Benji Marshall Questioned by Police
- Thread starter Ralphie
- Start date
You know as much as we all knew Brett was "wrongfully suspended and fined"Â does it make it better to do the same thing to Marshall, when at this stage he is "innocent untl proven guilty".
The Goose knows he did the wrong thing with Brett BUT can't say so, if he does it opens the gates to a legal claim (I would think), BUT there's no doubt he did learn from the experience and I think rightfully that Benji deserves his day in court and until then should be allowed to play.
I know that might not seem to be 'fair' but in business and life you learn as you go along and adapt to changes that have to be made....and the system does need to be changed to protect the innocent until proven guilty person (such as Brett).
The Goose knows he did the wrong thing with Brett BUT can't say so, if he does it opens the gates to a legal claim (I would think), BUT there's no doubt he did learn from the experience and I think rightfully that Benji deserves his day in court and until then should be allowed to play.
I know that might not seem to be 'fair' but in business and life you learn as you go along and adapt to changes that have to be made....and the system does need to be changed to protect the innocent until proven guilty person (such as Brett).
do we really need a face of Rugby league,with all that's going wrong with the person selected it seems like someone is giving us a hint or maybe it should be the faces of Rugby League which includes all the players then they will all go out and do something stupid and break the law and the goose Gallop wont know who to single out and his head will explode, now surely that would bring a smile to our faces.
Personally I would hate to see Benji (or any other player for that matter) given the same treatment that Snake got. We all know he was unfairly treated so does it make it any more right that another player cops the same.
Who knows what was actually said to marshall anyway. He declined to be interviewed and the only info we get is from the media. Marshall side says he was racial slurs, the tosser who provoked him says he said lockyer was better. ANother witness said that they didn't hear what was said but marshall was not intoxicated and signing autographs and having his picture taken with people in Maccas's and was in high spirits. Take from that what you will.
What ever was said yeah he should have walked away. But lets say this happened on the footy field, Tigers V roosters. Carney call Marshall I black C... Marshall decks Carney. I reckon the majority of people would support Marshall and his actions. Why - because it's on the footy field. And fans lov e to see a good stink. But then we go on how these blokes are role models and how Benji is a bad roll model for thumping some pissed bloke who had a go at him. Yet they are role models because of what they do on a footy field, which is where our kids see them and want to be like them. They take a swing off the field and we critise them. They take a swing on the field and we clap and cheer. ??? ???
Who knows what was actually said to marshall anyway. He declined to be interviewed and the only info we get is from the media. Marshall side says he was racial slurs, the tosser who provoked him says he said lockyer was better. ANother witness said that they didn't hear what was said but marshall was not intoxicated and signing autographs and having his picture taken with people in Maccas's and was in high spirits. Take from that what you will.
What ever was said yeah he should have walked away. But lets say this happened on the footy field, Tigers V roosters. Carney call Marshall I black C... Marshall decks Carney. I reckon the majority of people would support Marshall and his actions. Why - because it's on the footy field. And fans lov e to see a good stink. But then we go on how these blokes are role models and how Benji is a bad roll model for thumping some pissed bloke who had a go at him. Yet they are role models because of what they do on a footy field, which is where our kids see them and want to be like them. They take a swing off the field and we critise them. They take a swing on the field and we clap and cheer. ??? ???
Berkeley_Eagle
Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan
A sickening thought but Gallop as the face of league 😉
mickqld link said:
Which one would he use?
[/quote]
The s**tfaced. f**king hypocrite arsehole has he ever had a drink in his life and been intoxicated. Go f**k yourself Gallop and your News Ltd mates.
[/quote]
That's telling him Mick
Berkeley_Eagle
Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan
Just thru on Twitter
"no other misconduct than the assault charge. It's a matter that needs to go to court. We accept no action can be taken by the club"
Post automatically merged: [time]1299474268[/time]
imo
Fair enough, so if he gets found guilty then suspend him & fine him,
btw will benji be off his game now?
lets talk footy now,
"no other misconduct than the assault charge. It's a matter that needs to go to court. We accept no action can be taken by the club"
Post automatically merged: [time]1299474268[/time]
imo
Fair enough, so if he gets found guilty then suspend him & fine him,
btw will benji be off his game now?
lets talk footy now,
Brookie4eva
Bencher
Full NRL statement here - http://www.nrl.com/nrl-statement-regarding-benji-marshall/tabid/10874/newsid/61606/default.aspx
But the interesting paragraph -
"In the case of matters where the NRL finds a player’s behaviour has breached the NRL or the club’s code of conduct prior to him being charged, particularly in relation to alcohol abuse, the NRL reserves the right to act in regard to those matters that are not subject to dispute in the court. In the Brett Stewart case, the NRL publicly stated that it was suspending the player over conduct earlier in the evening and that it made no judgment in relation to the charge which was later to result in a ‘not guilty’ verdict. The jury made no finding in relation to events other than the sexual assault allegations."
