke it sounded like he didn’t believe it

Where are you Peter - you need to fix the referees and MRC.... NOW!

 

[Russell]

Didn’t Latrell also shove Lawrence in the face after he made a tackle but went unnoticed? so basically 3 incidents in one game

Forgot about this - remember being filthy about it at the time.

Getting away with it all... it's just the Tigers.

Latrine had heaps of time to consider how to tackle Garner.

How did they come up with "careless tackle"

Plain and simple, no doubt its was "Attacking the head of a player"

So, Bin and after the Reynolds 4 weeks easy.

Obviously they could still see the invisible flag he had draped over his shoulders.

 

[InBenjiWeTrust]

When is the NRL going to get serious about this spoilt brat , Mr Mitchell, he has been hiding behind the fact that his is Aboriginal for so long, Firstly the Roosters pampered him, and they have a bit to answer for as well, as I feel they instigated this behaviour that Mr Mitchell displays. Mr Mitchell just keeps on pushing the buttons like any kid will do and see how much he can get away with. Bennett and Souths , their taking it to another level, Clearly shown when you see old man Bennett hugging Mr Mitchell when he was crying. The NRL , referees , media basically just slap him on the wrist each time Mr Mitchell does an indiscretion. In this recent game against the Tigers, sure he shows a few bits of individual brilliance, however during the game he runs in and hits Reynolds in the head with intent then takes him to the ground and follows through, he also shoves Lawrence in the face , which was just ignored by the referee, and then he finally gets penalised for another high shot preventing a try. This should have been deemed as a prefessional foul, when most players would have been sin binned, however we do at least receive a penalty. The judicial system gives Mr Mitchell a small fine and 2 weeks. This was alot worse than what BJ did. Also, its unbelievable how the media treat Mr Mitchell, they are all so quiet.

We were lucky this time!:face_with_rolling_eyes:

 

[Newtown]

Of course the media have to take some blame for not turning up the heat. They had a field day with BJ, spread his face all over the back page of most eastern state rags and gave him prime time on television making him out to be a thug. Yet with Latrell they basically accept the league’s ruling. The NRL will do nothing unless they are shamed

Spot on....one is a thug act and the other is defending his teammate....what a spin!!!!

If either of them were on the street they would've both been locked up.....but Mitchell's is the true meaning of coward punch because reynolds wasn't even facing the same way

But you can make an argument LM was defending his teammate. Who was BJ defending when he cheap shotted Edwards?

I find it difficult to think that LM was defending his teammate.There was no reason at all for LM to coat hang Reynolds at all. I find it much easier to believe that LM was on angry pills throughout the match and knew he could get away with almost anything.

 

[innsaneink]

By Mark Levy

Source? Who is Mark Levy?

I looked him up, a guy from 2GB and seems to do stuff with channel nine.

If it is the same Mark Levy he played fullback for the Tigers and Eels.

Two different blokes.

Damien Cook was asked this.morning if he believed Reynolds kick was accidental... He ummed and ahhed, beated around the bush, mentioned his prior tripping incidents and not once said 'yes, accidental'

 

[happy_tiger]

But ...But....But .....I thought Vlandy's had all the answers and was a God

 

[4jtigers]

By Mark Levy

Source? Who is Mark Levy?

I looked him up, a guy from 2GB and seems to do stuff with channel nine.

If it is the same Mark Levy he played fullback for the Tigers and Eels.

Two different blokes.

Damien Cook was asked this.morning if he believed Reynolds kick was accidental... He ummed and ahhed, beated around the bush, mentioned his prior tripping incidents and not once said 'yes, accidental'

he's an idiot if he can't see and/or say it was accidental... and here I thought he's smart

 

[TrueTiger]

By Mark Levy

Source? Who is Mark Levy?

I looked him up, a guy from 2GB and seems to do stuff with channel nine.

If it is the same Mark Levy he played fullback for the Tigers and Eels.

Two different blokes.

Damien Cook was asked this.morning if he believed Reynolds kick was accidental... He ummed and ahhed, beated around the bush, mentioned his prior tripping incidents and not once said 'yes, accidental'

he's an idiot if he can't see and/or say it was accidental... and here I thought he's smart

In Cooks own head he knows the kick was completely accidental.....
His response was to suit the Bunnies narative in looking after Latrine...

 

[gato]

By Mark Levy

Source? Who is Mark Levy?

I looked him up, a guy from 2GB and seems to do stuff with channel nine.

If it is the same Mark Levy he played fullback for the Tigers and Eels.

Two different blokes.

Damien Cook was asked this.morning if he believed Reynolds kick was accidental... He ummed and ahhed, beated around the bush, mentioned his prior tripping incidents and not once said 'yes, accidental'

I noticed on last nights 360 they didn't question cook or Benji about any of it even though just prior they were talking about it. Crawley is an idiot the way he was carrying on

 

[hobbo1]

By Mark Levy

Source? Who is Mark Levy?

I looked him up, a guy from 2GB and seems to do stuff with channel nine.

If it is the same Mark Levy he played fullback for the Tigers and Eels.

Two different blokes.

