Craig Bellamy and Melbourne’s CEO have both criticised the current set-up.
Melbourne Storm figures Craig Bellamy and Justin Rodski have called for an overhaul of the NRL judiciary system over the fact an unsuccessful challenge results in an extra suspension. And ARL boss Peter V’landys has denied suggestions the commission used new powers to sanction Bulldogs captain Stephen Crichton.
Storm captain Harry Grant will miss the next two games and sit out the remainder of the regular season after copping a grade-two charge for a shoulder charge against the Bulldogs. The Storm opted against challenging the grading at the judiciary because it would have meant a two-game ban became a three-game ban if they were unsuccessful.
That would have ruled Grant out of the first week of the NRL finals, but he’ll now be free to take his place after missing two games. But speaking on Monday, Bellamy and Rodski both called out the farcical system that discourages teams for challenging.
“I thought it was very, very harsh,” Bellamy said. “Especially when you’ve seen some of the other actions similar to that throughout the year – yeah, I thought it was very harsh.”
Melbourne Storm boss says current NRL system isn’t fair
Storm boss Rodski told AAP the current system wasn’t “fair” and said he wanted the NRL to consider changes. “What I’d like to see is a review of the judiciary system around the way that a player is unable to challenge to downgrade a charge without risking the harsh penalty of an additional game,” he said.
“The grading is an incentive to not challenge, but at the same time it’s not a fair reflection of natural justice. While I understand and appreciate why it’s been set up that way … and I agree with the early plea in principle.
“The problem with the system now is that when you have an instance like this, surely the player should be able to challenge to have the charge downgraded and not risk such a heavy penalty. For any player at any club, to miss a final off the back of challenging that downgrade, it’s not worth it.”
Rodski said a better system might involve a financial penalty if a challenge at the judiciary is unsuccessful. “That would be a $5000 to $10,000 fine, so there’s still a disincentive to do it,” he said. “But in the extremes where a club and the player feel it’s justified, they aren’t risking time on the field, they’re risking a financial penalty.”
Peter V’landys addresses backflip on Stephen Crichton charge
Meanwhile, Crichton has copped a delayed charge after initially escaping sanction for his actions in the Storm-Bulldogs game. The Bulldogs skipper was put on report for raking the face of Storm fullback Ryan Papenhuyzen, but wasn’t charged by the match review committee on Saturday.
However an updated charge sheet was released on Monday, which included a belated $1000 fine for Crichton for grade one contrary conduct. An NRL spokesperson later denied it was an example of the ARL Commission using its new discretionary powers to intervene, which were criticised bAnd V’landys has since rejected that suggestion as well. The ARL boss said a rule was introduced in 2022 that gave the NRL chief executive and his management the power to request the match review committee re-asses certain incidents.
“We’re allowed to ask the MRC to have another look at an incident if they have missed something,” V’landys told News Corp. “The (new) rule only comes in if they still haven’t done something – then we can take it to the judiciary. But in this instance, Andrew (Abdo) has referred it after a closer look by NRL management for them to consider.y the players’ association.
