Yep .... the one law that GreenTurd should really be studying is the " Law of unintended Consequences " ...... that is the one that comes back and bites you on the arsse .....
Last edited:
Bah bah sacked and De Belin charged
- Thread starter MANLY4LIFE
- Start date
Yep .... the one law that GreenTurd should really be studying is the " Law of unintended Consequences " ...... that is the one that comes back and bites you on the arsse .....
The Who
Journey Man
I think the damage to de Belin has already been done. That's the price of 'celebrity'. But I don't think the NRL should interfere, yet.
Does anyone remember the name of the co-accused? I'd wager most people don't. Will he also be stood down from playing rugby league? Does the NRL actually care about bringing the sport into disrepute, or just bringing the NRL into disrepute?
For de Belin this court case can't come soon enough. Imagine the mindset of any accused person who has received such negative publicity and could now possibly be forced to lose the one thing that could keep him relatively sane? Of course, if he is found guilty there should be no sympathy for him and he must be severely punished.
I feel sorry for the female accuser but at least she hasn't been identified publicly. Her life is on hold also, and the trial will be harrowing for her and her friends and family.
pt73
Bencher
The plot thickens …..
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/de...letter-served-to-beattie-20190227-p510p9.html
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/de...letter-served-to-beattie-20190227-p510p9.html
These debate is happening because the NRL has failed miserably in its governance of our once great game. An absence of transparent rules, an absence of consistency and allowing players who have been released from prison after serving a goal sentences back to the game are stupid decisions that the NRL own. I still can't believe that they allowed the Broncos to play Lodge. The message the NRL have sent out to players in the past is that its going to take a **** load of offences and misbehavior to see you out of the game. The NRL are now only being reactive in response to public outrage and sponsors jumping ship. This off season is just the straw that is breaking the camel's back. Our game has lost credibility on a number of fronts over the years. Poor match officiating, Greenberg giving referees an edict to impose more penalties slowing the game to a grinding halt, inconsistent treatment of clubs subject of salary cap breaches, inconsistent and difficult to understand decisions by the judiciary and the bunker debacle. How difficult is it to watch a replay from numerous angles and get the decision right? Why on earth isn't the bunker permitted to rule on forward passes and so it goes on. Poor poor decision making by a mob at the mercy of the broadcasters and the financial power brokers of the game. Having former players on the judiciary isn't very smart either. We need a swift change of leadership and a clean out of the NRL because in my view they have dropped the ball. The NRL can't fix this retrospectively in view of the way they have handed other similar problems previously. I doubt they could withstand legal challenge if they did. Barba is different because he was not charged but was caught out on CCTV so after the NRL viewed the CCTV he was fair game. But if he had of been charged by the Police he would have been entitled to the presumption of innocence. The only fix is to have a clause incorporated in the player contracts that if charged with a serious offence (with a clear and transparent definition of what types of criminal offences) the player cant play but remains on the salary cap and on full pay until the court case has been completed. It might drive down the price of signing bad boys because of the risk of paying someone who is suspended.
yokahontas
Bencher
Callum Sinclair. Funny you should mention, he was in the (local) news a few days ago, back in court requesting to vary his bail conditions, so he didn’t have to report to police as often (which they already approved for JDB a few weeks ago), and also asking for permission to travel overseas to play for Norway in a World Cup qualifier. He was approved on varying the reporting conditions (his lawyer basically pointed out that it wasn’t fair he had more stringent bail conditions than his co-accused), but knocked back for overseas travel.
I don’t know if he’s been approved to play for Shellharbour, but I’ll keep an eye on it - it may depend on what happens with de Belin, TBH. Plus you’d reckon for his own safety...it’s a bit harder to protect players from say, beer cans being chucked at them, at small country grounds.
pt73
Bencher
De Belin stood down by NRL while he contests his charges
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/ja...er-sexual-assault-charge-20190228-p510tm.html
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/ja...er-sexual-assault-charge-20190228-p510tm.html
Wow. I'll be interested in the response from JDB's legal team on this.
Also I don't understand how they intend on applying this criteria "Under the new policy, any player who is charged with an offence that carries a prison term of 11 years or more will be automatically stood down." - we don't have mandatory sentencing in NSW do we ?? I'm no expert but don't judges rule on the sentence once the guilty verdict is made ? @SeaEagleRock8 can you clarify ?
