If there has ever been a time to campaign that it’s #NotHisGo, it’s now.
The NRL has charged Sydney Roosters front-rower Luke O’Donnell with a Grade 3 Dangerous Throw charge, which could rule him out for up to five weeks if the Roosters decide to fight the charge and lose.
However, if he takes the early guilty plea he will be back for the first game of the Finals.
Why the Roosters should fight the charge.
O’Donnell, with 29 matches suspended on his rap sheet, was charged after flipping Tim Simona like a pancake in the first half of the Roosters’ 56-14 win on Monday night:
The charge is excessive considering Cooper Cronk did not even have to head to the judiciary to fight this tackle in their match earlier this season:
In this writer’s humble opinion, the Roosters should fight the charge using the above .gif, footage and pictures of Luke O’Donnell at the Children’s Hospital or rescuing a cat from a tree.
The Roosters need to channel every single club legend, lament the death of the biff and blame the NRL for this. It worked for Burgess, who somehow gets just a two week ban for grabbing some testicles, and Jeff Lima, who twisted Anthony Watmough’s ankle with what looked to be pure intent.
If the Roosters cannot prove that O’Donnell’s Simona-flip was less dangerous than the above tackle — when Cooper Cronk drove Roger Tuivasa-Sheck into the ground — then something is wrong with the system. And the only way to circumvent the system is to tug on the heart strings, blame something completely unrelated, and end every quote with it’s #NotHisGo.
This is half sarcastic of course. This writer is totally against these kinds of tackles and LO’D probably deserves a stint on the sidelines for a clear brain-snap. But given the tackles that have come before his one this year, surely the Roosters should challenge the charge on the now-commonplace #NotHisGo defence.
The tackle had no intent to it, no driving force and ultimately nothing serious occured besides a spectacle. Did this tackle really warrant a Grade 3 and Cronk’s a stern “no case to answer”? Really?
The NRL set a dangerous precedent when it didn’t charge Cronk for that tackle. For those wanting consistency, this will be an interesting test case.