Calls for change to NRL judiciary rules after Stephen Crichton’s absence in Kyle Flanagan case

Kyle Flanagan was handed a four-game ban by the NRL judiciary on Tuesday for allegedly biting Stephen Crichton. The incident occurred during the second half of Canterbury’s 28-10 victory over the Dragons on Saturday night.

There are growing calls for the NRL to reconsider its judiciary rules after Crichton opted not to testify in Flanagan’s biting case. Despite video evidence suggesting that Flanagan did indeed take a nip at Crichton, the Dragons five-eighth pleaded not guilty, arguing that he was the initial victim in the tackle. Flanagan claimed he felt pressured by the Bulldogs defenders and that Crichton’s nose accidentally poked him in the eye. He insisted that he did not intentionally bite the Bulldogs centre, and any resulting injury was unintentional.

However, the judiciary panel ruled against Flanagan, determining that the bite was intentional and imposing a four-match suspension, which will sideline him for the remainder of the home and away season.

Stephen Crichton did not raise any complaints with the referee about being bitten during the game. However, after full time, the ground manager was informed of the biting allegations. The NRL requested that the Bulldogs take photos of any marks on Crichton’s nose, and a report was subsequently submitted to the NRL, which played a key role in the verdict reached on Tuesday.

Crichton had the option to present his version of events in front of the judiciary panel but chose not to do so. This situation is reminiscent of Jack Wighton’s biting charge last year when his accuser, Tyson Gamble, also declined to give evidence in person, opting instead for a written report. Many within the NRL community believe that fairness dictates the accuser should appear before the judiciary to provide their account in person, rather than relying solely on written reports.

NRL head of football Graham Annesley stated that any changes to the current judiciary code, which is overseen by Justice Geoff Bellew, would need to be initiated by the ARL Commission. However, *The Sydney Morning Herald* reports that several senior figures are in favor of modifying the code so that both the accuser and the accused are required to appear before the judiciary. This proposed change is supported by many NRL fans and pundits, who believe it would be a fairer approach moving forward.

<div  id='HB_Footer_Close_hbagency_space_105030'>
 <div id='HB_CLOSE_hbagency_space_105030'></div>
 <div id='HB_OUTER_hbagency_space_105030'>
<div id='hbagency_space_105030'></div>
 </div></div>