Greenturds selective policy

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
Where's Rex Mossop when we need him. He would have given Greenberg a good shellacking before he introduced his derriere to his size 12s. He'd be mortified and after giving Greenberg a good 'verbal tongue lashing' he'd have to have to put the boot in, preferably 'in the groin, somewhere in the upper leg'. He'd be 'flabbergasted' he would. Oh I miss the Moose
 
Mate ... Mateeee .... I have been known to exagerate at times ... even bend the truth .... but seriously ... Julia Gillard wouldn't be an improvement on genital herpes .....
Woodsie I ’d take her or even Walt Disney s cryovaced head over Greenturd
He is beyond hopeless and hapless
 
Good news regarding Reynolds but it shows the Police in a poor light. Did they simply believe the woman and not investigate her background?
Why was he charged in the first place?

Unfortunately that seems to be the way of the world these days, especially with regards to DV. All a woman has to do is say that he physically abused her and 99% of the time he gets arrested just on her word alone.

Luckily for Reynolds, the truth was found out. How many others are out there who've been accused of things like that when in reality they are completely innocent?

Most things like DVO's, AVO's etc are given out these days like confetti and most of the time there isn't even any evidence needed to have one put on. Things like these are a powerful tool in family courts and can severely affect one parent's rights (usually the father, but not always) to even see their kids, even if the allegation is completely false.
 
Most things like DVO's, AVO's etc are given out these days like confetti and most of the time there isn't even any evidence needed to have one put on
Completely untrue!
AVO's are not 'given out like confetti' without even 'any evidence'.
Upon receiving a credible complaint police can apply for an AVO and/or lay domestic violence charges. If the defendant believes the complaint is baseless they can contest it at court. And if there is no evidence the charges and the AVO would be thrown out. 100%.
So I wonder where you are getting those ideas.
 
I'll qualify my earlier answer above - yes, temporary (provisional) AVOs can be put in force on application by police before any matters are contested at court. That can only happen if police have "good reason" to believe it is necessary. In other words, some evidence. They can't do it just on a hunch or guess.

As to 'evidence' - certainly there seems some confusion generally among lay people as to what is 'evidence'. And what evidence is admissible in a court case.

The word of a complainant can be evidence, and you can be convicted of very serious crimes based on evidence of one person. It is not necessary to have CCTV, fingerprints, DNA, or eye-witnesses, although obviously a prosecution (or defence) case can be strengthened by such evidence.

Also worth bearing in mind that most domestic and sexual violence does not occur out in public where there might be a lot of 'objective' evidence. It is quite common for the word of the complainant to be the only evidence in such cases. Which is one reason why many victims don't even bother to make a formal complaint. The fact that so many domestic incidents escalate over time means police have adopted a pragmatic approach (arse-covering) because they are rightly damned if they receive a complaint from a woman or child, take no action, and things later escalate. Which we all know happens with alarming frequency. Therefore unless there is something obviously problematic in the original complaint, police will generally take the safer option and apply for an AVO or lay a charge, which then allows a court to sort it all out later.

Meanwhile it's true a provisional AVO might be in place and yes that certainly can have consequences for the defendant if there are family proceedings afoot.

In the Reynolds case it appears the police did take a closer look, no doubt prompted by information leaked publicly about the complainant, and have eventually taken the appropriate course which was to withdraw the charges. I note the police and DPP were criticised in the Brett Stewart case for not taking similar action. The reality is, the more serious the allegation, the more likely the police will leave it for the courts to sort out.
 
Completely untrue!
AVO's are not 'given out like confetti' without even 'any evidence'.
Upon receiving a credible complaint police can apply for an AVO and/or lay domestic violence charges. If the defendant believes the complaint is baseless they can contest it at court. And if there is no evidence the charges and the AVO would be thrown out. 100%.
So I wonder where you are getting those ideas.
John Price’s family would certainly contest such claims. Do you remember him? He’s the bloke who was stabbed, beheaded, skinned and cooked by Katherine Knight.

36 hours before his murder the police showed up on his doorstep with an AVO which they had to serve on him BY LAW because Katherine Knight made a complaint. When John demanded that she be removed from HIS house (she didn’t even live there) he was told that he needed to get a court order. 36 hours later the man was dead in what is widely regarded as one of the worst cases in Australian history.

This woman terrorised every single one of her previous partners and cut the throat of an 8 week old dingo pup to gain revenge on one of her husbands. She was able to do what she did because the system was geared in her favour.

