The NRL judiciary system has become a fair dinkum chook raffle.

If you’ve watched a round of rugby league and felt angry afterwards, you’re not alone.

Each week, it is becoming harder and harder for genuine and long-standing rugby league fans to work out what is a suspendable offence and what foul play is just going to be slapped on the wrist or swept under the rug.

It’s even becoming harder not to give weight to the tongue-in-cheek banter that the NRL has favourite players that get preferential treatment.

It’s noticeable that the same players seem to be getting let off consistently for foul play.

While Benji Marshall was just standing up for his club when he voiced his frustration at the double standards and confusing rules after his win over the Bulldogs, he made a valid point.

Two tackles with a shoulder to the head both resulted in different outcomes. Stephen Crichton stayed on the field, while Alex Seyfarth was sin-binned.

Even the Bulldogs skipper, through the immediate look on his face and post-game comments, knew he should have been in trouble – but got off scot-free.

Given Graham Annesley no longer does his weekly propaganda explainers, there wasn’t even any justification between the two rulings.

Without making this article go on until grand final day, with all the possible examples throughout time, let’s just stick to round 22.

There are enough inconsistencies to highlight the point that the system is now more confusing than ever for even the most ardent fan to understand – and that is a problem.

Stephen Crichton is tackled. (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

Firstly, make of this what you will, but stating facts; three players were suspended from 13 charges last weekend – Alex Seyfarth copped the highest with three games, then Felise Kaufusi with two and Jesse Colquhoun one week.

Out of the players who were charged but fined were current or past representative stars: Crichton, Brian To’o, James Tedesco, Eli Katoa and Reece Walsh. Samuel Healey (two offences), Luke Brooks, David Klemmer and Alex Twal were the others charged.  

While being careful not to put a tin-foil hat on and scream NRL prejudice, looking at the replays of each incident and taking into account the official documents on the league’s own website, it’s hard not to agree that double standards have crept into the game.

Let’s go through some of the examples from the past weekend to try to understand how the NRL may have lined up the punishments.

Kaufusi deserved to be banned. He was the third man in to tackle the Warriors Jacob Laban, with weight directly on the lower leg. The Warriors are fuming Laban suffered a broken leg and the NRL should have been tougher with the charge.

Then, just an hour or so later, you have Walsh. If there ever was a textbook example of a no-wrap shoulder charge, this is it. He never intended to make a legal tackle on Rabbitohs winger Tyrone Munro.

The way he turns his body with his knees nearly facing his own in-goal, it was nearly physically impossible to apply the necessary wrap of his arms around his opponent. The Rabbitoh was not injured, and a try was scored moments later, as Walsh was not punished on-field and only later hit with a $1,000 fine.

Is this not a type of tackle the NRL wants to stamp out? That’s hardly a deterrent.

(Image courtesy: Fox League)

Then we have the To’o high tackle on Phillip Sami as he was attempting to score a try.

It was an embarrassing moment for the Bunker, who almost missed the high shot completely, as Kasey Badger declared, “play has been cleared up until this point”, to everyone’s shock.

There was enough force in the tackle that Sami’s ear could be seen wobbling after the hit, and the Gold Coast winger has been ruled out this weekend due to concussion protocols.

He was unable to keep control of his body after the hit as his foot went over the sideline, and the officials, interestingly, did not seem to think that the high shot was the reason for him not being able to maintain his momentum, denying a penalty try.

Fortunately, after Titans veteran Kieran Foran protested, Badger corrected her mistake and the Panthers winger was placed on report – and later fined $750.

The smallest fine of the week for a direct and forceful high shot to the head.

(Fox League)

Then there’s Tedesco’s unusually bizarre knee to the head of Lehi Hopoate.

The Roosters captain was charging through, trying to contest a high kick from his teammate, when he got it badly wrong, leaping way too early, and as he was landing on the ground, the momentum of his stride meant his leg whacked his opponent, who had already fallen to the turf.

