DeBellin to appeal

[MadMarcus]

I hope Beattie and Todd get reminded that they are not above the law

 

[BOZO]

While it generally is innocent until proven guilty he is also an idol to many young Men and Women and kids and this charge is a serious one despite what people believe.

And without evidence there would have been no charges made. While at the moment it’s he said she said, suing because you believe you’ve been unfairly treated in way of being stood down is ridiculous.

Very ballsy move though and may leave the door open for many others

We can also see it this way . The player is an idol to many young Men and Woman and this serious charge that they have not been proven guilty of should not be a smear against them until proven guilty by a fair trial .
It is totally unfair to treat some one like a criminal when they have not been fairly convicted .

 

[The Wheel]

This appeal in the Federal court was a topic of discussion last night at the launch with some legal people in attendance that I know well. There is a view that Toddy law is a definite restraint of trade - for those of you who remember the draft restraint of trade brought that unstuck

 

[NZEaglesFan]

I think the NRL should not be allowed to retrospective penalise players for an incident that happened before the law was put in place. If this is the case then all the suspended players would be free to play.

Even though I do not condone what the players did, I would love to see the look on NRL’s decision makers and what other excuse they use to get around this issue. The way some of the decisions are made by the NRL, I am surprised that no one have challenged them earlier. I think a decision to suspend any players should be done before a player’s tribunal and not at the discretion of a few within the organisation.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

This appeal in the Federal court was a topic of discussion last night at the launch with some legal people in attendance that I know well. There is a view that Toddy law is a definite restraint of trade - for those of you who remember the draft restraint of trade brought that unstuck

I know nothing about the law BUT logically thinking of it, I would agree with that comment.

I think he’ll win the injunction, but may not win when it gets to court.

Meaning he, Napa, Bolton & Walker can be picked for round 1.

 

[fLIP]

The NRLs actions haven't exactly had the effect I think they were hoping to achieve.

If anything it's brought more attention to the league and these players.

Not to mention it won't look good in court when the prosecution uses the 'stood down from employment' line to insinuate his employer somehow has knowledge of guilt; which they clearly don't.

Todd and Peter really just needed to stay the f out of it all until a verdict is handed down.

Perhaps Todd, spend more time on prevention instead of playing Judge, jury and executioner.

 

[Sue]

Geez they’ve made a mess of this by tying suspensions to criminal proceedings and this no fault bul**** .
Not sure if people realise it but there are two things at play here( in a previous life I had experience as a litigation lawyer)

1 Criminal proceedings and beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof

2. Contrary conduct provisions in the players contacts that are broad and basically at the discretion of NRL with a far more lenient standard of proof. Just simple discretion of the NRL.There are none of the strict requirements for a criminal conviction. Most of the time they are not dealing with alleged crimes. Just mug behaviour. In effect they apply the pub test. Is this grub behaviour ? Yep. Cop 4 weeks and go home lad!

De Belin and Walker may or may not have been guilty of the offences with which they are charged but I’m damn sure the circumstances of both cases would be covered by the NRL s discretion as to contrary conduct. Just like Bubbler, Pearce and co

Should have just left it as is and suspended them for bad behaviour under the contrary conduct provision. Draw the line in the sand with heavy suspensions , not this no fault rubbish. If they are found guilty then punish them again when the verdict comes in and due process has occurred.

If Toddy has botched this now you can have the ludicrous situation where a bloke just makes a fool of himself like Bubbler and Pearce and gets 8 weeks while players charged with serious criminal offences get no suspension at all until much later, and then only if they are found guilty under a far more stringent burden of proof.They may have acted disgracefully and worse than blokes who have been suspended but if the behaviour falls short of being criminal they get no punishment.

The contrary conduct provisions are important . Otherwise fools could just trash the brand without it being criminal with impunity. You don’t have to commit a crime to get sacked. Seems to me a lot of people are confusing a defendants right to a presumption of innocence with what behaviour is acceptable in the workplace. Totally different issues with totally different standards of behaviour and burden of proof. An organisation has a right to protect itself against behaviour that is disgraceful but falls short of being criminal. Otherwise it would be total chaos.

Toddy botched it again. The current system allowed him to throw the book at them for simply behaving like mugs and then they could have gone again after a guilty verdict after due process had been adhered to.

So simple but far too hard for Beaty and Turd.

I notice De Belin is contesting the contrary conduct part as well. Be a lot harder for him to beat that.

 

[bob dylan]

DeBelin will be allowed to play . Everyone is innocent until conviction. Regardless of rules the NRL just made up - it’s a restriction of trade for starters and unlawful ban .
Just an opinion.

His bail could be revoked, as it probably should be.

 

[Budgie]

Geez I’m torn here. Always been first to advocate the presumption of innocence until proven guilty argument, BUT the NRL needs to do something.
Despite constant ribbing from my friends, I’ve been a rusted on League fan for decades. But, as a woman, I am finding all this sleaze impossible to defend. I no longer watch non Manly games because I don’t want to watch seriously rubbish people. And I don’t want to cheer on Dickhead Dylan in our colours.
Truth.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Geez they’ve made a mess of this by tying suspensions to criminal proceedings and this no fault bul**** .
Not sure if people realise it but there are two things at play here

1 Criminal proceedings and beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof

2. Contrary conduct provisions in the players contacts that are broad and basically at the discretion of NRL with a far more lenient standard of proof. Just simple discretion of the NRL.

