The amazing, fantastic NRL Judiciary
By Wild Man From Borneo, 23 Aug 2012 Wild Man From Borneo is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- NRL, Rugby League
Last night Anthony Minichiello was exonerated for a Grade 3 striking charge for a forearm to the head of Josh Dugan.
The NRL web site reported “…had the 32-year-old been charged with dangerous contact or a careless high tackle offence, then he would almost certainly been suspended.
His counsel James McLeod successfully argued that his client’s actions were not strong enough to warrant a striking offence, where deliberate intent has to be proven.”
Now, I have nothing against Minichiello, in fact I think he has been a wonderful player and he seems to be a grand fellow.
However, how he got off that charge last night is akin to being charged with shoplifting, but proving that you were never strong enough to lift up the shop!
Mini attempted on two occasions to tackle Dugan. On both occasions he jumped high and clumsily appeared to try and take Dugans’ head off.
The second attempt saw him hit Dugan fair in the face with his forearm splitting Dugans’ eye and making him unable to get to his feet.
Regardless of no previous offences, he was entitled to sit on the sidelines for a few weeks.
But we are forgetting that this is rugby league! We are forgetting that this great game of ours is being officiated by men with viewpoints and legal nous that us, mere fans will never be able to experience. After all, these men are always found to be able to prove themselves correct, even when they have been proven incorrect.
Greg McCallum seems to have watched the video of the Dugan tackle and made a mistake by charging Minichiello with a “Striking Offence rather than a dangerous contact or careless High tackle offence”.
It must be a really hard decision to make Greg.
This is where the jokes cease and the jokers take centre stage.
All NRL fans want is consistency with the Judiciary and Match Review Committee! We ask the same of the referee’s but that seems to be asking way too much these days.
But, is it asking way too much of McCallum and his band of disciples to get it right? Considering they have days to consider their position and formulate their charges, why should they get any slack?
I don’t think we are expecting too much!
Yet, we are continually being astounded by their failure to win cases they should never lose and win cases that many of us believe shouldn’t have even been charged in the first place.
Intent should play a huge role in sentencing, but intent doesn’t seem to figure unless it suits the judiciary. Players making contact with the head by accident and players making contact with the head with purpose are treated the same way!
Well, sometimes!
We’ve seen numerous players charged with accidental contact with the head charged and miss a game and others with worse or identical charges, let off.
The first thing the ARLC has to do in the off season, after fixing the Refereeing debacle, is to fix the judiciary. Throw out ringmaster Greg McCallum. He’s proven ineffectual. He has failed us time and time again.
After the Minichiello charge being defeated last night, Travis Burns must be choking on his breakfast wondering if his fortunes may be different had he played for the Roosters rather than Penrith.
These types of questions will continually be raised by NRL fans as long as certain clubs win at the Judiciary and certain clubs continually lose in the midst or ridiculous reasons, made up parameters and Judicial Chairmen such as Justice Woods being allowed to play active roles in sentencing rather than passive roles.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby League articles
- How to increase crowd numbers in the NRL (181)
- How rugby league should expand (132)
- All I am saying is give Pearce a chance (123)
- Why do NRL fans love empty seats? (115)
- Let me tell you why people don’t like Manly (103)
- Ease up on ASADA: NRL boss (90)
- It’s time for Channel Nine to get serious about the NRL (89)
- STEVE TURNER: Only one Origin newcomer for the marauding Maroons (20)
- Whittling down the Blues contenders for State of Origin I (50)
- Time for the NRL to introduce silver point (44)
- A Blues Origin jumper for everyone? Why not (7)
- Dugan for Origin? Lay off the Breezers! (24)
- NRL golden point must get the flick (25)
- Cronulla Sharks fighting a war they can’t win (62)
- Time for the NRL to introduce silver point (44)
- A Blues Origin jumper for everyone? Why not (7)
- NRL golden point must get the flick (25)
- Cronulla Sharks fighting a war they can’t win (62)
- Where were you when sport sold its soul? (29)
- NRL Power Rankings week 10: Where is your team ranked this week (13)
- Melbourne Storm vs Manly Sea Eagles: NRL live scores, blog (153)
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- NRL, Rugby League

August 23rd 2012 @ 12:17pm
oikee said | August 23rd 2012 @ 12:17pm | Report comment
To be honest, your wasting your breath, or time writing this, we are talking about the NSW run ruggy league are we not. They make the rules, the laws, ask Harrigon, he has taken to introducing new rules, bring more and more into the video box.