Let’s stress, there was no suggestion it was deliberate, and even he looked shocked at how bad he got the jump wrong, but it still ended up with the Sea Eagle dazed and needing a HIA.

Just like car crashes, hardly any are intentional, but you have to be responsible for your actions.

Tedesco’s punishment? A $1000 fine for an almost kamikaze-like play.

(Image courtesy: Fox League)

There was more controversy to come later in the round, on Sunday, the moment that angered Marshall.

Seyfarth was sin-binned for a high tackle on Bulldogs prop Harry Hayes in the 59th minute. It was high and a bit of force in it, so the right course of action was probably taken.

But just minutes later, Crichton flew in to tackle opponent Taylan May, but as May was slipping, the Dog’s shoulder crashed into his head, snapping back the neck and leaving the Tiger needing to leave the field for a head injury assessment.

Comparing the two incidents, there is a difference in the Tigers player slipping, which does need to be taken into account.

However, the force in the tackle and the injury outcome are not the difference between a sin bin and a three-week ban and getting off without charge.

Keeping consistent throughout the year, the Bulldogs captain should have got at least one week’s suspension, whether he was falling or not.

But that’s the dilemma that the Tigers and fans were faced with, working out how the NRL can argue that double standards don’t exist after watching these two incidents.

(Fox League)

So, take into account the abovementioned examples, and now weigh it up with Colquhoun’s one-match hip drop ban against the Cowboys.

The Cronulla forward initially grabbed winger Rob Derby around the arms and shoulders and then began trying to wrestle him to the ground.

At that point, he was joined by Sharks teammates and at one point, there were four men in the tackle as Colquhoun was the unfortunate one to land on the back of Derby’s leg, forcing the North Queenslander from the field.

It was a tackle where his actions were impacted by the weight of his teammates in the mostly 3-on-1 tackle, as the force of Blayke Brailey and Tom Hazelton resulted in him landing where he did.

The Match Review Committee saw fit to hand down a one-week suspension, therefore suggesting it was one of the more serious incidents of the weekend.

(Fox League)

So before discussing the Match Review protocols, just consider this: are fans really expected to cop that Colquhoun’s actions in that tackle were more serious than what Walsh, To’o, Tedesco and Crichton did?

Yes, Derby was injured, but do we need to be

Granted, it is not always easy lining up different offences like apples and oranges, but it’s like a court of law where carrying drugs or punching someone can result in the same monetary fine as long-term systematic fraud.

But looking at the above examples, it is hard to understand fairness, justice and consistency.

It’s hard to get that equality and allow the fans to understand the comparison between moments of foul play that are seen on the field, especially with the system being so complex.

The game is trying to explain the process it goes through on a game-by-game basis, but the problem with this is that it’s in a theoretical sense.

Fans are not given an insight into the application of factors (seen in the diagram below) to the actual on-field moments.

Source: NRL website

For example, you could probably argue that with the force, risk of injury and the careless nature of the conduct, Tedesco’s knee to the head could easily have been grade two or three, resulting in a suspension.

It could also be argued from the above table that To’o’s hit on Sami was reckless and a high degree of force due to the visual impact left on Sami’s face, and the aggravating factors of injury (he is out this week) and the direct contact with no ability to protect himself. That too was a suspendable offence.

While, as stated before, Colquhoun probably had the most mitigating factors of all three, given that his involvement was careless, at absolute worst, and other players had a significant

In other words, the NRL’s explanation to fans can be used to argue against their own decisions, leaving fans no better off and in a frustrated position of not knowing what to expect.

In saying that, fans were no better off when Annesley was giving his public briefings, because the same inconsistencies were occurring, just with the additional PR spin and waffle.

This is not the only week that these frustrating discrepancies have occurred.

It is understandable that there will be one or two incidents where the committee’s personal discretion will come in, and fans will disagree with a decision made. But when it is

The process just needs to be simplified.

To borrow the old “if it quacks like a duck” saying; if it looks like a high tackle and the opponent has been left concussed, then just maybe it warrants a suspension – regardless of the team logo or number on the back of the shirt.