2019 Official NRL Thread (Spoilers/Rumours/Game Results/Discussions etc.)

[Brendan_B]

I feel sorry for the alleged victim and JDBs pregnant partner.

A sexual assault victim is a very tough position to be in. The investigative and court processes can be brutal, particularly if a consent based defence is run. Due to the presumption of innocence, victim's often can treated very poorly.

 

[220]

I have no issue with players fighting serious criminal charges being stood down on full pay until they have their day in court.
Plenty of occupations where it is the norm, plenty where just being charged would be the end of your career even if found not guilty.
Look at Michael Diamond got charged with DUI and other things, had his firearms licence revoked due to the charges. Couldn't train or qualify for the last olympics. Won his case but his career is finished, reputation in tatters and has legal bills in the hundreds of thousands. Couldnt find a job due to the publicity and was forced to sell his olympic medals to eat.

Like I said a NRL player being stood down on full pay while fitting charges hardly compares to what can happen in other occupations or sports.

 

[Brendan_B]

Unfortunately if he voluntarily stood himself down everyone would assume he is guilty. He basically has to go down this path of suing the NRL as much for the process of standing behind his not guilty plea as anything else.

It is a huge distraction for the Dragons and regardless of what is said publicly IMO it has basically ensured St George wont have a chance of winning the comp. It will go quiet for a while and then in April the noise will pick up again and so on, there is no escape for the club until the verdict which potentially could be years away.

I am a fan of Roy Masters he has to be one of the best journo's in the game, I think his article on it was one of the most balanced pieces:

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/th...-de-belin-guilty-ban-him-20190222-p50zmh.html
Cheers
Ross

Good read and some well considered points. The only aspect I would really have any disagreement with is ‘charge and let the courts decide.’ While this does happen, particularly in a consent based defence, there is generally a need for some form of corroborative evidence to establish a prima facie and the ability to charge.

 

[Sharks16]

I have no issue with players fighting serious criminal charges being stood down on full pay until they have their day in court.
Plenty of occupations where it is the norm, plenty where just being charged would be the end of your career even if found not guilty.
Look at Michael Diamond got charged with DUI and other things, had his firearms licence revoked due to the charges. Couldn't train or qualify for the last olympics. Won his case but his career is finished, reputation in tatters and has legal bills in the hundreds of thousands. Couldnt find a job due to the publicity and was forced to sell his olympic medals to eat.

Like I said a NRL player being stood down on full pay while fitting charges hardly compares to what can happen in other occupations or sports.

Also the only difference is in the Diamond case is that training and fitness to shoot shotgun is completely different and also a individual sport that doesn’t require match fitness like the Nrl.
We have heard of players being injured and missing a off season and it take them a season to come good , sitting out for 6-12 months may take him another year to get back to where he is .
Like I said I believe he should stand down for the reasons I stated previously but the law is the law and he has the right to defend himself and fight to play if that’s what he wants to do .
If it turns out it was consensual the only crime he has committed is cheating on his partner and disrupting his club and I’m sure neither will let him off lightly.
No one knows what happened apart from the people involved but it would be grossly unfair if he was accused of a crime he didn’t commit and his career and as Ross said the next few seasons of the dragons is in tatters due to a possible false accusation .
If there are any POLICE OFFICERS on here that could clarify things a bit more maybe ?

 

[220]

Yeah the physical fitness is not as great but I think you missed the point that simply being charged resulted in his firearms licence being revoked. His firearms were seized and was was not allowed to posses use or even handle a firearm until it all went through court and he was found not guilty. That was over 2 years in which he couldnt do anything. The OAC also has a policy of non selection for anyone on criminal charges. The firearms licence revocation applies to anyone with a firearms licence facing criminal charges, that is a million or so people in the country who can be banned from participating in their sport for something as minor as driving at 70kph through a 40 zone.

I to am interested in hearing from any serving police, my understanding is they would be stood down in similar circumstances and quite possibly without pay. Just like anyone working in a industry requiring a police background check or working with children clearance.

Being stood down on full pay is a better outcome than a large percentage of the population would face in similar circumstances.
I think the problem is the NRL's lack of consistency, back peddling and constant change of position. Make a policy stick with it and I cant see a problem. Players fans and everyone else will know exactly where they stand.

 

[Sharks16]

Yeah the physical fitness is not as great but I think you missed the point that simply being charged resulted in his firearms licence being revoked. His firearms were seized and was was not allowed to posses use or even handle a firearm until it all went through court and he was found not guilty. That was over 2 years in which he couldnt do anything. The OAC also has a policy of non selection for anyone on criminal charges. The firearms licence revocation applies to anyone with a firearms licence facing criminal charges, that is a million or so people in the country who can be banned from participating in their sport for something as minor as driving at 70kph through a 40 zone.

