The damaging NRL precedent in Mitchell suspension timing

I strongly doubt we have heard the last of when Latrell Mitchell's one-game suspension will be served.

In what has been an issue that has followed the NRL around in recent weeks, Mitchell was hit with a breach notice that carried a $20,000 fine and a one-game ban for a photo posted online that the NRL claimed "brought the game into disrepute."

Without rehashing the facts of the case for the umpteenth time, the NRL's hands were all but tied over what penalty to hand Mitchell, given similar instances for North Queensland Cowboys' centre Valentine Holmes and Penrith Panthers dummy half Mitch Kenny over the last off-season.

But it's not the length of the suspension that is under the microscope here.

Instead, it's the fact the NRL are only allowing Mitchell to serve his game suspension once he is fit and ready to go again.

Whether he was fit for this weekend's Round 27 clash remains a mystery in a 'he said, she said' type back and forth between the Maroubra-based club and the sport's authorities.

The Rabbitohs, who are understood to have sourced three separate independent doctors, submitted paperwork to the NRL expressing the fact he was ready to go against the Sydney Roosters on Friday night. Interim coach Ben Hornby said repeatedly they wanted to name Mitchell.

That in itself would check out and is consistent with what South Sydney said when Mitchell was initially injured - that he likely would have been fit for the last week, or maybe even two, of what has been a disastrous regular season for the club.

But the medical documentation submitted by the club didn't meet the NRL's standards, who then asked for Mitchell to perform a fitness test at NRL headquarters.

With a refusal to perform that test, and legal advice sought, the NRL have reportedly decided the suspension will be carried out next year, but it's unlikely South Sydney will let the issue die over the coming weeks as they continue to work with their legal team in an attempt to have Mitchell's suspension reversed to this year.

What is clear is that the fullback will not be able to serve his suspension during the end of year Pacific Championships for Australia - coach Mal Meninga has already confirmed a lack of first-grade rugby league in recent weeks had ruled the fullback out of selection contention.

The All Stars game remains a possibility, but Mitchell is a huge fan of the concept and will likely want to play for the Indigenous side at the start of next season.

That leaves Round 1 of 2025 - the first game of Wayne Bennett's second stint in charge at the now Maroubra-based club unless the Rabbitohs can convince the NRL the suspension should be backdated to Friday night's game against the Bondi-based Roosters.

But in their decision, the NRL have begun what is a very worrying slope, and set a dangerous precedent in the process.

Under reported NRL rules, all suspensions must be served as soon as they are handed down. If that is correct, then this should never have been up for discussion.

Mitchell's suspension should have been served weeks ago, and we all should have got on with life.

Certainly, that's the way it works for suspensions picked up out of on-field cases. Already this year we have seen more than once players set to fight at the judiciary, only to be injured and take the suspension with a 'no contest' plea.

Those suspensions don't need to wait until the player is fit, and effectively get the suspended player out of serving a fine while they would have been sidelined anyway.

And yes, on-field incidents are different to off-field ones, but you could argue any and all that result in a suspension are technically bringing the game into disrepute, if that is indeed the argument being used here.

I don't hear too many stories of parents rushing out to sign their kids up for rugby league after watching a big high tackle.

Returning though to specific off-field offences which result in a suspension, what is to prevent clubs from hiding medical details from fans and the NRL themselves in the future to ensure suspensions aren't delayed for future incidents?

The bottom line is that the NRL can't pick and choose when to enforce their own rule book. Incidents previously prove they aren't above doing it though.

When Taylan May was suspended ahead of the NRL finals, his suspension was held off to the following year so he could play in that year's finals series, a decision that made even less sense than Mitchell's current situation. It certainly wasn't kicked further down the road when he ruptured his ACL at the start of the 2023 season.

It really is a case of rules for some, and other rules for others.

It's that which the NRL simply must become a consistent force on. Either the rules apply, or they don't.

End of story.

In this case, don't be surprised if technicalities mean Mitchell lines up in Round 1 next year.