It was referee B Cummings that appeared before the judiciary exonerating Klemmer from the touching charge. That was outrageous for a referee to show parochialism for any player at any time let alone to appear before the judiciary supporting that p[layer. The Referees are supposed to be neutral--some neutrality! Today, the referee in the Canterbury- Souths match is--you guessed it--Ben Cummings! This is appalling. Cummings should not referee any Canterbury games this season after his outrageous support for Canterbury in getting Klemmer`s charge dismissed. The Head Referee Tony Archer needs to explain why Cummings has been selected for this match. Watch for the penalties against Souths to day--when and where they occur. On the fifth tackle close to Souths line. I hope I am proven wrong on all this but I don`t think so. Common Souths sow the evils that you can still win.
You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!
Replies
FME: It is risible to have a referee giving evidence for a player before the judiciary. It is some thing like the police giving evidence for someone they have arrested and charged! A report in a Sydney newspaper claimed that the other referees were filthy about his involvement--as they ought to be.
I would agree with your police comparison if the ref fronted up to help Klemmer based on a refs call to an incident but the ref didn't charge or make a call in this case. If it was a referees decision that was the issue and the ref fronts the judiciary to go against his own decision then I would agree with you 100%. It would be more like if someone fronted court on a charge and a policeman was a witness to the incident and he goes to court as a witness for that person. That's ok imo.
What makes you think I would have respect for anyone who did such a thing? I don`t and will not. The fact that you went to church this morning explains your intolerance to such an incidental error. Holier-than-thou are we?
well said Brad
Robert Lloyd I think you have lost the plot here. Cummins was requested to attend by the Dogs to determine if Klemmer touched him or not. He responded by saying I dont think so. In the video, Cummins did not react in any way whatsoever. It was a nonsense from the start.
The Dogs were not disputing any of his decisions, just whether he was touched or not. It really is a no brainer.
Speedy2460 : I think you and Cummins--Is the spelling right?--must be the only people on the planet who think Klemmer did not touch him, if what you say is true--I am not doubting your truth, just think your version of events is wrong. That they charged Klemmer must have come from vision from the bunker and we know that can`t be wrong because it is the new CEO`s baby! To be serious though just about every media report on it said that Foran was hard done by because his touch on a referee was far less than Klemmer`s on Cummins. Foran pleaded guilty to avoid any suspension. Klemmer gets off scott free. The real reason Klemmer got off is because he is a Canterbury player not that he did not touch Cummins.
I was expecting some larry- dooly last night with Cummins and Canterbury but nothing happened. There were about four or five tries scored before a penalty was issued and the game was as good as over at point.
But keep an eye on how many times Canterbury is controlled by Cummins this season.
Honestly Bret Alen. His comment lost little meaning through a slight spelling mistake. If everyone got as pissy as you are over a misspell or mispronunciation some of the Pacific Islander players in the comp would be too busy constantly complaining to play the game.