I to am interested in hearing from any serving police, my understanding is they would be stood down in similar circumstances and quite possibly without pay. Just like anyone working in a industry requiring a police background check or working with children clearance.

Being stood down on full pay is a better outcome than a large percentage of the population would face in similar circumstances.
I think the problem is the NRL's lack of consistency, back peddling and constant change of position. Make a policy stick with it and I cant see a problem. Players fans and everyone else will know exactly where they stand.

I understood what you meant about Diamond and have a pretty vast knowledge of the sport as well .
There was a lot more to that story and even more issues relating to that case and Michael aswell unfortunately as he was a legend of the sport , a tosser , but one of our best lol.
Was just making a point that he was at the back end of his career and wouldn’t of made that team with or without a licence as he wasn’t close to being selected.
I think people are missing the point about being stood down on full pay as well . Not all sportspeople are driven by money , I know a lot are but if they all were Valentine Holmes would still be at Cronulla or North Queensland and not running around in a training camp with the possibility of not making a team .
Last thing I’ll say is I watch football for football ,while I don’t agree with the boofhead behaviour of a few I think the people that say they aren’t watching anymore were never real fans anyway ??And let’s not forget in this case he has plead not guilty so it’s just a allegation at this stage and one that could be made against anyone of us .
I’m also pretty sure if they were 100% on a conviction he wouldn’t be on bail ?
Do we stop watching movies, read books or go to church because there have been sex predators in those areas ? Do we not trust all police because a few are on charges of sexual assault? Of course not and it’s ridiculous to tar everyone with the same brush .
I think as a human race we’re a lot smarter then to model our own and children’s behaviour on sportspeople. And if your relying on a group of blokes that kick a ball around for guidance, maybe the problem is worse then you think

 

[saintsforever]

I understood what you meant about Diamond and have a pretty vast knowledge of the sport as well .
There was a lot more to that story and even more issues relating to that case and Michael aswell unfortunately as he was a legend of the sport , a tosser , but one of our best lol.
Was just making a point that he was at the back end of his career and wouldn’t of made that team with or without a licence as he wasn’t close to being selected.
I think people are missing the point about being stood down on full pay as well . Not all sportspeople are driven by money , I know a lot are but if they all were Valentine Holmes would still be at Cronulla or North Queensland and not running around in a training camp with the possibility of not making a team .
Last thing I’ll say is I watch football for football ,while I don’t agree with the boofhead behaviour of a few I think the people that say they aren’t watching anymore were never real fans anyway ??And let’s not forget in this case he has plead not guilty so it’s just a allegation at this stage and one that could be made against anyone of us .
I’m also pretty sure if they were 100% on a conviction he wouldn’t be on bail ?
Do we stop watching movies, read books or go to church because there have been sex predators in those areas ? Do we not trust all police because a few are on charges of sexual assault? Of course not and it’s ridiculous to tar everyone with the same brush .
I think as a human race we’re a lot smarter then to model our own and children’s behaviour on sportspeople. And if your relying on a group of blokes that kick a ball around for guidance, maybe the problem is worse then you think

well put Joel, we look at your parents first, that is what we do. We are humans after all.
Some aspire more then others.
The majority of the male population do not mature until around 25 years of age.
Where there is smoke, there is generally fire, I am not at all saying he /debelin is guilty, he has pleaded not guilty.
Karma will prevail.
Lets see what happens.
Sport is a totally different kettle of fish as opposed to being a tradie, I now, I am an electrical contractor, if I was to do something totally unsafe, I would have to face the technical regulator first, they would take my licence from me, then the courts will have there go.
A rugby league player in reality has a window of 10 years to make his or her make on the game, ie injurys and so on.
to deny someone earning an income without being proven guilty, can have some deep ramifications, ie sueing the NRL.
DeBelin has been told to plead not guilty by his legal team for certain reasons, or he has told them.
Either way he is going to get hammered, legally, by his club, the general public/public media. his piers, etc.
Let him play until his court case has been dealt with, then he will have to face the music.
The Nrl should stay the f out of it.
This is why we have laws and a judical system in place.

 

[220]

Hey Joel I think your right about him being a tosser and he also had form so to speak but at the end of the day being a tosser isnt yet criminal and he want convicted. Still talking about trying to make Tokyo so maybe the back end of his career but still over 2 years of it gone due to nothing other than accusations as well as the sponsors he had and a lot of opportunities.

Saints did you read the article by Slater the other day where he was saying he doesnt know what clubs are supposed to do, he learnt right from wrong what was acceptable behaviour etc from his family well before he was ever a NRL player.
I dont think standing him down has anything to do with guilt or innocence. If he had been stood down when first charged the whole thing would be a non story and the game wouldnt be brought into disrepute.
I was saying to someone the other day if you picked 600 18-30 year olds out of the general population would the incidence of misbehaviour be any different to the NRL? I doubt there would be much, I dont think the NRL has anymore of a problem than exists in the general population. Their problem is how they deal with players facing accusations given any accusations will bring the game into disrepute.

