Eagle Eyed
Reserve Grader
He is a tosser, however he should be allowed to play, based on the fact all the other players are allowed to play.
Todd Carney was never accepted back and that only involved urine.He is a tosser, however he should be allowed to play, based on the fact all the other players are allowed to play.
Yep True, although he was always in the ****, the inconsistency is the thing that gets me, does not get a lot worse than Lodge and yet he's ok to play, then the question arises how long do you have to pay a penalty for mistakes, at the end of the day Curtis Scott is a knob anywayTodd Carney was never accepted back and that only involved urine.
Yes,that’s ALL Carney did 🙄🙄🙄Todd Carney was never accepted back and that only involved urine.
He is a tosser, however he should be allowed to play, based on the fact all the other players are allowed to play.
Would Dugan and Ferg enjoyed the rooftop breezers without his leadership?Yes,that’s ALL Carney did 🙄🙄🙄
He fits the alcoholic mould - just as Curtis does.Would Dugan and Ferg enjoyed the rooftop breezers without his leadership?
Not defending Carney but he is much more talented, won a Dally M and fits more the larrikin mould than this flog.
You could describe Carney as that,but he also had a very long list of indiscretions and many that were swept under the carpet or not made publicWould Dugan and Ferg enjoyed the rooftop breezers without his leadership?
Not defending Carney but he is much more talented, won a Dally M and fits more the larrikin mould than this flog.
Yeah, a bubbler impersonation of the worst kind.Todd Carney was never accepted back and that only involved urine.
Yeah, it's called having consistency, of which the NRL have very little.Finally some common sense outside of myself.
It just shows how morally corrupt the NRL is, depending on how popular the player is.
Yeah, it's called having consistency, of which the NRL have very little.
The players are helped.The NRL spend millions every year educating players.Anywhere from alcohol management to life after League programs.Every club has a qualified career coach.At some point,the players and their families need to take responsibility.I have zero interest in Curtis Scott as a person, however it schiits me completely when there is not consistently in the way sporting codes treat players.
Most of these guys are not educated and should be helped, not shunned.
The players are helped.The NRL spend millions every year educating players.Anywhere from alcohol management to life after League programs.Every club has a qualified career coach.At some point,the players and their families need to take responsibility.
As for consistency,you’re not going to get that when you have different people making the decisions.The administration that allowed the likes of Lodge and Packer to return to the game,are not currently running the NRL.Are you suggesting that because a previous CEO/Chairman allowed them to play again,that Abdo and PVL should be consistent and allow any current and future players who transgress,back into the league?At some point the bosses have to make a stand.
To understand your point - are you saying no-one should ever be sacked unless they are convicted of a crime?If they have had their day in court.
Yes.
Or are you suggesting that the court process is meanginless for NRL players and any player should be subject to additional punishment set by the NRL in a totally subjective manner?
To understand your point - are you saying no-one should ever be sacked unless they are convicted of a crime?
(which by the way in Curtis Scott case, he has been convicted of 3 domestic violence offences, also pleaded guilty of 2 counts of offensive behaviour for separate, unrelated matters, also accepted an NRL ban for a separate unrelated fight in a club - this is all stuff on the public record. Let alone whatever else his various clubs have managed to keep quiet)
Yep! If he was a dog you would put him down!To understand your point - are you saying no-one should ever be sacked unless they are convicted of a crime?
(which by the way in Curtis Scott case, he has been convicted of 3 domestic violence offences, also pleaded guilty of 2 counts of offensive behaviour for separate, unrelated matters, also accepted an NRL ban for a separate unrelated fight in a club - this is all stuff on the public record. Let alone whatever else his various clubs have managed to keep quiet)
Yep! If he was a dog you would put him down!
Just sayin’
Yep probably!So would have our so called forward saviour, Matt Lodge using your logic.
People get fired from a job for all sorts of indiscretions and can get re-hired in the same industry, yet we have a moral compass with this game that says "NO NO NO - NEVER AGAIN"Yep True, although he was always in the ****, the inconsistency is the thing that gets me, does not get a lot worse than Lodge and yet he's ok to play, then the question arises how long do you have to pay a penalty for mistakes, at the end of the day Curtis Scott is a knob anyway
You don't make a good argumentYep! If he was a dog you would put him down!
Just sayin’
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 |