Schwab on 774

[Thunder Shaker]

Here's my guess as to what will happen.

There is one crucial bit of evidence missing that is essential for a charge to be laid. There is no vision of the contact. Thus it is not possible to determine if the alleged strike was with an open palm or a fist; nor is it possible to determine what part of the body was struck. Macguire's reaction suggests it was the solar plexus, but player reaction is not a reliable indicator of this.

I will bring up another case to illustrate my point. In round 21, a Kangaroos player was reported by the umpire for striking Amon Buchanan. From the umpire's perspective, and the front-on vision, there was apparent contact and then Amon Buchanan grabbed the back of his head. Was he punched in the head? No. There was additional footage from behind that clearly showed the contact was with an open palm to Amon's back. The report was withdrawn.

This is why I feel Bazza cannot be charged with a specific offence. Bazza can claim the contact was with a palm. The tribunal doesn't generally get victim evidence because of its unreliability. Without evidence to the contrary it's difficult to sustain a precise charge.

If my understanding of this evidence is incorrect, a striking charge is likely to be sustained. I feel there's two possible outcomes. One outcome is a 225-point offence which results in a suspension, or a 125-point offence that results in Bazza playing. If there's a reprimand, Bazza will take it, but if there's a likely suspension it will be contested.

[Nico]

Gary Davies would say he is guilty. He wants a plunge on the WCE, but if overruled by the tribunal gets a plunge on Sydney, so he wins either way.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Thunder Shaker
There is one crucial bit of evidence missing that is essential for a charge to be laid. There is no vision of the contact. Thus it is not possible to determine if the alleged strike was with an open palm or a fist; nor is it possible to determine what part of the body was struck.

This is what I've said a number of times. You can't lay a charge without knowing the details.

[giant]

Good article in the SMH today (richard Hinds' column) noted that SChwab testified on behalf of Rocca in 2003 stating that he didn't believe a player should be rubbed out for a GF unless his actions were malicious.

As someone who has felt the pain of missing a GF thru suspension, we can assume that Schwab will weigh his decision very carefully.

I feel a reprimand coming on.....

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
This is what I've said a number of times. You can't lay a charge without knowing the details.

This photo demands a report as much as the video.