Judicial method suspect

Press, 26 June 1978, Page 19

Judicial method suspect

By

JOHN COFFEY

The credibility of the Canterbury Rugby Leagues judicial methods must be se-i nously questioned in the’ light of the suspension of a senior first division player ,nnocent of the'alleged offence — for which the'reVeree 1 Charged b > ic. L f U n‘t Clarkson, the Mar-1 It. i?u Ck ’ was sent fr() ni dllHno Mr Gar > BaXter ,‘; ng a the match against Linwood on June 10. He was w a C <. USed - of P unc hing, and ' a X requ 2 red . t 0 att end the i e s board of control meeting two nights later lo all intents and pur- i Clarkson’s hearing i Scartea along orthodox lines. < mS®? Was in com - ’ X, K is believed < tnat Clarkson admitted using ;s his fist m retaliation,” and tie was subsequently stood it

down for one match because of his indiscretion. However, a member of the board of control, who had apparently spoken to Mr ■Baxter a few hours before the meeting, then raised the pot: * that the referee had been threatened as he walked from the field at the end af the game. No mention of a threat had been made either on Mr Baxter’s match card, or his report about the dismissal. It seemed that the board was then left in a quandary. At one stage, apparently, Clarkson and his team coach (Mr George Tuaine) were asked to leave the meeting while the board considered its verdict. They were later recalled, and Clarkson was charged with having issued the threat. He denied having done so, and the board again sat in judgment. Although there was a cautioning word during the.

deliberations that it was quite unjust to add further charges, and that Mr Baxter could not confirm who had threatened him, the board increased the suspension bv three games. Clarkson cannot resume football until July 15, a term that has since been in-S creased by another week because rain caused the cancellation of his grade last Saturday. Officials of the Marist Club investigated Clarkson’s case, and have learned that: another player made the remark to Mr Baxter. They are understandably reluctant to disclose the identity of the culprit and risk the distinct probability that he, too, will be brought before the board and suspended without oeing charged by the referee. A protest is likely to be lodged by Marist at this : evening’s board meeting. In-11 instigations by “The Press” |<

have also suggested that it was not Clarkson who uttered the remarks to Mr Baxter. Five members of the board were told last Saturday that Clarkson was innocent of the threatening accusation — four were sympathetic, the other appeared eager ta have the real offender arraigned and, presumably, suspended. Canterbury rugby league administrators have been criticised in the past for standing down players who incur three times in the “sin-bin” (temporary orderings off) in one season. The inconsistencies of referees, the very fact that referees decide spells in the “sin-bin” are sufficient penalty for the crime, and the failure of some referees to even record “sin-bin” instances on their match cards: make the system impracticable, and often farcical.