So they are saying Benji only did the assault not any other poor behaviour and wasn't pissed, so let the assault charges go through court with no other penalty.
But with Brett, he was suspended for his behaviour prior to him going home, and not the charges he had laid against him.
At least they are trying to cover their arse here, as poorly as it is.
But the interesting paragraph -
"In the case of matters where the NRL finds a player’s behaviour has breached the NRL or the club’s code of conduct prior to him being charged, particularly in relation to alcohol abuse, the NRL reserves the right to act in regard to those matters that are not subject to dispute in the court. In the Brett Stewart case, the NRL publicly stated that it was suspending the player over conduct earlier in the evening and that it made no judgment in relation to the charge which was later to result in a ‘not guilty’ verdict. The jury made no finding in relation to events other than the sexual assault allegations."
So they are saying Benji only did the assault not any other poor behaviour and wasn't pissed, so let the assault charges go through court with no other penalty.
But with Brett, he was suspended for his behaviour prior to him going home, and not the charges he had laid against him.
At least they are trying to cover their arse here, as poorly as it is.
Berkeley_Eagle
Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan
Gallop is stumbling
This 4 eyed C bomb just needs to come out and say he was wrong with the way he handled to Snake drama, I am sick of this!
Well we have one thing in common with the Storm and that is they hate Gallop as much as we do if not more maybe we can spread the word around the stadium on saturday and start up the "gallops a wanker" chant!!!!
Well we have one thing in common with the Storm and that is they hate Gallop as much as we do if not more maybe we can spread the word around the stadium on saturday and start up the "gallops a wanker" chant!!!!
Berkeley_Eagle
Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan
Dave link said:
Imagine GF day when we have 55,000 + Manly fans chanting that
The point is, that in the Stewart case, the prosecutor tried valiantly to prove Brett was intoxicated (drunk) before the alleged assault. No one, barmen, people in the street, those accompanying him, CCCTV both inside and outside the various hotels, or the police said he was drunk. He wasn't charged with being drunk in a public place. How can Gallop continue to make this assertion that he was drunk? It just wasn't true.   Â
willstyles
Bencher
Dave link said:
Hah - the one thing the two fan groups could agree on.
I think the Benji/Carney verdicts are fair in isolation, but of course are quite unfair when compared to Stewart's treatment.
It all comes down to one thing: Stewart was treated disgracefully, and they jumped the gun because of a build-up of off-field sh*t across the competition that had nothing to do with Brett. The relationship between Stewart/the NRL has clearly suffered irreparable damage from this debacle. Not sure what can be done/said by Gallop that would repair the bridge there other than admitting his mistake, which isn't an option because of the legal ramifications.
Stuck between a rock and a hard place really.
Sadly, the best thing for Snake is to just ignore it all, score tries and hope no one f*cks up in the future so they keep bringing up the toughest time in his life when he was wrongly accused and had a cleanskin reputation tarnished for two straight years.
willstyles
Bencher
I think you know the answer to that.
Mud sticks.
Mud sticks.
Users who are viewing this thread
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 | 1 | 0 | 36 | 2 |
|
1 | 1 | 0 | 30 | 2 |
|
1 | 1 | 0 | 22 | 2 |
|
1 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 2 |
|
1 | 1 | 0 | 6 | 2 |
|
1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
|
1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
1 | 0 | 1 | -2 | 0 |
|
1 | 0 | 1 | -2 | 0 |
|
1 | 0 | 1 | -6 | 0 |
|
1 | 0 | 1 | -8 | 0 |
|
1 | 0 | 1 | -22 | 0 |
|
1 | 0 | 1 | -30 | 0 |
|
1 | 0 | 1 | -36 | 0 |