Dictatorial authority of the NRL turning them into bullies

[King Salvo]

Yet you conveniently forgot to add that he said it needs “ fine tuning” as well. So selective

I don't know what Nick Politis meant by Fine tuning which i suggest you wouldn't either although as I have previously said fine tuning may involve the match officials and bunker being trained up on what grading's the foul play or misconduct would be before deciding a course of action.- penalty/ penalty and on report / penalty and on report and sin bin / send off

Paul Gallon suggested someone from the MRC be in the bunker to say that's a grade 1 or 2 or whatever although later on other members of the MRC might not agree with that MRC members initial view.

Questions may also be asked about their independence in the process if they are assisting in on field decisions when their role is an off field one in reviewing all completed matches and charging players for relevant foul play and misconduct incidents.

Showing the incident in slow-mo can make an incident look worse than what it actually is - so should incidents of foul play or misconduct be viewed at normal speed only?

The issue of accidental or incidental contact is a grey area - if a player does this a few times in a game and or on a regular basis is this still accidental though? - i.e arm hitting the ball or shoulder of the ball carrier and then striking the ball carriers head.

I thought Keary's head slam vs Knights and when he was held up by 2 Storm players and Branko Lee attacked his ribs were deliberate actions but not penalised on field or subject to any MRC charge.

It is easier for the NRL to have a blanket rule on contact to the head or neck instead of leaving it up to interpretation or mitigating circumstances - as who know if these are deliberate or not.

Bit like the 7 tackle rule which was brought in to stop teams deliberately kicking the ball dead to set their defence - which somehow then included ball carrier knocking on or losing the ball in the in goal area and the attacking kick going dead in goal , missed field goals or attacking kick caught in goal on the full by the defending team - none of which are deliberate and in reality should only be a 20 metre restart 6 tackle set.

[King Salvo]

You finally acknowledge it is not the minority of players and shifted your narrative from NRL not pandering to the minority to supporting dictator PVL slapping everyone out the way. The good news is the constitution gives 16 clubs the power to sack PVL. That was the whole point of 16 teams unanimously condemning PVL's "no consultation" approach. It was a warning shot that he had better change his attitude or they will make moves to remove him.

Again conflating foul play with legal tackles.

You should tell Robbo to hire you as defensive coach. Tell him Radley, Friend, Cordner tackling technique all wrong. I suspect the conversation will go something like this:

I don't think the Chooks or Vermin will backing any sacking of V'Landy's- so your actually going against Nick Politis - what next you will want to oust Nick as well

Two of rugby league’s most influential powerbrokers have laid to rest any suggestion ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys has lost the support of the clubs amid an apparent clamour from some players to have him removed.

South Sydney chairman Nick Pappas and his Sydney Roosters counterpart Nick Politis wield as much influence as anyone in the code and both have backed V’landys at a time when his decision-making and influence over the game is under immense scrutiny.

Under the ARL Commission constitution, players have no power to remove commissioners or the chair. Only the clubs and states — by simple majority — or the commissioners themselves can enforce that sort of change.

That seems unrealistic given the support for V’landys from Pappas and Politis. Arguably no chairs carry as much gravitas as the Roosters and Rabbitohs bosses, who at one point or another have been asked whether they would consider joining the commission.

“The clubs are 100 per cent behind Peter,” Politis said.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...a9f3e05b10df7c


They would be tackling legally at least and no wrestling/judo jiu-jitsu consultants in sight either. - the target is a big one on the ball carrier though - from the ankles to under the armpits so the statements bandied about that it's only a narrow target area is bunkum.

Also do they watch video's of the opposition and how they hold the ball when they do hit ups/normal runs and any other actions they do - lead with their forearms/ turn somewhat side on before impact /crouch/lean etc etc etc so they know the area to target defensively.

It would change the way the Chooks defend and play as I would also throw in a couple of ideas as well - the rotating/non designated dummy half / three lines of defence / the shift etc - get back to Chooks footy of players in motion /moving the ball /support play and offloads

[The Skeez]

KS, can’t you see that Nick leant on Pete at their breakfast meeting. Ever since then, VPL has softened his public comments and the crackdown is virtually over. Along with the players playing dead and threatening to continue if they weren’t listened to