Zane Tetavano: only 1 week

Just saw that Zane Tetavano got his suspension reduced from a possible 5 weeks down to 1 for his head-high tackle that resulted in a bloke knocked out and medi-cabbed from the field. That’d be right! What a joke.
Unca Nick and his wallet have done it again it seems. The NRL came out and made a point of saying contact with the head will be dealt with harshly and this is their penalty? There wasn’t a huge amount wrong with the tackle apart from FIRST CONTACT BEING MADE WITH THE HEAD.
The judiciary is laughable, anyone remember Bryce Gibbs getting 3 or 4 weeks for an accidental knee on Luke Burt in 2010 or thereabouts? Or Marty Taupau when he played for WT getting 4 weeks for a love-tap of a hit on James Maloney? The double-standards in the NRL are astonishing.

I think they had a good case…

@:

I think they had a good case…

As in what, the shoulder to the chin that knocked a bloke out cold?
Or the not insignificant fact that he is a Rooster, a club whose players always seem to get “fortunate” at the judiciary?
Can’t see the difference between his hit and Sia Soliola’s on Slater myself, first contact was to the head in both instances. Slater was falling to the ground more than the Titans player if anything. One player gets 4 weeks and the other gets 1……it is a joke.
Mumps Robinson described it as a “perfect hit” at the judiciary, hope he sees it that way this weekend if Mitchell Pearce or Boyd Cordner cop a similar one. Doubt he would.

Gotta agree with OP….the inconsistency is a joke. first contact was the head

How Lussick was found not guilty of tripping (his 2nd or third offencee too mind you) has me baffled as well

Semi Final time, Theses Clubs get away with murder.

It would’ve been a disgrace if he got 5 weeks, absolutely no intent in it.

@:

It would’ve been a disgrace if he got 5 weeks, absolutely no intent in it.

Doesn’t have to be intent if the contact is with the head - careless and reckless.

@:

@:

It would’ve been a disgrace if he got 5 weeks, absolutely no intent in it.

Doesn’t have to be intent if the contact is with the head - careless and reckless.

Can’t agree with you there mate (On the careless and reckless bit), It was a solid front on hit and it was unlucky that the shoulder hit the head. The outrage seems to be on the fact that Nakubuwai go knocked out. Worse stuff happens every weekend but the NRL seems to let most things go unless there is an injury, or they feel the need to make an example of a low profile player.

@:

@:

It would’ve been a disgrace if he got 5 weeks, absolutely no intent in it.

Doesn’t have to be intent if the contact is with the head - careless and reckless.

This was the point they made when they said they’d get heavy - that a player’s head needed to be protected - and started dishing out severe penalties.

As usual, that hard and fast rule didn’t last long became very subjective. If the same tackle was made back then and the player was knocked unconscious the penalty would have much more severe.

Should of got life and the Rorters thrown out of the comp!

The campaign against the dangerous head hits goes on for a week or too then drops of until someone gets a bad one, and even then the offending player is unlucky if he gets more than a penalty there’s been quite a few that deserved a send off this year, but we can’t spoil a game for the tv viewers, can we?
A lot gets said about player sFety, but until someone sucessfully sues the nrl , it will go on with excuses over and over.
ANY contact with the head or the neck( there’s hardly a set that goes by that doesn’t involve an arm around the neck in at least one tackle) should be taken out of the game.
It’s not necessary.
I’m just wondering who will be the first to deliberately take out the opposition gamebreaker in the Finals.
Ita worth taking the chance now with the no send off attitude that referees seem to be running with.
The GF is the best game for anyone to try it as they won’t get sent off, and a few weeks off at the start of next season is not a problem for anyone if they can get a Cronk or or a Cleary out of the game early . With the concussion laws in the game now, a team can lose their top player even if the head hit isn’t a really bad one. Without the send off hanging over them, I’ll be surprised if someone doesn’t take the gamble. In a GF there’s no worrying about tomorrow

@:

@:

@:

It would’ve been a disgrace if he got 5 weeks, absolutely no intent in it.

Doesn’t have to be intent if the contact is with the head - careless and reckless.

This was the point they made when they said they’d get heavy - that a player’s head needed to be protected - and started dishing out severe penalties.

As usual, that hard and fast rule didn’t last long became very subjective. If the same tackle was made back then and the player was knocked unconscious the penalty would have much more severe.

The Soliola hit was late but there was no intent to hit Slater on the head. Slater slipped - Tigga - what do you reckon? Soliola got charged incorrectly for 5 weeks? should’ve been a week too right? very unlucky that Slater (the grub) slipped aye 😒

@:

@:

@:

@:

It would’ve been a disgrace if he got 5 weeks, absolutely no intent in it.

Doesn’t have to be intent if the contact is with the head - careless and reckless.

This was the point they made when they said they’d get heavy - that a player’s head needed to be protected - and started dishing out severe penalties.

As usual, that hard and fast rule didn’t last long became very subjective. If the same tackle was made back then and the player was knocked unconscious the penalty would have much more severe.

The Soliola hit was late but there was no intent to hit Slater on the head. Slater slipped - Tigga - what do you reckon? Soliola got charged incorrectly for 5 weeks? should’ve been a week too right? very unlucky that Slater (the grub) slipped aye 😒

Oh spare me! Not even comparable.

The Tetavano hit is almost the same as the Simon Dwyer hit on JWH back in the day, except Tetavano actually used wrapped his arms. Reckon Dwyer should’ve been rubbed out for 5 weeks for that hit?

@:

@:

@:

@:

Doesn’t have to be intent if the contact is with the head - careless and reckless.

This was the point they made when they said they’d get heavy - that a player’s head needed to be protected - and started dishing out severe penalties.

As usual, that hard and fast rule didn’t last long became very subjective. If the same tackle was made back then and the player was knocked unconscious the penalty would have much more severe.

The Soliola hit was late but there was no intent to hit Slater on the head. Slater slipped - Tigga - what do you reckon? Soliola got charged incorrectly for 5 weeks? should’ve been a week too right? very unlucky that Slater (the grub) slipped aye 😒

Oh spare me! Not even comparable.

The Tetavano hit is almost the same as the Simon Dwyer hit on JWH back in the day, except Tetavano actually used wrapped his arms. Reckon Dwyer should’ve been rubbed out for 5 weeks for that hit?

Absolute rubbish - shoulder charges were legal when Dwyer hit JWH.

So rubbed out for what?

i didn’t see it

did it make contact to the head?

i remember the hit i think he put on against the bulldogs which sent Hoppa to the hospital with an eye socket injury

Recent Topics

Support our community by clicking here and joining our Forum Support Scheme

Can’t log in or access your account?
Send an email to contact@weststigersforum.com and we’ll get you back online.