* From years of reading and posting here, I'll let you know
@jirskyr that I always read your posts and really respect your opinions and how you have yours and let others have theirs.
So I'm pretty sure you won't mind me having a different one. 😊
--------
------------------------
I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not in a place to speak in absolutes about whether or not they have grounds to litigate.
But Lee Hangipantelis is (I know - not his area of expertise. We've been through that).
And if the previous post (screen cap below) is correct, why did V'Landys say he "hoped they would not commence legal action"?
Why is it that shortly after the fact, the ARLC (of which he is the chairman!) called for their own investigation into it?
How's that going btw? Anyone heard?
And why do the tigers have to have precedent?
It's common knowledge this is unprecedented; That's why it's such an issue.
Just because no nrl club has previously taken the nrl to court over...
[a missed penalty for illegal recommencement of play (with 1 second left on the clock); the ref blowing the whistle; an ignored captains challenge where the ref clearly states "it's been cleared"; the bunker talking to the referee when, afaik, is not supposed to even happen during regular play (?); accepting a captains challenge against a call that never existed; having the bunker rule that a player has committed a foul - that even the nrl's own head of football publicly said was wrong; awarding a penalty for said wrong call to the team 1 point behind after 80 minutes and a tackle had been affected; the penalty being successfully converted, thus winning the game for that team]
... And won the case is no reason for them not to try.
There's a first time for everything.
With yet another insulting little snipe, he makes the "we'd be in court every week if we let this happen" comment that is derisive and intended to dilute the real issue and make such a notion thought foolish.
I honestly believe that the exact opposite of what V'Landys says about it setting a bad precedent is true.
From that moment until they decide they're ready to talk about the rules, they can now be exploited and should a similar situation happen in the meantime, precedent has now been set that a captain can challenge a call that hasn't even been made, even when everyone thinks its full time.
The bunker can only review plays resulting in a try or captains challenge. The bunker will review the entire play from it's commencement to its conclusion. The first infringement of the play nullifies all subsequent ones, even the one being disputed, and dictates the ruling.
Well none of those seem to be true now because that's not what happened!
That is what I believe is the Pandora's box.
To me it's as simple as this:
The game has rules.
A team won a game in an amazing comeback, scoring two tries in the last 5 minutes, fairly and according to the rules of the game.
Yes!!! An all too rare great moment for any tigers fan!
The rules of the game were then clearly not followed (in not just one, but at least three instances) - by the officials employed by the very association that wrote them!
Not only that, but at the start of each year they send them to every club so it is all clear, in black and white.
Hmm, black and white makes grey. Maybe that's the "grey area"? But I digress....
In a display of either astonishing incompetence, or possibly 'some other' lurking reason, the team who won the game fairly and squarely, according to the rules, somehow lost.
It's a sport. The very word is synonymous with fair play (in Australia at least! 🤣) . Be a sport. Show good sportsmanship....
I shouldn't be so upset about this.
But I think anyone with a half decent sense of fairness knows what's right and what's wrong.
Any spin V'Landys or anyone else wants to put on it, this is just plain wrong.
In my view, if I've done something wrong that can be made right, then I'm fking doing it.
View attachment 2206