He will want a box with a lounge suite and deck chairs for his cricket team of video refs and onlookers.
Look, the NSW ruggy league cant see past the first row of trees, everyone on the outside can see all the booobies, the stuffups, the biased decisions from Judy, everyone except these masked men making the game a complete and utter joke. sorry i am trying hard not to be negative.
August 23rd 2012 @ 2:04pm
Wild Man From Borneo said | August 23rd 2012 @ 2:04pm | Report comment
I don’t feel like I’m wasting my breath. The more we fans have the ability to air our views, the more pressure is applied to the ARLC to meet the fans expectations.
What has transpired for donkeys years, can change, if we can find avenues to air our grievances and get the message through that we fans, won’t allow ourselves to be treated like idiots.
and “We won’t submit to Blackmail” (Python)
August 23rd 2012 @ 12:34pm
AGO74 said | August 23rd 2012 @ 12:34pm | Report comment
Mini will never get a better time to go to the judiciary – 24 hours after David Gyngell just gave the NRL hundreds of millions of $.
How many roosters games on FTA next year? Thank God for fox.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:00pm
Tony Archers Maroon Underwear said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Once again the NRL has said loud and clear attacking a players head is Okay, except if your travis Burns or someone they randomly feel like making an example of.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:06pm
turbodewd said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:06pm | Report comment
I am surprised Minichello didnt get 2 weeks. He jumped WITH ELBOW and struck Dugan’s head. Just because it looked disorganised and clumsy doesnt mean he missed. I dont care if someone thinks he didnt have intent – he hit his head and got Dugan good.
Hopeless judiciary decision.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:14pm
Chris said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:14pm | Report comment
249 games with an unblemished record should count for something. Common sense.
If he does the same thing next week then he should rightly be suspended (for quite a while).
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:46pm
Gareth said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
Chris, it does count for something. It’s the reason he was only facing 2-3 weeks as opposed to Travis Burns facing 12-18 weeks because of the loading on his previous offenses.
August 23rd 2012 @ 7:37pm
Meesta Cool said | August 23rd 2012 @ 7:37pm | Report comment
Chris, — 250 games should not count for anything that is outside the guidelines of punishment for the offence. any judicial system must treat each case with the same ‘rules’, no glossing over and no favouritism.
The bottom line is, Mini (regardless of what he has done for his club, State, Country or League in his lond NRL career). should have received a penalty for his actions (equal to what Danny Williams got for his brain explosion many years ago — and Danny was provoked into his action!. , the action of Mimi in this case were unprovoked, VERY unforgivable and in my view intended!.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:17pm
Will Sinclair said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:17pm | Report comment
So Minichiello gets nothing for attacking the head of an opponent, and breaking his nose, while Adam Blair gets a week for pulling someone’s leg?
I think that’s not the only leg being pulled here.
Farce.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:23pm
Rellum said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
I don’t usually comment on these type of issues, but that ruling last night needs to be questioned, their explanation defies logic.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:40pm
Renegade said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Can someone please explain to me why Greg Inglis got 3 weeks for his shoulder charge yet Minichello gets off after attempting to take Dugan’s head off not once but twice???
I couldn’t care less if it’s Mini’s 250th game…..rules are rules!