De Belin and Walker may or may not have been guilty of the offences with which they are charged but I’m damn sure the circumstances of both cases would be covered by the NRL s discretion as to contrary conduct. Just like Bubbler, Pearce and co

Should have just left it as is and suspended them for bad behaviour under the contrary conduct provision. Draw the line in the sand with heavy suspensions , not this no fault rubbish. If they are found guilty then punish them again when the verdict comes in and due process has occurred.

Now you can have the ludicrous situation where a bloke just makes a fool of himself like Bubbler and Pearce and gets 8 weeks while players charged with serious criminal offences get no suspension at all until much later, and then only if they are found guilty under a far more stringent burden of proof.They may have acted disgracefully and worse than blokes who have been suspended but if the behaviour falls short of being criminal they get no punishment.

Toddy botched it again. The current system allowed him to throw the book at them for simply behaving like mugs and then they could have gone again after a guilty verdict after due process had been adhered to.

So simple but far too hard for Beaty and Turd.

I notice De Belin is contesting the contrary conduct part as well. Be a lot harder for him to beat that.

But he could well win the injunction part.

 

[Rodo]

Lets hope Greenberg goes down. But as they say nothing sticks to Teflon Todd so de Bellin will likely lose the case.

 

[Sue]

Yep Mark. That’s my point . The NRL should never have tied this to criminal proceedings. Absolute fools.

But the injunction against the application of contrary conduct provisions will be a lot harder to get than an injunction based on being denied the presumption of innocence in a criminal proceeding.

Put it this way. If the NRL lose out on the contrary conduct provision then every dickhead in the world will be in court to avoid suspension and if they succeed the inmates will run the asylum. Toddy could have really botched this.

How simple is it to let the trial process go ahead , Jack retains his presumption of innocence as is his right , and they simply apply the contrary conduct measures at their discretion.
Suspend him for a term for being a mug and let the courts decide the rest.

Now it is a basket case.

 

[Woodsie]

Would the dragons play him against Turdy's orders?
Interesting times.

1000/1 against that happening .... St Gorge went to water at even the mention of supporting DeBelins court case .... In exactly the same way Manly went all jellyfish with appealing the Walker ban .... The NRL has the clubs by the dangly bits financially and they will just nod and say yes dear ....

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Yep Mark. That’s my point . The NRL should never have tied this to criminal proceedings. Absolute fools.

But the injunction against the application of contrary conduct provisions will be a lot harder to get than an injunction based on being denied the presumption of innocence in a criminal proceeding.

Put it this way. If the NRL lose out on the contrary conduct provision then every dickhead in the world will be in court to avoid suspension and if they succeed the inmates will run the asylum. Toddy could have really botched this.

How simple is it to let the trial process go ahead , Jack retains his presumption of innocence as is his right , and they simply apply the contrary conduct measures at their discretion.
Suspend him for a term for being a mug and let the courts decide the rest.

Now it is a basket case.

You could rightfully say they have well and truly ****ed it up!!

 

[Rodo]

If the incident with Snake had happened now then he would have been suspended for effectively 2 full seasons. And he was completely innocent. Not many players can come back from a 2 year suspension when they have such a short rugby league career as it is.

 

[Woodsie]

Surely the NRL legal mob would’ve foreseen such a challenge to their rule change? But then you’ve got DeBellin pertentially going broke by self funding his legal challenge if denied with costs and damages. So his legal mob are obviously damn sure they’ve found a loop-hole. If there’s one thing for sure, this is going to drag on for ages.

1) No, the NRL mob knee jerk and have no respect for the laws of unintended consequences ... no matter how many times it has come back to bite them ..

2) On costs .... this will be a very high profile case with potentially a lot of up side for a successful Law firm ... I suspect a deal has been done with the lawyers ... hence the "damages" component of the case ....

3) The initial case is time sensitive, hence it is in court today ..... an appeal however could be very lengthy

 

[Fibro Eagle]

The problem with comparing the standing down of a person from there position eg: Police officer , Teacher. To Debelin is that usually the person’s name and face is suppressed due to the influence of being named or exposed in media as it can affect the case , The way Debelin has been treated one might now presume he is guilty ,and he may well be . The NRL has acted in that way
This is one big clusterf#*%k

 

[Woodsie]

Of topic ... but not really ..

Has it been established that the NRL has a higher incidence of poor male behavour than any other occupation or past time .. ???

 

[wombatgc]

Of topic ... but not really ..

Has it been established that the NRL has a higher incidence of poor male behavour than any other occupation or past time .. ???

I think the Catholic Church might be in the running.

 

[Fibro Eagle]

It’s just

Of topic ... but not really ..

Has it been established that the NRL has a higher incidence of poor male behavour than any other occupation or past time .. ???

It’s just more visible to us cause we follow NRL more closely than other sports or professions
Below is a link on English footballers and that’s just one sport

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/859240-15-footballers-who-spent-time-in-jail