Damien Cook was asked this.morning if he believed Reynolds kick was accidental... He ummed and ahhed, beated around the bush, mentioned his prior tripping incidents and not once said 'yes, accidental'

I noticed on last nights 360 they didn't question cook or Benji about any of it even though just prior they were talking about it. Crawley is an idiot the way he was carrying on

Crawley’s a twat

 

[JD Tiger]

Of course the media have to take some blame for not turning up the heat. They had a field day with BJ, spread his face all over the back page of most eastern state rags and gave him prime time on television making him out to be a thug. Yet with Latrell they basically accept the league’s ruling. The NRL will do nothing unless they are shamed

Spot on....one is a thug act and the other is defending his teammate....what a spin!!!!

If either of them were on the street they would've both been locked up.....but Mitchell's is the true meaning of coward punch because reynolds wasn't even facing the same way

But you can make an argument LM was defending his teammate. Who was BJ defending when he cheap shotted Edwards?

Defending his mate? It was a revenge dog shot, not done in defence of his mate, but in retaliation. Retaliating is not defence, it is hitting back. Reynolds was standing by the player he accidentally kicked, seeing if he was alright. Dogshot Mitchell came and hit him because he was angry and a thug.

In no sport or country or legal system I have ever heard of are you allowed to hit someone in revenge. I understand the action, it can be rationalised, but it is not permitted.

 

[JD Tiger]

BJ hit out in anger, but there was no intent to harm the bloke. He just hit out at whoever was nearby out of frustration. Not good, but not malicious. An act of opportunity.

Dogshot Mitchell clearly had intent to harm Reynolds, you could see the anger in his face. How that wasn't even considered by the judiciary is testament to their inadequacy.

 

[Speed2burn]

If Latrell did that outside of the footy field he’d face assault charges and possible jail.

Not really sure what Crawley is on about, is he a souffs supporter? The only people defending LM are the ones that are involved with souffs in some way

 

[GNR4LIFE]

BJ hit out in anger, but there was no intent to harm the bloke. He just hit out at whoever was nearby out of frustration. Not good, but not malicious. An act of opportunity.

Dogshot Mitchell clearly had intent to harm Reynolds, you could see the anger in his face. How that wasn't even considered by the judiciary is testament to their inadequacy.

So you make excuses for BJ, yet with LM it’s black and white. A dog shot. Try looking through both eyes instead of one

 

[JD Tiger]

BJ hit out in anger, but there was no intent to harm the bloke. He just hit out at whoever was nearby out of frustration. Not good, but not malicious. An act of opportunity.

Dogshot Mitchell clearly had intent to harm Reynolds, you could see the anger in his face. How that wasn't even considered by the judiciary is testament to their inadequacy.


So you make excuses for BJ, yet with LM it’s black and white. A dog shot. Try looking through both eyes instead of one

I wasn't making excuses, I was drawing a comparison. BJ should have gotten into trouble over his action. Comparatively less trouble than Dogshot Mitchell, because his action carried intent.

That's not bias (well maybe calling Mitchell Dogshot Mitchell is showing bias sure), but that's not bias in viewing the two acts.

Dogshot Mitchell's act was sentenced the same as Reynolds act. In your opinion does that seem reasonable?

 

[GNR4LIFE]

BJ hit out in anger, but there was no intent to harm the bloke. He just hit out at whoever was nearby out of frustration. Not good, but not malicious. An act of opportunity.

Dogshot Mitchell clearly had intent to harm Reynolds, you could see the anger in his face. How that wasn't even considered by the judiciary is testament to their inadequacy.


So you make excuses for BJ, yet with LM it’s black and white. A dog shot. Try looking through both eyes instead of one

I wasn't making excuses, I was drawing a comparison. BJ should have gotten into trouble over his action. Comparatively less trouble than Dogshot Mitchell, because his action carried intent.

That's not bias (well maybe calling Mitchell Dogshot Mitchell is showing bias sure), but that's not bias in viewing the two acts.

Dogshot Mitchell's act was sentenced the same as Reynolds act. In your opinion does that seem reasonable?

Yes, cos they were as both as bad as each other. Don’t know how you can condemn one but make excuses for the other

 

[JD Tiger]

BJ hit out in anger, but there was no intent to harm the bloke. He just hit out at whoever was nearby out of frustration. Not good, but not malicious. An act of opportunity.

Dogshot Mitchell clearly had intent to harm Reynolds, you could see the anger in his face. How that wasn't even considered by the judiciary is testament to their inadequacy.


So you make excuses for BJ, yet with LM it’s black and white. A dog shot. Try looking through both eyes instead of one

I wasn't making excuses, I was drawing a comparison. BJ should have gotten into trouble over his action. Comparatively less trouble than Dogshot Mitchell, because his action carried intent.

That's not bias (well maybe calling Mitchell Dogshot Mitchell is showing bias sure), but that's not bias in viewing the two acts.

Dogshot Mitchell's act was sentenced the same as Reynolds act. In your opinion does that seem reasonable?


Yes, cos they were as both as bad as each other. Don’t know you can condemn one but make excuses for the other

Did you actually read what I wrote? I didn't make excuses for BJ. I was putting it in context. I was not excusing his behaviour, how else can I say this?

I disagree with your opinion that Reynolds act and Mitchell's act were as bad as each other, but that's only my opinion, so fair enough. The judiciary agrees with you.