Melbourne Storm captain Harry Grant has received a two-match ban from the NRL. This decision rules him out for key upcoming games against the Sydney Roosters and Brisbane. The ban follows a shoulder charge grade two during last Sunday’s match against Canterbury. This ruling has opened the floodgates to discussions across the country about the equity of our judiciary system.
As such, the suspension will sideline Grant for the remainder of the regular season. Melbourne’s coach, Christian Craig Bellamy, has publicly condemned this ruling as too severe. Bellamy on his social media reacted with disappointment to the decision, saying, “I felt like this was very, very unfairly harsh.”
This controversy over Grant’s ban has recently inspired action from Melbourne’s Chief Executive, Justin Rodski. He is currently advocating for a comprehensive review of the judiciary process. He made a very important point clear—that under our current system clubs are unable to contest the grading of charges. This arbitrary limitation places them at risk of receiving an additional match suspension.
“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,” – Justin Rodski
His main point was about the current grading system penalizing clubs for disputing charges. A grade-two charge carries a two-match ban with an early guilty plea, but it goes up to three matches if the club fights the decision and loses. Along with the one-race suspension, Grant was fined $1,000 for a grade-one contrary conduct charge that was issued on Monday.
He explained that the new grading system serves as a strong disincentive for clubs and players in equal measure.
“The grading is an incentive to not challenge, but at the same time it’s not a fair reflection of natural justice,” – Justin Rodski
As discussions persisted, Rodski countered with a different approach where clubs would be able to appeal charge gradings without the threat of extra suspensions. Rather than be rewarded for making bad downgrades, they would instead incur financial penalties for failed downgrades.
“That would be a $5,000 to $10,000 fine, so there’s still a disincentive to do it, 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,” – Justin Rodski
The NRL judiciary system makes room for retrospective reviews of incidents following a rule change in 2022. Opponents of the status quo contend that such an approach lacks due process for players subjected to discipline. As the Storm continue to approach this difficult circumstance, cries for change have become louder. If adopted, these demands would make for a more fair and just process for evaluating player behavior moving forward.
