JDB Federal Court Challenge

[BK13]

I just wrote this to the NRL.

To Whom It May Concern

I just wanted to say I find Todd Greenburgs recent comments surrounding how he came up with the 'no fault, stand down policy' due to discussions with his daughter an absolute joke.

Is this now how policy is determined at NRL Headquarters? We have let an absolute thug (Matt Lodge) back into the game who was found guilty of one of the most disgusting acts of violence and intimidation back into the game, (and all because Todd said he looked into his eyes and found redemption) and yet have rubbed out players now who are accused of certain acts.

Don't get me wrong. If Jack De Belin (or anyone) is found guilty of some of these acts, they need to go to prison, and be rubbed out of the game for life. But this stance currently by the NRL is a typical hysterical, knee jerk reaction which lacks any kind of due process in a civilised world.

Has the Brett Stewart case (yes as a Manly fan I am going to bring this up) taught the NRL nothing? Obviously not. Stewart was shunned by the NRL and years on you would still hear the despicable 'rapist' calls coming from opposition fans.....because he was deemed guilty. Even though found innocent....he's still guilty.

This De Belin debacle is headed in exactly the same direction, standing him down makes him guilty.....and even if found innocent....he's guilty. Where is the concern for his mental welfare? For his families? Just another casualty of Todd Greenburg and his ill thought out policies.

Regards

Andrew

 

[HappilyManly]

Guess we can add the storm ceo to the list of people happy to fib under oath.

I'm amazed that the Scumos are so intimately involved in this JDB case.

How does it affect them? Their Sponsors are from a completely different market.

Scumos are the only Club to have premierships stripped for systematic cheating and being 25% over the Cap, yet have Sponsors to thus day

Just a curious situation with the Scumo CEO involving them in this case

 

[HappilyManly]

Not only that, Edrick Lee put his foot on the touchline right in front of Casey Badger and she failed to see it, luckily it was picked up by the bunker, it could have cost us the game.
Now I'm one for women being given equal opportunity in all forms of employment where it's possible, but I would hate it if a better linesman was left out due to political correctness, just saying.

Lets not hang out a fairly junior linesman here.

Plenty of them miss foot in touch or blatant illegal acts in tackles each week.
The Rabbids short kick off went 8 meters right in front of one just recently

The reasons given for the Cows Refs being dropped was

1) the pocket Ref literally walking past the 2 injured players and ignoring them

2) Ref waving away a Trainer who tried to report the injuries

The Vidiot was even more guilty of neglect IMO as he had the luxury of watching a replay and noting the players on the ground

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

I just wrote this to the NRL.

To Whom It May Concern

I just wanted to say I find Todd Greenburgs recent comments surrounding how he came up with the 'no fault, stand down policy' due to discussions with his daughter an absolute joke.

Is this now how policy is determined at NRL Headquarters? We have let an absolute thug (Matt Lodge) back into the game who was found guilty of one of the most disgusting acts of violence and intimidation back into the game, (and all because Todd said he looked into his eyes and found redemption) and yet have rubbed out players now who are accused of certain acts.

Don't get me wrong. If Jack De Belin (or anyone) is found guilty of some of these acts, they need to go to prison, and be rubbed out of the game for life. But this stance currently by the NRL is a typical hysterical, knee jerk reaction which lacks any kind of due process in a civilised world.

Has the Brett Stewart case (yes as a Manly fan I am going to bring this up) taught the NRL nothing? Obviously not. Stewart was shunned by the NRL and years on you would still hear the despicable 'rapist' calls coming from opposition fans.....because he was deemed guilty. Even though found innocent....he's still guilty.

This De Belin debacle is headed in exactly the same direction, standing him down makes him guilty.....and even if found innocent....he's guilty. Where is the concern for his mental welfare? For his families? Just another casualty of Todd Greenburg and his ill thought out policies.

Regards

Andrew

Nicely written mate!!

 

[HoldenV8]

Not only that, Edrick Lee put his foot on the touchline right in front of Casey Badger and she failed to see it, luckily it was picked up by the bunker, it could have cost us the game.
Now I'm one for women being given equal opportunity in all forms of employment where it's possible, but I would hate it if a better linesman was left out due to political correctness, just saying.

I've got nothing against more female involvement in the game of rugby league, so long as those who get into positions of importance of such as refereeing do their jobs competently and correctly, the same we expect of any male referees.

With the obvious exception of the NRL's players being male, women in league should be encouraged. However, it should never come down to gender. Any position obtained, from a CEO to a referee, a broadcast commentator, a trainer, maybe one day even coaches, should be based on the best person for the job.

 

[Disco]

I just find that Greenberg anecdote weird

I mean I could understand player behavior turning you off watching, going to and supporting NRL but why would anything happening in the NRL stop you from playing touch footy yourself.

The enjoyment of the sport itself, fitness and team camaraderie doesn't change?

Like as an example....I like the odd round of golf. If Tiger Woods or Adam Scott murdered 87 people is some act of craziness............then maybe I wouldn't tune in and cheer them in the Masters but if my mate suggested 9 holes on the weekend, of course I'd go play

I dunno....I just find it a weird example

 

[Pittwater Legend]

Not only that, Edrick Lee put his foot on the touchline right in front of Casey Badger and she failed to see it, luckily it was picked up by the bunker, it could have cost us the game.
Now I'm one for women being given equal opportunity in all forms of employment where it's possible, but I would hate it if a better linesman was left out due to political correctness, just saying.

