Talkback radio has a way of giving you very immediate feedback.
There was Lee Hagipantelis on line one on Tuesday morning, as part of his weekly SEN radio segment, responding after the Australian Rugby League Commission had handed itself the power to charge players for on-field offences.
“I was listening to these reports overnight and I must say I was somewhat confused at first; I wasn’t sure if we were talking about the ARL or the Trump administration, where they are assuming more authoritarian power for themselves,” said Hagipantelis, a former Wests Tigers chairman who is also the principal of Brydens Lawyers.
“Traditionally, there is always a distinction drawn between the executive and the judiciary. The two shouldn’t overlay.
“We’re seeing that in America at the moment where the Trump administration is leaning on the judiciary. Well here the ARL should remove itself entirely from the judicial process.
“I don’t know what the motivation is behind this.”
Similar sentiments were expressed on the radio open lines across the echo chamber that is talkback Tuesday. It felt like there was a change to a system that isn’t broken.
The concerns were mirrored across clubland. When it comes to the whole process of sanctioning players, the common belief is this: once you’re charged, you’re done for.
Given the low success rate at the judiciary, and the extra loading that comes with an unsuccessful appeal, there is little appetite to front up and plead your case at Rugby League Central.
“The judiciary is just a rubber stamp of the match review committee,” said one NRL club official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because they did not have permission to speak publicly on the issue.
Could Jacob Preston have been a beneficary of the NRL’s new powers?Credit: Getty Images
And now there will be even more sets of eyes scanning the game for foul play. Members of the commission will be joining the match review committee in attempting to identify crushers, hip drops and squirrel grips. If they feel a player should be sanctioned, they can come in over the top.
Head office says that it can also work in the players’ favour – if it feels a player has been overcharged, or is in danger of missing a big finals game over a misdemeanour, it can also intervene.
The NRL is selling it as an added layer of protection for the game, one that it hopes will be seldom, if ever, used. But is it really necessary?
No-one has spent more time at the judiciary than the game’s go-to defence lawyer, Nick Ghabar. While Ghabar stressed he had not yet seen the amendments to the judiciary code, and remained unaware when the ARLC’s new powers would be invoked, he felt the change undermined the independence of the match review committee.
“This is just bizarre,” Ghabar said. “So much for respecting the independence of the MRC and respecting the process.
“It shows no faith in the match review committee and their so-called independence. This is a move Trump would be proud of.”
Save for perhaps Reed Mahoney’s challenge on Cronulla utility Daniel Atkinson way back in round five, there have been few match review committee decisions that have been at odds with the prevailing view of the board.
Then there’s the issue of concussion. When Peter V’landys ascended to the ARLC chairmanship, he identified concussion as one of the seven main issues he wanted to be judged on. Now he and his board can highlight head knocks at a time when the spectre of legal action looms large.
And while the judiciary remains totally independent, is there not a risk it could be subconsciously influenced if a referral has come straight from the game’s bosses?
“It gives me great concern,” said Paul McGirr, a leading criminal lawyer who has presided over two defences at the NRL judiciary. McGirr’s first defence – which he lost – is probably the best example of where the ARLC could use its new powers to downgrade a charge.
Bulldogs backrower Jacob Preston was rubbed out for four games – effectively ending his chances of a Blues debut – when found guilty of a crusher tackle on Gold Coast’s Tino Fa’asuamaleaui. He would have escaped with a fine if not for two previous offences this season.
On his second appearance before the panel, McGirr enjoyed a rare win, getting Canterbury’s Viliame Kikau off over a dangerous-contact charge.
“To use an analogy, it would be like having a superintendent or a commissioned officer in the police going to the prosecution and saying, ‘We want this matter run’,” McGirr said.
“And the prosecution also works for the police force. What would the general punter think about his chances [of being acquitted] in that matter?
“I want to make it clear that I have the utmost respect for [judiciary chair Geoff] Bellew and the panel, I’m not suggesting anything untoward.
“But in criminal circles, justice not only has to be done, it has to be seen to be done.
“In my opinion, it’s already over-policed. In my limited experience in dealing with these matters, the match review committee is jumping at shadows and breaching people that frankly shouldn’t be breached.”
The Rugby League Players Association and many of the clubs harbour similar concerns. Which is why all eyes will be on the first time the ARLC enters the fray.
Independent? If there’s a feeling they have overreached, the switchboards on the radio talkback lines will light up like a Christmas tree.
Michael Chammas and Andrew “Joey” Johns dissect the upcoming NRL round, plus the latest footy news, results and analysis. Sign up for the Sin Bin newsletter.
NRL is Live and Free on Channel 9 & 9Now.
