Walker cleared to play.

[HappilyManly]

Not sure why the club wouldn't take up the salary cap relief? As far as I understand it, we can claim the amount of "cap" that sits on the sidelines while Walker has been stood down. For ****s and giggles, let's call it $150k.

So assume Walker is found not guilty...
Why wouldn't the club claim that $150k and pay forward any other players in the top 30s salary? It's an exemption. We are allowed to go over the normal cap by $150k.

If he’s guilty, we’ve benefited by reducing our cap spend for next year by $150k. And then have Walkers full amount to spend.

Unless I am missing something, only thing I can think of is Penn doesn’t want to payout the additional $150k??

The 150k is on top of the 650k for Baz and it all comes off the bottom line of an already loss making business

Greenturd said in some interview that a Club has to hire a new player to claim exemption. Promoting a 2nd tier player would still require another person to be hired.

 

[HappilyManly]

Ok I missed the part about the $150k having to be spent on a player outside the 30. Is there a link to that info anywhere?

Understand that $150k is on top of other expenses...but hey, this is an NRL team with the end game of playing the cap as best as possible to compete with the top tier teams.

Remarkably Greenturd said in the original decree that the details will be finalized when a Club asks 😕

But he pointed out that most Clubs don't have the funds to pay another player in any case 😎

I tried to find a link to the news conference but it has been recut to basically the 'no fault' stand down part

 

[HappilyManly]

I listened to the full PC from Tood Greenflog when he handed down all the rulings and nothing was mentioned about having to bring in another player.

Someone actually asks him how complex would it look for clubs and he says that it would be something similar to the provisions offered to clubs for rep players being injured ...?

No real detail other then that.

He says the detail would be given out to the dragons as they’ve started to talk to the NRL. After they request it (cap relief) he says they’ll put some terms and reference and a framework around what it looks like.
He says “we just need to come up with a relatively simple framework that will work...”

Making it up as they go by the sounds.

Greenturd misses the 'simple' and goes for the subjective in every instance 😕

 

[Highflier]

Remarkably Greenturd said in the original decree that the details will be finalized when a Club asks 😕

But he pointed out that most Clubs don't have the funds to pay another player in any case 😎

I tried to find a link to the news conference but it has been recut to basically the 'no fault' stand down part

The old Greenturd catch 22 where u can get cap relief but only if you can afford to pay anyway ,otherwise donut
Nice work Greenturd what a mess you have made of this once great game

 

[Bearfax]

I personally think it is enough. However, the magistrate will make certain findings of fact in determining whether he is guilty or not. The NRL is not bound by a guilty or not guilty verdict but they can determine that his behaviour (based on facts the magistrate finds) in totality, even if not sufficient to be found criminal, towards a women and a child was out step with what they expect and that warrants a suspension of more than the 12 weeks or whatever it is. It would be harsh - extremely harsh - but I can see it potentially happening given that they will want to be seen as tough in this area.

Yes and no on this one Ranga. The case against Walker is 'alleged' behaviour. If there was clear video evidence of the actual matter that would be different. But at this stage it rests on a phone call, some scratches and a witness or perhaps some witnesses who claim to have seen the incident. Its different from say a drink driving offence where blood tests give virtually irrefutable proof of drink driving, or someone possesses a drug or has such in their system. Where you have clear first hand evidence, there is little to contest. But matters like this often are found to be contrary to the public perception (Stewart). For example a driver hits someone on a pushbike at an intersection in the evening and the bike rider dies. There is dispute over who drove against the lights and the driver is charged. Should the driver's licence be suspended? I witnessed just such an incident and gave evidence that the driver was in the right which led to dismissal. But should that person have been disqualified until the court case over a year later?

Was Gallop right in wiping Stewart from being the poster boy, banning him from 4 matches for alleged drunkenness (unproven) to avoid the entanglement with the alleged sex offence matters, and fining Manly $100,000 to cover themselves by suggesting that was the focus of the NRL. I wonder what he would have done had Stewart not had injury problems that kept him out of all but five matches in 2009 and all but one in 2010. It was noted that two thirds of public survey said he should have been stood down until the resolution of the court case. That would have meant being put out of the game for two seasons (about 50 games). Where is justice there?

My gut feeling is that Walker is probably guilty and will accept a common assault only conviction. But I know little of the case and know that it is not my place to judge. Nor is it the NRLs place to judge and argue their actions are related to Walker's behaviour. They have no idea of the full story and in my mind have no right to judge. After the conviction, fine. Before the conviction it is contrary to the fundamental rights we have under the Law of this land.