I’m willing to give Casey the benefit of the doubt with that call. It was quite obvious with the 2nd replay that Edrick’s foot had touched the line but one of Garrick’s leg had swung around in the tackle and would have blocked her vision of his foot going on the touch line. If I was in her position I don’t think I would have seen it either

 

[Shoe1]

I'm amazed that the Scumos are so intimately involved in this JDB case.

How does it affect them? Their Sponsors are from a completely different market.

Scumos are the only Club to have premierships stripped for systematic cheating and being 25% over the Cap, yet have Sponsors to thus day

Just a curious situation with the Scumo CEO involving them in this case

Because they are the nrl’s pet club

 

[Bearfax]

The trouble with the NRL is that it is responding to hysteria among certain elements of the public that have obviously no concept of law or human rights (of course their attitude would quickly change if it affected them). And then for Greenberg to come to court and express anecdotal evidence about his daughter and the Storm boss to pick out of the sky a cost to his club shows a total ineptitude on their part when it comes to legal issues. If the judge rules in their favour, and I doubt she will, she needs to be sacked herself.

This is about Constitutional legal practice and to reach any verdict against that is unconstitutional. Constitutional issues can only be altered by a majority of voters in each and all states following the introduction of a referendum, which itself requires 10,000 people to petition the Federal Govt to initiate a referendum. The NRL is just trying to muddy the waters concerning the right to interfere with an individual rights while deemed innocent under the law until their court judgement.

I don't know what all the fuss is about quite frankly. If the individual is found guilty, the NRL is then free to act. Why the pre-emptive strike? It smacks of knee jerking and total disregard for the players, an attempt to deal with this to make themselves look good at the expense of the welfare of those they are responsible for. Absolutely selfish skulduggery. Shameful. Greenberg's daughter should be ashamed of him.

 

[Ranga]

So the Melbourne chair said that JDB and the others cost the Storm $500k in sponsorship. Are they sure it is not because they extended Scam’s time with the club for another two years? That decision rather than JDB’s charges would influence me way more if I was a sponsor!

 

[Shoe1]

So the Melbourne chair said that JDB and the others cost the Storm $500k in sponsorship. Are they sure it is not because they extended Scam’s time with the club for another two years? That decision rather than JDB’s charges would influence me way more if I was a sponsor!

Again, the loss of sponsorship may well be true.

But how does that relate to the point of law being tested in court? Answer: it doesn’t.

 

[Ranga]

Again, the loss of sponsorship may well be true.

But how does that relate to the point of law being tested in court? Answer: it doesn’t.

I guess we will find out how relevant it is, if at all, next week when the judge hands down the decision.

 

[BrendonStarr]

So the Melbourne chair said that JDB and the others cost the Storm $500k in sponsorship. Are they sure it is not because they extended Scam’s time with the club for another two years? That decision rather than JDB’s charges would influence me way more if I was a sponsor!

Its all easy for them to make these outlandish statements but where is the supporting evidence to back up such claims. Its no ****ing business of the Storms. Why the **** are they even involved.

 

[Ranga]

Its all easy for them to make these outlandish statements but where is the supporting evidence to back up such claims. Its no ****ing business of the Storms. Why the **** are they even involved.

The corporate world is often simply a case of favours given and favours called in return. I’ve seen it all too often. The NRL is no different so I reckon the Storm are either giving to receive something down the track or Todd has called in a previous favour.

 

[BrendonStarr]

The loss of sponsorship could be due to any number of reasons. Unless the Storm have representitives of these so called lost sponsors in court willing to testify as supporting evidence, this should have absolutely no bearing upon the outcome of the case.

 

[ManEagle]

The Storm CEO can really only give evidence that he has lost sponsors, anything else he say is merely hearsay unless those sponsors are also giving evidence.
As for the favour, as I said earlier, its very obvious this is payback favour for Billy Slater beating the Shoulder Charge.

 

[Shoe1]

Maybe the storm are being called as expert witnesses, because they are highly experienced at being a hugely unpopular team that struggle to attract fans and sponsors.

 

[Ranga]

It is interesting that no sponsor was called to give evidence. I would have thought a representative of a potential corporate sponsor would be happy to offer themselves to give evidence that player misbehaviour was their reason for pulling out of sponsorship. It would be some cheap publicity and they would be able to extol their virtues as an ethical corporate citizen.

I can only assume though that no such sponsor or potential sponsor exists; or put another way, the decision not to sponsor is not purely down to player misbehaviour but a number of factors (including bang for buck).

 

[Chunky]

Why is Brian Johnston not being called as a witness, as the Dragons CEO, to state how much in sponsorships it's cost the club that DeBelin plays for?

Why is not every CEO being brought as a witness?

It's pretty easy to bring in 1 person as a witness to support your claim. Haven't the Sharks signed a major sponsor since all this happened? So it can't have had that much impact.

 

[Ranga]

The Storm CEO can really only give evidence that he has lost sponsors, anything else he say is merely hearsay unless those sponsors are also giving evidence.
As for the favour, as I said earlier, its very obvious this is payback favour for Billy Slater beating the Shoulder Charge.

He can give evidence as to what reasons he has been told by sponsors or potential sponsors. But to truly test those reasons you do need the sponsor (or rep of sponsor) to give evidence and be tested.