Burg-arse summoned to explain his words

[roosterchook]

Glad he mentioned JWH. Missing such an important game for a trivial matter like that to me is witch hunting. Or rather rooster hunting. What about Slater last year clearly guilty but let go free. The trip didn’t look deliberate to me at all. It’s a kangaroo judiciary letting guilty players off when it suits their agenda but throwing the book at rooster players. What petty mindedness for Jarrad to miss out on a technicality. He shouldn’t have been charged. The referee didn’t even penalise him.

[Arties Pie]

Correct me please if I am mistaken but was Jared suspended for a game for tripping or for the fact like Burgess they couldn't fine him again and had to cop the one game suspension.

[ism22]

"The integrity of the system and the people in it should never be questioned." - Todd Greenberg.

It's that sort of head in the sand attitude that allows corruption to breed. The integrity of the system and the people in it should always be under review, in my opinion. To be clear, I am not saying that they are corrupt, just that if no attention is paid to those matters, the circumstances exist in which a human being could be corrupted. I suspect that he is meaning to defend the integrity of the system and the people in it and that's fair enough, but if that's what he means that's what he should say. There is a hint of trying to shut down the discussion and that's what worries me.

They want it to be like a court or administrative tribunal as that's clearly their model. Within legal fraternities, it's a massive no-no for you to question a court's integrity and by doing so publicly, you risk losing your registration as a lawyer because you're corroding public trust in your own profession.

I'll be frank, the NRL 'judiciary' is in fact the very definition of a kangaroo court (non-lawyers sitting on a panel that's run by the same organisation that's not only heading the case against players, but has also tried to entice them with a discount if they plead guilty... something something... all their bills are being paid by the media organisations that provide the footage, commentate on what they think's naughty and force players like JWH to face the judiciary, even when the refs haven't put them on report, making the whole reporting process a joke).

However, I can get why an organisation would have a code of conduct that says 'you cannot publicly trash talk our integrity'. I mean if you work for a bank and publicly say 'there's no integrity in this bank... we rip off customers, put profits first and our internal complaints/appeals process is an absolute farce' then you'll probably lose your job. IMO it all comes back to not biting the hand that feeds you. In Burgess' case he's lucky that he fed Fox and Channel 9 with a good gossip story, so he'll probably just get a slap on the wrist.

[Bansai Pipeline]

I'm all for Burgess here. The little tin pot dictator in charge of the NRL is insufferable.

[Keith]

Sam Burgarse is an irrelevant prick , he will only ever be remembered as the Squirrel gripping, hair pulling , dick pictures grub.
He's a very small man in a big frame.

[gragra]

if you want to compare the nrl judiciary to a court case, when a jury panel is before the court for selection, anyone who knows the accused or has an affiliation to the accused can not be on the jury. And the defence has the right to reject panelists too. So having ex-players on the judiciary where by association they will have biases as to whether to find a polyer guilty is inherently a flawed system. I think the completely inconsistent findings this year shows the system is flawed and as grubby a player as Burgess is, he is right...you don't have consistent citings or penalties.

[The Skeez]

Interesting to read Andrew Webster have a crack at him when he is usually quite sympathetic to him.

Now that Vlandys is in charge, you can’t question the NRLs integrity and get away with it.

If Souths win this weekend, wait for the media furore next week when he likely gets fined.

[NorthChook]

If Burgess is expected to be fined money over this how come its not a similar deal to when players receive fines for on-field matters? According to their system you would think because he hasn't had a great record with the judiciary, being fined again even if it is because he is criticising the integrity of the system should result in him sitting out time again? They'll say its different so doesn't apply but it just doesn't seem consistent - the whole thing is a mess now

[The Lip]

If Burgess is expected to be fined money over this how come its not a similar deal to when players receive fines for on-field matters? According to their system you would think because he hasn't had a great record with the judiciary, being fined again even if it is because he is criticising the integrity of the system should result in him sitting out time again? They'll say its different so doesn't apply but it just doesn't seem consistent - the whole thing is a mess now

Sorry but that’s a ridiculous suggestion- give yourself an uppercut!

[chopstiks]

... all their bills are being paid by the media organisations that provide the footage, commentate on what they think's naughty and force players like JWH to face the judiciary, even when the refs haven't put them on report, making the whole reporting process a joke).

This !!!!!

[NorthChook]

Sorry but that’s a ridiculous suggestion- give yourself an uppercut!

I wasn't saying that it is right, I was just pointing out the lack of consistency - their system (if not a stupid system) is to punish repeat offenders (of any charge) with harsher penalties and lack of leniency (ie you no longer get charged money, you lose game time). Going off their system I don't get why a charge from accusing the judiciary is different to a charge on field. A charge is a charge.

Whether Sam is in the right is a different matter - but if they deem his accusation is an offence why does this charge have a different set of rules

If he did this on field this would be a charge from the game and he would be sitting out because of the rules. Why because he said outside makes it that different?

The flaw in their system is that any charge counts. If you trip every game you should be suspended till you stop, same with hair pulling etc. What doesnt add up is that someone who has never tripped before is being punished because of unrelated incidences.

[Kingbilly]

**** Burgess, nothing but a damn hypocrite.He should have been suspended in 2014 and missed the GF.
I am sick and tired of hearing about this prick of a thing will rejoice when he is no longer in the NRL

What about Bennett, since he has joined Souffs he is like a ****ing party clown. I guess he fits in there.

I love JWH but he pushes the envelope and is now paying for it.

Does burgess realise if he gets want he wants then there is a chance he will never play another NRL game again.

I know the judiciary is not the greatest, but most of the inconsistencies are created by viewing the results through rose coloured glasses. Most people seem to apply different standards to players of their team to the players of other teams.

[Kingbilly]

The flaw in their system is that any charge counts. If you trip every game you should be suspended till you stop, same with hair pulling etc. What doesnt add up is that someone who has never tripped before is being punished because of unrelated incidences.

But that isn't true. Those are fineable offences but due to previous other offences they coped a suspension. There is also reductions for "clean skins" and loading for repeat offenders. Did you notice that most offences do not have points that are divided by 100 they are more like 150 or 175, that is an inbuilt system to get repeat offenders

[The Axe]

I’ve seen too much big business bullshit.

potentially burgearse will be rewarded with a post footy role on the judiciary when he can join the pie man

[Johnny73]

Garlick is independent from clubs is he?

https://www.garlospies.com.au/about-us/2/community

Want to blame anything for Sergeant Crackleback being pissed, blame Freddy's prick. Some people don't like being cuckolds.