To come back to the original topic, I do find it quite amusing Bridge's advocates doubt him capable of malicious intent on the grounds that he isn't a dirty player.
This is the same Chris Bridge who was cautioned for affray after punching a bouncer who justifiably refused to let him into a club because he was too drunk isn't it? Just checking...
I think it is less conclusive of the 'intent' by Sammut given the circumstances I highlighted. The lack of contact also sets the incidents apart. Both fouls, but hardly comparable and certainly not deserving of the same punishment in my opinion.
My view on the incident. Sammut deliberately hit his forearm/elbow in Hall's face. 1 game ban.
All the Bulls have to do is plead guilty, Sammut doesn't have a hearing and he gets his ban reduced so that will be 0 games. It's the new hearing system Tony Smith was raving about last week, which IMO stinks.
The Sammut incident is 1 game ban, no more no less, but he can just plead guilty and he should get it reduced like Bridge did last week.
755_1290430740.jpg“At last, a real, Tory budget,” Daily Mail 24/9/22
"It may be that the honourable gentleman doesn't like mixing with his own side … but we on this side have a more convivial, fraternal spirit." Jacob Rees-Mogg 21/10/21
A member of the Guardian-reading, tofu-eating wokerati.:d7dc4b20b2c2dd7b76ac6eac29d5604e_755.jpg
Sammut deliberately used his elbow on the opposition player. The sort of incident that was common place before VR & I remember fondly. Penalty, end of. Bridge appeared to have far more intent (& possible damage) behind it but I gave him marginal benefit of the doubt that he was not aiming for the head. Bridge was more stupid & can't argue with the one game. If the rules still permitted it a 10 minute sin bin would have been sufficient. But then you would get the usual paranoid fans screaming about consistency.
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