 

[Brendan_B]

Dave, De Belin is on full pay and would only be financially penalised missing out on rep payments, player of the match payments and potential sponsorship deals.

His current court action v the NRL and then defending his charges will set him back well in excess of $150,000.

The NRL sanction and the charges before the court are two very different things, and they need to be. De Belin not only has the presumption of innocence on his side but the right to a fair trial. This is where the NRL need to be careful and from what I have read they have. The sanction is for damaging the image of the game as opposed to whether or not he has committed rape as alleged.

The NRL were criticised heavily by the presiding Federal Court Judge for not having tendered the correct paperwork. This is so amateurish and stock standard for the NRL and shows why the game is struggling to move forward.

In terms of what De Belin's legal team have advised, who knows? One thing is for sure, this matter needs to be committed to a higher court to be dealt with. That process and a trial will likely not see the matter dealt with in 2019. I think you will find that in the case of serious charges such as rape and homicide, most enter a plea of not guilty initially until they have every scrap of evidence. I would think that the Police brief would still be coming, forensics etc can take time.

Every occupation and profession is different with their internal rules. Government employees would certainly be stood down but very likely on full pay, it is rare they are stood down without pay.

Overall I think the NRL have done the right thing. A line in the sand had to be drawn.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

The NRL act...they're wrong.

The NRL don't act...they're wrong.

 

[Brendan_B]

Speaking of off field dramas, what are the forums thoughts on Cronulla's penalty for the salary cap breaches?

Sufficient? Too lenient?

Other clubs caught for protracted breaches like this one have copped far worse punishments but there was also the discount for self reporting.

Of interest are Kent's claims that the NRL had an ''óff the record'' media session where it was outlined that Cronulla were in breach in 2016 leading up to the GF but were compliant on the day. If there is any truth to this then wouldn't that make the 2016 title dodgy?

A couple of close mates of mine and life long Cronulla fans felt that the penalties were a bit lighter on but they should keep the 2016 title.

It is a tough one, Cronulla's maiden title was certainly a feel good story (much like the Cows in 2015) when the game needed one. There is no easy answer to this.

 

[Brendan_B]

The NRL act...they're wrong.

The NRL don't act...they're wrong.

Agreed. Tough situation to be in. Hopefully moving forward decisions can be consistent and at least that should help public opinion.

 

[Leith Holding]

Speaking of off field dramas, what are the forums thoughts on Cronulla's penalty for the salary cap breaches?

Sufficient? Too lenient?

Other clubs caught for protracted breaches like this one have copped far worse punishments but there was also the discount for self reporting.

Of interest are Kent's claims that the NRL had an ''óff the record'' media session where it was outlined that Cronulla were in breach in 2016 leading up to the GF but were compliant on the day. If there is any truth to this then wouldn't that make the 2016 title dodgy?

A couple of close mates of mine and life long Cronulla fans felt that the penalties were a bit lighter on but they should keep the 2016 title.

It is a tough one, Cronulla's maiden title was certainly a feel good story (much like the Cows in 2015) when the game needed one. There is no easy answer to this.

It presents as very dodgy.

 

[Sharks16]

Hey Joel I think your right about him being a tosser and he also had form so to speak but at the end of the day being a tosser isnt yet criminal and he want convicted. Still talking about trying to make Tokyo so maybe the back end of his career but still over 2 years of it gone due to nothing other than accusations as well as the sponsors he had and a lot of opportunities.

Saints did you read the article by Slater the other day where he was saying he doesnt know what clubs are supposed to do, he learnt right from wrong what was acceptable behaviour etc from his family well before he was ever a NRL player.
I dont think standing him down has anything to do with guilt or innocence. If he had been stood down when first charged the whole thing would be a non story and the game wouldnt be brought into disrepute.
I was saying to someone the other day if you picked 600 18-30 year olds out of the general population would the incidence of misbehaviour be any different to the NRL? I doubt there would be much, I dont think the NRL has anymore of a problem than exists in the general population. Their problem is how they deal with players facing accusations given any accusations will bring the game into disrepute.

Could smash a trap house down like nobody though lol. Was sad how it ended for him .
Used to bump him at Cecil Hills and he would do training for I think $100 a hour ? Not bad I suppose considering he was Australia’s best . As I said think he had a few other dramas unfortunately.

 

[hobo]

Agreed. Tough situation to be in. Hopefully moving forward decisions can be consistent and at least that should help public opinion.

