0
![Not allowed!](images/buttons/up_dis.png)
Wait with interest on the outcome of the judiciary on this one
RWA has an opportunity to send a message but I fear they will slap the perpetrator on the wrist
If we simply look at the judiciary outcome without the benefit of knowing what transpired at the judiciary then we could well be disappointed at said outcome.
Case in point: I had a send-off in a recent game and I am told the player didn't even get the next match as a ban. I have no idea how he was able to convince the judiciary that he didn't lift a player to his shoulders and then slam him to the ground on his back, but there you go.
imo any from of racism needs to be stamped out by example; whether it is from someone of the same race or no.
I think we need to be realistic about the judiciary's role here. Usually, in this situation, they are an impartial judge ruling on set laws with a variety of legal opinions of varying quality in their faces.
They rule upon the letter of the law as they are able with legal argument coming from both sides.
Rugby WA or the Referees association should have some representation there, but it will be separate from the actual judiciary members.
Most of the time, the stupid decisions by a judiciary come as a result of either insufficient evidence for the right call to be made or some fancy pants lawyer arguing some technicality to get the bloke off.....generally both.
I think it's rare that a judiciary shows genuine bias unless it is set up poorly.
C'mon the![]()
![]()