Quote Originally Posted by Texas Ranger View Post
I didn't question card or sanction, I'm not involved in the process and am not in a position to judge the sentence handed down and I don't particularly care. I am, however, witnessing some comments that don't appear to make sense. I was pointing out that Thomas477 was misinterpreting a reasonable question/comment by Stanley. To say a ref has no input in the sentencing would mean the refs report and grading is totally ignored by the judiciary, therefore why have a refs report at all. It seems T477 is not the only one that gets "triggered" by a simple comment.
Not triggered at all.
See my above comment where I also clarify Stanley’s question.
I can definitely see the point he makes. But without anybody seeing the report, it’s hard to know.

I was just curious how other people would grade the incident and how they would objectively describe the incident. It’s easy to call out something like that, and say the ref didn’t do enough, but their role isn’t to determine suspension. They apply and enforce the laws of the game. Which the ref did, send off straight away, defused the situation. They file a send off report and describe the incident objectively. Yes, they may grade the incident from low (second yellow, DGSO), moderate (bad tackle, altercation) to severe (really bad tackle or incident causing severe damage).
Regardless of what the referee puts down, it does guide to some extent but not much I wouldn’t think, and nor should it. I daresay NNSW would have a set of predetermined sentences for common actions.


I just think the criticism of the sentence, should be directed to NNSWF. They are the ones who can review footage, call witnesses and compare to previous incidents.