Scorpio
Armchair Expert
Confirms what I thought.
If the Brett Stewart 'incident' happened now, the NRL would have stood him down for 2 years, only for him to be found NOT GUILTY.
Did they not learn anything?
manlyfan76
There is no A.I. Just better computers
The Who
Journey Man
Under the new policy, any player who is charged with an offence that carries a maximum prison term of 11 years or more will be automatically stood down.
11 years? How did the NRL come to this figure?
The NRL are just making up stupid rules on the run.
So when a player accused of, say, a white collar crime that could impact thousands of people, he'll still be allowed to play because the maximum jail term is 10 years?
11 years? How did the NRL come to this figure?
The NRL are just making up stupid rules on the run.
So when a player accused of, say, a white collar crime that could impact thousands of people, he'll still be allowed to play because the maximum jail term is 10 years?
You are assuming the NRL are run by competent people. Don't think they have learnt from the Snake incident.
No decision has been formally made on walker - to be determined in the coming days. Doesn’t look like he will be allowed to play though from the high level comments by Greenberg and Beattie.
Decisions on salary cap matters to be given tomorrow.
FWIW I loved it when one of the journo’s accused Beattie of throwing the CEO under the bus with this new policy!
Decisions on salary cap matters to be given tomorrow.
FWIW I loved it when one of the journo’s accused Beattie of throwing the CEO under the bus with this new policy!
Good question Also why 11 years ?why not 10 or 5 yrs ,am I missing something ?
MuzztheEagle
Bencher
I am concerned by a lot of the noise coming from the NRL right now. They have created yet another grey area in which to operate. But I really don't have a problem with the Barba and De Belin bans and I wouldn't have a problem with Walker also receiving some form of sanctions.
What's more, I'm so sick of these cases being compared to the Stewart case - which we all no was a complete joke:
"Mr Bellanto said Stewart did not commit the offences he is accused of.
He said Stewart came home to be with his girlfriend who was expecting him back to share a takeaway meal.
The barrister said Stewart talked to the complainant before the alleged assault.
He said the complainant's psychiatric condition will be questioned because she was once diagnosed with a thought disorder with symptoms of hearing voices and hallucinations.
Mr Bellanto told the jury that police who tested Stewart on the night of the alleged attack found no DNA evidence."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-09-15/stewart-deserves-fair-trial-jury-told/2261778
In contrast: De Belin's accuser went to hospital where she underwent a rape test and her injuries were noted. Walker's partner somehow ended up falling to the ground and then called triple 0. This doesn't mean they are guilty of the charges before them and the NRL should not penalise them in line with these charges. BUT, in both cases, it is pretty clear that some poor actions were made and I don't have a problem with the NRL acting on the UNDISPUTED facts that surround these cases.
Like it or not, in the modern game, players are now media ambassadors and if you don't know how to keep your nose clean in that job then perhaps it's best you found another one.
The Who
Journey Man
You use the word UNDISPUTED. It is far to early to know this. de Belin hasn't given his side of the story and no evidence has been given. All we have is a Police prosecutor claiming this in a bail hearing. de Belin's defence team have not been able to put any of the statements to the test in court.
Be careful. Just keep an open mind and not be convinced by speculation.
When the court case begins everything will be challenged.
Be careful. Just keep an open mind and not be convinced by speculation.
When the court case begins everything will be challenged.
Peter C
Bencher
There's another scenario in all of this, what if this is DeBellin's final year, should the NRL have allowed DeBellin to keep on playing until his case was heard, and what if he was found to be guilty?.
There's no perfect solution to this, the thing is, if you want the BIG money that sponsorship brings into this game, you must think that any action you take could have a reaction, and if players think this is unfair, then perhaps they should go back to park football.
MuzztheEagle
Bencher
Fair point on De Belin - nothing has stated that DNA evidence implicates him and he hasn'[t confirmed or denied any involvement with the woman (that we are aware of) yet. I am probably more fixated on Walker's case and am frustrated by the constant mentions of Stewart's case.
Users who are viewing this thread
Staff online
-
JethroStar Trekkin' across the universe
Latest posts
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