 

[bazeagle]

Yes and no on this one Ranga. The case against Walker is 'alleged' behaviour. If there was clear video evidence of the actual matter that would be different. But at this stage it rests on a phone call, some scratches and a witness or perhaps some witnesses who claim to have seen the incident. Its different from say a drink driving offence where blood tests give virtually irrefutable proof of drink driving, or someone possesses a drug or has such in their system. Where you have clear first hand evidence, there is little to contest. But matters like this often are found to be contrary to the public perception (Stewart). For example a driver hits someone on a pushbike at an intersection in the evening and the bike rider dies. There is dispute over who drove against the lights and the driver is charged. Should the driver's licence be suspended? I witnessed just such an incident and gave evidence that the driver was in the right which led to dismissal. But should that person have been disqualified until the court case over a year later?

Was Gallop right in wiping Stewart from being the poster boy, banning him from 4 matches for alleged drunkenness (unproven) to avoid the entanglement with the alleged sex offence matters, and fining Manly $100,000 to cover themselves by suggesting that was the focus of the NRL. I wonder what he would have done had Stewart not had injury problems that kept him out of all but five matches in 2009 and all but one in 2010. It was noted that two thirds of public survey said he should have been stood down until the resolution of the court case. That would have meant being put out of the game for two seasons (about 50 games). Where is justice there?

My gut feeling is that Walker is probably guilty and will accept a common assault only conviction. But I know little of the case and know that it is not my place to judge. Nor is it the NRLs place to judge and argue their actions are related to Walker's behaviour. They have no idea of the full story and in my mind have no right to judge. After the conviction, fine. Before the conviction it is contrary to the fundamental rights we have under the Law of this land.

Excellent post Bearfax. Spot on. The original sentiment behind this entire thread is Walker should be sacked. If he is guilty. Nothing more. For the NRL to stamp all over this is wrong on every possible level. It's also unspeakably arrogant.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Excellent post Bearfax. Spot on. The original sentiment behind this entire thread is Walker should be sacked. If he is guilty. Nothing more. For the NRL to stamp all over this is wrong on every possible level. It's also unspeakably arrogant.

I agree but mainly what's wrong is the process - or lack of it. I can think of good reasons to stand down anyone charged with a criminal offence but it can't be arbitrary or discretionary and it can't ignore principles of natural justice.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

This administration won't be happy until everything about the game becomes a politically correct hold all that pleases everybody and offends nobody .... a vanilla single cone, no sparkles please ..... a game played to a prepared script with all spontaneous attitude and surprises eliminated .... all colourful, distasteful and entertaining characters removed for the good of the game ....

This is the third time I have posted the following qoute ... and each time I read it .. it becomes truer ......

This insightful summation by Malcolm Knox may unfortunately be prophetic ....

"But the ultimate crunch won’t come when fans decide they’ve had enough atrocities. The reckoning is on the other side: if the game becomes antiseptic, cleansed, no longer primal – if it becomes a middle-class game for a middle-class audience – that same audience might begin to ask if this was what it really wanted. And then it might ask different questions about ultimate accountability."

Participation medals for eveybody .... any takers ...

Sadly you can see it coming.

We are blessed to have been here through the “ good old days” , this modern version of the game is being sanitised to appease the media overlords.

I can see many of our ilk walking away from the game if it continues.

 

[Leho]

I get the feeling that they will fight the length of the ban

 

[ManlyTragic]

With publicity like this..... not too many mums will encourage their sons to take up rugby league!

It’s not the media’s fault, they are just relaying a story that is already out there!

If I was the parent of Napa and others I would be horrified! That are their friends and family members thinking? They will be no doubting questing their parenting skills.

Not only have they embarrassed themselves they have bought embarrassment to their family.

 

[EagleFlys]

No real need to worry about Walker post 2019 at least. I doubt Des will hang on to this train wreck.

But where or who do we spend the freed up cap space on?

 

[Sue]

All this legal eagle, guilty/ not guilty stuff is irrelevant really.

It is blatantly obvious Walker is being suspended by Greenturd because he has form and was in his front yard confronting his Mrs and baby after a fight over a video game and she rang the cops.Those facts are not in question. He is not being suspended for common assault or domestic violence.He is being suspended for being a fool with form.This “ no fault “ rubbish is pathetic. They are suspending grub behaviour. Simple as that.It has ZERO to do with the technicalities of a criminal trial etc.