I have a good friend who was completely stitched up by his ex wife in a similar situation (minus the homicide.) It was a blatant act of malice on her part which almost destroyed his livelihood.

Perhaps things have changed since 2000. I’m no lawyer, but these two examples certainly support what @HoldenV8 has inferred in the post above.
 
Last edited:
The noose is around your scrawny neck Greenturd, you allow Scott to play with serious charges against him and if hes found guilty of these charges you must swing! The rank hypocrisy of this policy has a stench to it and the person making the executive decisions remains unaccountable! I smell a huge law suit coming against the NRL if one of the banned players is found innocent by the courts. This whole policy is not protecting the game. the game is a laughing stock that some players are banned while others are allowed to play because they play for one of your pet clubs it stinks!!!!
 
See ya....
Todd Greenberg’s future as NRL chief executive could be decided as early as next week amid growing concerns about his position in the game.
Greenberg, who this week was forced to defend the NRL’s revamp of the Tina Turner Simply The Best campaign, has several other issues affecting his leadership.
His relationship with ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys has been described as having “friction”, while several club bosses are believed to be unhappy with his performance.

There’s also concerns around Greenberg’s stance on suburban grounds and the stadium rebuilds of Allianz and ANZ, as well as the no-fault stand-down policy.


“There’s enormous unrest among the clubs about his role. And not just necessarily coming from the (ARL) Commission.”

V’landys and his fellow ARL commissioners will meet next week where the main topic of discussion will be Greenberg.

“So the independent commission have to decide next week whether to take up that option or let him run his contract out in October.

“I have a feeling it’s going to blow up next week and they will not take up the option.

“So he’ll still be there — but he won’t have a long-term future in the game.”

Greenberg is keen to remain at the helm of the NRL, having steered the game through a number of controversial issues in the past four years.

Whether that’s enough to sway commissioners V’landys, Gary Weiss, Wayne Pearce, Tony McGrath, Megan Davis and Amanda Laing, remains to be seen.


“He’s been ringing chairmen, he’s been ringing chief executives, all the key powerbrokers in the game in recent days trying to shore-up support.

It’ll end up being a Commission decision — they’ll make the call.

“There’s a couple of options – they might just say ‘look, we’re not ready to extend at the moment, let’s have another look in October’ and quietly start looking around for other options. If there’s no better options they’ll sign Todd again.

“But it’s the clubs as much as V’landys, I’m told, are not happy with Todd at the moment, for various reasons.”

Weighing in Greenberg’s favour is the fact the NRL last week announced a second straight surplus of more than $30 million, part of which Greenberg attributed to its strong stance on player behaviour and how he believed the no-fault stand-down policy had protected the league’s image and revenue.

“The other important issue and it’s been in the media a lot lately, is suburban grounds.

“Peter V’landys is desperate to get rid of television matches at ANZ Stadium with 65,000 empty seats in the background.

“He wants suburban ground rugby league.

“Todd Greenberg is very tight with Darryl Kerry at ANZ Stadium. Todd Greenberg is very tight with the (NSW) Premier Gladys (Berejiklian).
 
See ya....
Todd Greenberg’s future as NRL chief executive could be decided as early as next week amid growing concerns about his position in the game.
Greenberg, who this week was forced to defend the NRL’s revamp of the Tina Turner Simply The Best campaign, has several other issues affecting his leadership.
His relationship with ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys has been described as having “friction”, while several club bosses are believed to be unhappy with his performance.

There’s also concerns around Greenberg’s stance on suburban grounds and the stadium rebuilds of Allianz and ANZ, as well as the no-fault stand-down policy.


“There’s enormous unrest among the clubs about his role. And not just necessarily coming from the (ARL) Commission.”

V’landys and his fellow ARL commissioners will meet next week where the main topic of discussion will be Greenberg.

“So the independent commission have to decide next week whether to take up that option or let him run his contract out in October.

“I have a feeling it’s going to blow up next week and they will not take up the option.

“So he’ll still be there — but he won’t have a long-term future in the game.”

Greenberg is keen to remain at the helm of the NRL, having steered the game through a number of controversial issues in the past four years.

Whether that’s enough to sway commissioners V’landys, Gary Weiss, Wayne Pearce, Tony McGrath, Megan Davis and Amanda Laing, remains to be seen.


