JDB Federal Court Challenge

[Sue]

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.

Maybe a bit over the top Bear.You don’t get to be a Federal Court judge by being less informed than punters like us.If the judge thinks a particular piece of evidence is ridiculous I’m sure it will be disregarded.
This is not some incredibly complicated legal conundrum that will change the face of the law in this country. The judge will be applying well established law to the facts in this case as they are provided in court. It definitely ain’t some land breaking piece of constitutional jurisprudence.

And I’m quite happy to accept the verdict of said judge who has years of experience dealing with matters like these. We love the game and tend to think these are matters of life and death. Im sure the judge will face far more vexing issues than this one.

You are also seriously confusing two separate issues.

De Bellin is NOT being denied the presumption of innocence in relation to his ALLEGED OFFENCE . He is on bail and will maintain that presumption until his trial as per any other defendant in this countries legal system. In fact I would suggest his bail conditions are quite lenient for a case like this.He has not lost this right at all and to suggest otherwise is false.

What has actually happened to De Bellin is he has being stood down on full pay until his situation is cleared up. This happens all the time in employer/ employee situations in an effort to mitigate brand damage.The court is simply determining if the actual rule that has been implemented to achieve this is legally binding as part of his employment contract and a number of factual issues around issues of natural justice will decide that.And Toddy’s evidence and other evidence that seems strange to us all will be assessed by someone who has decades of legal experience as to what constitutes the facts of the case.If it’s garbage it will be treated as garbage.

 

[Fibro Eagle]

The NRL the way they act is
Clutch at straws
What's the meaning of the phrase 'Clutch at straws'?
Try any route to get out of a desperate situation, no matter how unlikely it is to succeed.

 

[BrendonStarr]

Maybe the Storms excessive salary cap rorting over an extended period is still having a negative impact in regards to potential sponsorships? Or even its extended association with the grub Cameron Smith after his poor handling and involvement in the Alex Mckinnon tragedy?

 

[HappilyManly]

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.

The 2018 sCam's Testimonial monies being off their Cap

 

[Scorpio]

Greenturds evidence of females turning away from the game is based on some players in his daughter's sports team saying so.

In that case, can we also get their opinions on the following?
- Suburban grounds
- NRL expansion
- Wrestling in the game
- Video referee usage
- Signing two contracts
- Third Party Agreements

Maybe this would clarify other areas of NRL policy as well.

 

[ManEagle]

The 2018 sCam's Testimonial monies being off their Cap

Actually good point, when you think about it the list would be endless...

 

[dowdz]

Question on sponsorship? Did our club recently gain two new sponsors?

 

[HappilyManly]

Question on sponsorship? Did our club recently gain two new sponsors?

The issue is major sponsorship has dried up in the NRL.

The recent Manly ones are not classed as 'front of jersey' sponsors

 

[dowdz]

The issue is major sponsorship has dried up in the NRL.

The recent Manly ones are not classed as 'front of jersey' sponsors

Ah ok. Thanks.

 

[HappilyManly]

Ah ok. Thanks.

Lottoland sponsorship is in its last year at Manly

 

[Uk eagle]

Are the CEO's of all clubs going to be called to give evidence or just those in Todd's pocket? Otherwise it means nothing, it's almost like basing policy on what his daughter and friends think ......

 

[mickqld]

Most of the nrl sponsorship is from online betting moral vaccum companies. They don't give a sht about anything than fleecing punters. Under the leadership of these assclowns they've failed to attract top end companies in any major capacity. It's had nothing to do with a few players who can't control their emotions and or substance abuse. It's had everything to do with the fuked up mismanagement of the game over the last decade.

 

[HappilyManly]

Are the CEO's of all clubs going to be called to give evidence or just those in Todd's pocket? Otherwise it means nothing, it's almost like basing policy on what his daughter and friends think ......

Only Scumos decided to get involved. That's why it's so curious

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

So apparently decision handed down next week, that’s a lot quicker than I thought!

 

[urulion]

Considering senior counsel are involved, there is a respect factor of showing that a judge has taken time to review all facts and applied all appropriate legislation to those facts (hence the judge is actually taking a week). I have no doubt that if a self represented litigant puts forward those, or similar arguments, to defend a claim like the NRL did based on opinions and ratings, the decision would have been made this arvo.

Next week when the decision is handed down the judge will hear the parties submissions regarding costs. I hope the costs are as huge as Greenturd's ego.

 

[ALinda]

So apparently decision handed down next week, that’s a lot quicker than I thought!

I heard Brent Read on Triple M tonight say no decision next week and more likely the earlier part of the week after, i.e. possibly in time for round 8 team selections.

 

[globaleagle]

It's strange, and I believe the Judge will pick it up as:

The storm C(heat) E.O has said he's lost 500k in sponsorship but then in the next sentence he said that it's not until late in 2018 / early 2019 that current negotiations will end.

So...they haven't 'lost' anything at the moment.

It's so ridiculous I'm surprised the Judge didn't throw him off the stand.

While I'm fearful the nrl might win, I'm also confident, as Sue said, that a real judge is hearing this case and not the "three wise men" that agreed with the nrl that the nrl was are allowed to change the definition of the words 'best endeavours' to say Manly rorted the cap by paying players the exact amount they reported.

 

[The Wheel]

Everyone's missing the real issue though....


Will Todds teenage girls touch footy team be called in as key witnesses....? I don't see how any judge can make a determination on the case without interviewing the key witnesses.

That'll clearly decide JDBs future.

Actually you are right - that type of evidence by Turdy is heresay and should be struck out. The girls should be on the stand

 

[mickqld]

Actually you are right - that type of evidence by Turdy is heresay and should be struck out. The girls should be on the stand

So should these so called sponsors and they're real reasons for not continuing. Just more nrl Turdy bullsht spin doctoring but to a court now. Contempt of court spring to mind anyone.

 

[Sue]

What has failed to be mentioned here (with everyone claiming sponsors and others have not appeared ) is that there were a number of issues regarding sponsorship,reputational and other commercially sensitive matters that were dealt with “ in camera” (not in public) by the judge a couple of days ago so I would not be jumping to the conclusion that the NRL sponsorship and brand damage argument has not been accompanied by affidavits from sponsors and other parties key to the NRL defence.The fact it was held in camera due to its sensitivity almost certainly means sponsors and others have stepped up with detailed submissions so I think that issue can be put to bed.The idea that the NRL would claim sponsorship and repututation damage, when the case swings on it, with no evidence is ludicrous.How convincing that evidence is, who knows.

The NRL is being represented by the best commercial lawyers in the country so to suggest this is some hillbilly defence that will be blown out of court is a getting a bit ahead of oneself. Who knows who will win but I suggest that any evidence submitted to the court was ok d by senior counsel who would have a hell of a lot more knowledge of what is pertinent to the questions at issue than us.

I hope Toddy gets nailed and on the face of it appears he has the job ahead of him but you don’t spend millions to get legal representation from blokes who have no idea.The “ in camera “ stuff we haven’t seen I would think will play a major part in how this goes.