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm
Wild Man From Borneo said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
That tackle was the ugliest tackle I think I’ve seen on a footy field, but it was made ugly by Dylan Farrell acting as a type of fulcrum. It was a sensationally ugly tackle, but I still thought more accidental than intentional. I thought Inglis hit him in the chest first but because it was a bad look for the game, the Officials seem to go into damage control and try and hang the guy.
If it wasn’t Inglis but Isaac Luke who made that tackle, he probably would’ve got 10 weeks.
This is the area where the game has to grow a set! Bad and sensational publicity should NOT drive the result.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm
Gareth said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
What I don’t get is that if he beats a deliberate striking charge on the grounds that intent couldn’t be proven, shouldn’t that charge then be downgraded to reckless? If it wasn’t striking, it was still high contact, and that comes with its own penalties. What an absolute farce. Now all we can hope for is karmic retribution. Probably in the form of Adam Blair.
August 23rd 2012 @ 1:59pm
Wild Man From Borneo said | August 23rd 2012 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
How can you prove intent???
You’d have to employ a Psychic with mind reading abilities. It’s crazy!
August 23rd 2012 @ 2:38pm
Karen said | August 23rd 2012 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
Oh, I don’t know, the fact that he had two clear goes at Dugan’s head might be a handy hint…
August 23rd 2012 @ 2:11pm
eagleJack said | August 23rd 2012 @ 2:11pm | Report comment
Gareth, the judiciary can only adjudicate on the charge at hand. It is the role of the defence to dispute the charge. They correctly argued that it was not a Striking Charge and thus the case was thrown out.
It is the fault of the MRC in coming up with the wrong charge. As correctly pointed out in the article if they had charged Minichiello with dangerous contact or a careless high tackle then he would have been suspended.
You can only downgrade from a Grade 3 Striking Charge to a Grade 2 or 1 Striking Charge. You can’t downgrade it to a completely separate charge (eg Dangerous contact etc).
Blame McCallum for getting it wrong…again.
August 23rd 2012 @ 2:31pm
oikee said | August 23rd 2012 @ 2:31pm | Report comment
So what you are saying is now we not only have to put up with bumbling refs and video refs run by bumpling Harrigon, now we have to put up with fools who dont even know the rules or charges.
I will say it again, our game should have fixed all this first issue when the commish came in, fix the rules .
If we had of done this, the only problem we might have now is some clown who has no idea what to charge who, and why is he not outed for being a dill.
The game has to get rid of the dills. not encourage them. Playing lip service to Harrigon is not helping the game, it is making it impossible to watch.
Soon i will be switching channel’s if we go to the video ref. Who knows, i might not turn back.
August 23rd 2012 @ 3:11pm
eagleJack said | August 23rd 2012 @ 3:11pm | Report comment
Now with the TV deal out of the way the ARLC will have plenty of time (and money) to fix the issues that plague the game.
Things will improve but we probably just have to be patient.
And welcome back negative oikee … we missed you the last 2 days!!
August 23rd 2012 @ 2:39pm
Karen said | August 23rd 2012 @ 2:39pm | Report comment
Considering he had two goes at Dugan’s head within five metres, I think the charge was perfectly correct – it was clearly intentional and he jumped with elbow raised.
August 23rd 2012 @ 3:12pm
eagleJack said | August 23rd 2012 @ 3:12pm | Report comment
I disagree. I don’t believe it warranted a striking charge. And in any case the MRC should have erred on the side of caution and simply gone with a reckless high tackle charge. That way Mini would have done atleast 1 on the sidelines.
August 23rd 2012 @ 2:34pm
solly said | August 23rd 2012 @ 2:34pm | Report comment
Leaping off the ground expresses an intent on behalf of the leaper.
Whether that intent is aimed at the head of the opposition player or whether it was aimed at the ball is, I think, irrelevant to the issue of carelesness.
eaglejack is right, the charge was the wrong one. Any decent lawyer could have seen that and act accordingly.