Whether you agree with the suspension or not it has nothing to do with whether he is guilty or not of a crime.

And there are going to be a hell of a lot like him who get dispatched when they are charged with an offence with less than 11 years jail time attached or are just being dickheads.

This is a crackdown on dickheads after the dickheads have been protected by clubs and NRL for years and now the game is being seriously effected by angry members and sponsors etc.

In the current environment Walkers actions were always going to be enough for the Turd to act and it was an unbelievably stupid thing to do.

To be honest ovrr the last 48!hours or so I’ve changed my view quite a bit and I’m all for cracking down on these clowns hard and getting back to our game getting the headlines.The standards of behaviour are simply disgraceful. Not a day goes by without some tomfoolery.
There is a massive culture problem which is the elephant in the room and now big sponsorship dollars and future junior participation are being threatened by that culture.

What I’m dead against is tying action to criminal offences / jail terms/ court proceedings and getting into the realm of workplace law like the Turd is doing and the biased and selective way he imposes the penalties.

Just suspend them for behaving like idiots if the evidence available confirms that as Walker, Pearce, Barba and others have been suspended and have an independent tribunal decide the penalties and let the legal stuff play out independently. If a criminal conviction is recorded then act on that after it occurs .

For example I would be ok with Walker getting 4 to 6 weeks for being a dickhead by the tribunal and then the suspension reassessed after the trial if found guilty .If not guilty he plays again with a big axe hanging over his head if he reoffends .A few more long stretches for tomfoolery and maybe the inmates start towing the line.I for one wouldn’t mind talking about f....ing rugby league.
Once again the NRL have made something far harder than it should be.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

A few more and maybe the inmates start towing the line

Hard to disagree with any of that post, except, rather than players changing behaviour, I think it will be a case of clubs being more selective about who to recruit, including which juniors they choose to develop. 'Character' or whatever you might call it will become more important and sheer footballing talent less important when deciding where to invest the club's money.

 

[brad]

Agreed. Even if guilty then his 3 month suspension should be suffice. Although manly may choose to sack him

Agree mate but i think Manly might keep him .

 

[davohan123]

Agree mate but i think Manly might keep him .

Don’t think so he does not fit Des’ s mould of a player.
The club won’t risk him even if he is found not guilty way too much trouble for what he is on around 600-700 k.

 

[brad]

Don’t think so he does not fit Des’ s mould of a player.
The club won’t risk him even if he is found not guilty way too much trouble for what he is on around 600-700 k.

See what ur saying and makes sense but with him hanging around training and the team in general , councilling etc it wouldn't surprise.

 

[yokahontas]

See what ur saying and makes sense but with him hanging around training and the team in general , councilling etc it wouldn't surprise.

He’s still contracted for now, so it’s not really surprising. The club extending counselling to Walker and his partner is the same as any other player could expect from their club under similar circumstances, regardless of future plans. It’s a pretty standard part of what they see as their duty of care these days.

 

[Eagle thru 'n' thru]

Let's suppose everything goes well for DW, and Des decides to keep him on. Would there be any benefit with starting with Garrick, Funa or Suli or whoever, with DW playing for Blacktown Workers for an undisclosed period of time as a reality check to smarten the hell up without any promise of first grade. The rookie's in the first grade backline would know that DW would be coming in sooner or later and it might be a way of finding out which rookie makes the most of the opportunity to grab a centre spot.

 

[MadMarcus]

Don’t think so he does not fit Des’ s mould of a player.
The club won’t risk him even if he is found not guilty way too much trouble for what he is on around 600-700 k.

If Des does keep him on I suspect he would be on around half the money he is on now.

If he can find an idiot club to pay him his current salary then good luck to him. That seemed to work out well for Foran, Watmough et al...

 

[Tragic Eagle]

Elite athletes have the rare opportunity and privilege of playing a sport they love in front of the multitudes and in the modern game they can be handsomely paid if good enough. Everyone knows the potential for exposure by public media because everybody is carrying a camera / movie camera in their hands (phones). If you want to play in the show and earn big bucks you have to maintain a high level of beahaviour and conduct. If you can’t or won’t behave appropriately then you don’t fit and don’t deserve the job. No more dickheads.