“He’s been ringing chairmen, he’s been ringing chief executives, all the key powerbrokers in the game in recent days trying to shore-up support.

It’ll end up being a Commission decision — they’ll make the call.

“There’s a couple of options – they might just say ‘look, we’re not ready to extend at the moment, let’s have another look in October’ and quietly start looking around for other options. If there’s no better options they’ll sign Todd again.

“But it’s the clubs as much as V’landys, I’m told, are not happy with Todd at the moment, for various reasons.”

Weighing in Greenberg’s favour is the fact the NRL last week announced a second straight surplus of more than $30 million, part of which Greenberg attributed to its strong stance on player behaviour and how he believed the no-fault stand-down policy had protected the league’s image and revenue.

“The other important issue and it’s been in the media a lot lately, is suburban grounds.

“Peter V’landys is desperate to get rid of television matches at ANZ Stadium with 65,000 empty seats in the background.

“He wants suburban ground rugby league.

“Todd Greenberg is very tight with Darryl Kerry at ANZ Stadium. Todd Greenberg is very tight with the (NSW) Premier Gladys (Berejiklian).

MoonDoggy .... who wrote that article .... hopefully someone in the know ......
 
Greenberg is keen to remain at the helm of the NRL, having steered the game through a number of controversial issues in the past four years.

More like stumbled and bumbled his way through while making clearly biased decisions that favour certain clubs ... which just happen to be the same clubs clearly favoured by the league's broadcast benefactor Ch.9.
 
See ya....
Todd Greenberg’s future as NRL chief executive could be decided as early as next week amid growing concerns about his position in the game.
Greenberg, who this week was forced to defend the NRL’s revamp of the Tina Turner Simply The Best campaign, has several other issues affecting his leadership.
His relationship with ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys has been described as having “friction”, while several club bosses are believed to be unhappy with his performance.

There’s also concerns around Greenberg’s stance on suburban grounds and the stadium rebuilds of Allianz and ANZ, as well as the no-fault stand-down policy.


“There’s enormous unrest among the clubs about his role. And not just necessarily coming from the (ARL) Commission.”

V’landys and his fellow ARL commissioners will meet next week where the main topic of discussion will be Greenberg.

“So the independent commission have to decide next week whether to take up that option or let him run his contract out in October.

“I have a feeling it’s going to blow up next week and they will not take up the option.

“So he’ll still be there — but he won’t have a long-term future in the game.”

Greenberg is keen to remain at the helm of the NRL, having steered the game through a number of controversial issues in the past four years.

Whether that’s enough to sway commissioners V’landys, Gary Weiss, Wayne Pearce, Tony McGrath, Megan Davis and Amanda Laing, remains to be seen.


“He’s been ringing chairmen, he’s been ringing chief executives, all the key powerbrokers in the game in recent days trying to shore-up support.

It’ll end up being a Commission decision — they’ll make the call.

“There’s a couple of options – they might just say ‘look, we’re not ready to extend at the moment, let’s have another look in October’ and quietly start looking around for other options. If there’s no better options they’ll sign Todd again.

“But it’s the clubs as much as V’landys, I’m told, are not happy with Todd at the moment, for various reasons.”

Weighing in Greenberg’s favour is the fact the NRL last week announced a second straight surplus of more than $30 million, part of which Greenberg attributed to its strong stance on player behaviour and how he believed the no-fault stand-down policy had protected the league’s image and revenue.

“The other important issue and it’s been in the media a lot lately, is suburban grounds.

“Peter V’landys is desperate to get rid of television matches at ANZ Stadium with 65,000 empty seats in the background.

“He wants suburban ground rugby league.

“Todd Greenberg is very tight with Darryl Kerry at ANZ Stadium. Todd Greenberg is very tight with the (NSW) Premier Gladys (Berejiklian).
See y’a you bald headed drop kick
 
Unfortunately i see a poor rights deal coming up, it will be greensnots parting gift.
 
20200306_222403.jpg
is this actually happening???
 
Team P W L PD Pts
5 4 1 23 10
5 4 1 14 10
6 4 2 48 8
6 4 2 28 8
5 3 2 25 8
5 3 2 14 8
6 3 2 38 7
6 3 2 21 7
6 3 3 37 6
6 3 3 16 6
6 3 3 -13 6
5 2 3 -15 6
6 3 3 -36 6
6 2 4 -5 4
6 2 4 -7 4
5 0 5 -86 2
6 1 5 -102 2
Back
Top Bottom