Bah bah sacked and De Belin charged

yokahontas said:
If there’s any truth to these allegations, then screw Jack de Belin’s welfare. His fiancé and unborn child, sure - on second thoughts, maybe the NRL should be suspending him without pay, and putting those $$$ aside to support them while he does time (if convicted, of course)? But if he’s done any part of what’s alleged then he’s the lowest of scum and will get what’s coming to him, and zero sympathy from me. Ditto Barba, Hayne, Walker, Musgrove, Coleman, and any others I’ve missed in that list.

Who’s bending over backwards to support de Belin’s park footballer co-accused, BTW? Or does his lower profile also mean his welfare doesn’t matter as much?
Click to expand...

Maybe I should have used a sarcasm emoji ...... I agree with you regarding sexual offenders .... my issue is with all the talking heads .. mumbling the same self serving measured platitudes ad nauseam .....

Also sick of the tough sounding telecrap trying to stir up a few sales ..... jump up and down all you like every time an incident happens ... wring your hands .... call for summary execution and castration ......

No matter how many times it happens or how loud you scream ... It doesn't change the fact that we live in a Country that has rule-of-law and every individual has enshrined legal rights .....
 
Maybe not totally relevant to the present [ and some ] N R L players situation of alleged unacceptable [ or more explicitly appalling treatment against women ] actions but it would be interesting to see what the A F L ;s policy for example is and in regard to similar instances with some of their players in recent years . It is a bit hard to generalize in this type of obvious community standards for proper conduct but i guess that there could be some type of degree of seriousness categories to apply and in J D B :s case , maybe and if the indications are any guide , definitely in the more serious level .. Innocent until proven guilty , fair enough but not a good look for the code or some reasonable peace of mind for any alleged victims if it just continues as business as usual for any again very serious alleged offending by N R L playing individuals .
 
Woodsie said:
Maybe I should have used a sarcasm emoji ...... I agree with you regarding sexual offenders .... my issue is with all the talking heads .. mumbling the same self serving measured platitudes ad nauseam .....

Also sick of the tough sounding telecrap trying to stir up a few sales ..... jump up and down all you like every time an incident happens ... wring your hands .... call for summary execution and castration ......

No matter how many times it happens or how loud you scream ... It doesn't change the fact that we live in a Country that has rule-of-law and every individual has enshrined legal rights .....
Click to expand...

Could’ve written it all in the official sarcasm font and I probably still would’ve missed it @Woodsie - post night shift fog is a sometimes hilarious thing!
 
Chip and Chase said:
NRL players being charged with serious crimes and dealing with the how you can balance their rights to a fair trial and the rights of the game not to be brought into disrepute.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, that is a conundrum, and also how to consider the interests of the player's club. I recall being horrified when there was talk of Snake being stood down, partly due to the unfairness to him (assuming as I did that the case against him was totally underwhelming) but also robbing Manly of our star player. In the end his long term injuries may have saved the game a lot of emabrrassment and saved him some unwanted media spotlight?
As for DeBellin, it's hard to imagine St George sending him out, wearing their proud colours, week after week, month after month, while he is subject to such serious allegations. Ditto with Hayne, and the game is spared some of that dilemma due to him being off-contract. It's a difficult situation for sure.
 
manlyfan76 said:
I don't know why,
But I recall we got fined for Snake getting a taxi home from a season launch.
Click to expand...
100k for Choc attacking a Sponsor, for players being drunk at an official function and for Snake's group being asked to move on from the Manly Pacific.

Court case actually highlighted the fact that Snake himself was not the drunk being kicked out.

Sadly ZtC was the one who collated the facts of the Season Launch and handed the report to Gallop 😎
 
Again it is going to be another ‘reactionary’ move by the nrl instead of the being ‘proactive’. If their rules currently don’t stipulate that a player will be stood down pending a serious court case then the idiot leader will do his usual thing and pick and choose what to do and the players and fans will perceive it as favouritism or victimisation. If it is clearly stipulated that a player will be stood down then it is clear to all. Not sure you could back date that rule however
 
MissKate said:
Again it is going to be another ‘reactionary’ move by the nrl instead of the being ‘proactive’. If their rules currently don’t stipulate that a player will be stood down pending a serious court case then the idiot leader will do his usual thing and pick and choose what to do and the players and fans will perceive it as favouritism or victimisation. If it is clearly stipulated that a player will be stood down then it is clear to all. Not sure you could back date that rule however
Click to expand...

Yes what they need to do is formulate the new rules , have every single player read and sign them and understand the ramifications, and we move forward.

This half arsed treat one player this way and another that, write references for some and not others has to stop.

But can’t see how things can be backdated.
 
Tragic-Eagles said:
He should be suspended with pay and not permitted to play rep footy including origin before the trial.
Click to expand...

I am not going to tell everyone what the right or wrong answer is here.

But once again, for anyone advocating suspension until the conclusion of the trial:

Would you have supported the NRL if they suspended Brett Stewart for the 18 months (i.e. two entire seasons) between the time he was charged, and the verdict?

Yes or No?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Members online

Total: 153 (members: 3, guests: 150)

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

Online statistics

Members online
3
Guests online
150
Total visitors
153
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Latest posts

Newest members

Stay Connected

Back
Top Bottom