The problem is they wont be consistent because even in drawing this line in the sand it was done in the tidal zone and is ambiguous because the commission has given Greenberg the right to impose his subjective opinion on any matter he sees fit from the way I understand the rule that hasn't been written yet.

Speaking of off field dramas, what are the forums thoughts on Cronulla's penalty for the salary cap breaches?

Sufficient? Too lenient?

Other clubs caught for protracted breaches like this one have copped far worse punishments but there was also the discount for self reporting.

On a selfish note I would like to see the Sharks stripped of the title so I can go back to bagging out my mates again.

Cheers
Ross

 

[Sharks16]

The problem is they wont be consistent because even in drawing this line in the sand it was done in the tidal zone and is ambiguous because the commission has given Greenberg the right to impose his subjective opinion on any matter he sees fit from the way I understand the rule that hasn't been written yet.


On a selfish note I would like to see the Sharks stripped of the title so I can go back to bagging out my mates again.

Cheers
Ross

While we’re at it lets investigate the stacked Bulldogs and Parra teams of the 80s the Broncos and Raiders teams of the 90s and the Roosters and Storm teams since lol . Talk about clutching at straws
The competition was much fairer with half the Australian team was split between 2 teams .

 

[Brendan_B]

Salary cap didn't exist in the 80's, bit hard to punish those teams...

Even into the 90's, it was the NSWRL then, the NRL have no grounds to retrospectively punish teams from that comp.

I believe in 1990 the first cap was introduced and yes, Canberra were found to be over and were punished financially as well as having to move on several players including Lazarus, Barnhill and Gaffey. This really knocked them about for the 92 season. Was the punishment sufficient? You can't try and view 1990 and 2019 as the same. 30 years ago the salary cap was not a cornerstone of the competitions integrity as it is today. The 1990 punishment fit the crime and the reality is that many of the Canberra players went to Canberra as prospects and developed to a point where they played rep footy and those bonuses for playing rep were a major reason the cap was over.

It wasn't like they bought several established players like the Sharks did.

To that end, the breach of the cap wasn't systematic like the Storm and the Dogs and to a lesser extent the Eels. Based on the available information, it appears that the Sharks breaches, while not as financially significant as the Storm had an element of 'planning'to them which makes the breaches worse.

Do they Sharks deserve to lose their 2016 title? That is a huge call, I would say no but find it hard to believe they were over the cap either side of the premiership year but not in the premiership year. Do they deserve a more significant punishment? I think they deserve to lose some competition points at least, much like Parramatta did a couple of years back.

A point Gallen raised on the weekend is a fair one and that is why should the players be punishable for management stuff ups? As I said fair question but the club is not just the NRL side that takes the field each week.

I won't pretend that other clubs aren't breaching the cap as we speak, probably half the comp would but there is no easy solution to this.

 

[Jaede]

A big problem that has allowed breaches and kind of makes a salary cap redundant is back ending contracts and third party deals. They need to scrap both of these and stick to just the salary cap and what it's purpose was intended for.

To a point i understand where Gallen is coming from but in some of those cases players were aware of a breach especially if your signing two different contracts, receiving extra assests ect. Yeah in some cases that is not the case and players aren't aware and do heavily rely on the clubs management to have it correct but the reality is without that extra cash over the salary cap that team of players wouldn't have existed, the extra talent, skill and depth wouldn't be there, this is what ultimately gives them the advantage over other teams and why premierships were stripped.

As for whether Sharks deserve to have their premiership stripped away? I agree with what Brendan said 'That is a huge call, I would say no but find it hard to believe they were over the cap either side of the premiership year but not in the premiership year' with that in mind if they were over the cap, how much were they over by, there is just too many questions that I would need answered before handing out a punishment. Except i don't agree the breach being worse, i would say just as bad as for example Storm still had a lot of planning with their by having a second set of books shows planning and a deliberate breaking of the salary cap.

 

[Sharks16]

A big problem that has allowed breaches and kind of makes a salary cap redundant is back ending contracts and third party deals. They need to scrap both of these and stick to just the salary cap and what it's purpose was intended for.

To a point i understand where Gallen is coming from but in some of those cases players were aware of a breach especially if your signing two different contracts, receiving extra assests ect. Yeah in some cases that is not the case and players aren't aware and do heavily rely on the clubs management to have it correct but the reality is without that extra cash over the salary cap that team of players wouldn't have existed, the extra talent, skill and depth wouldn't be there, this is what ultimately gives them the advantage over other teams and why premierships were stripped.

As for whether Sharks deserve to have their premiership stripped away? I agree with what Brendan said 'That is a huge call, I would say no but find it hard to believe they were over the cap either side of the premiership year but not in the premiership year' with that in mind if they were over the cap, how much were they over by, there is just too many questions that I would need answered before handing out a punishment. Except i don't agree the breach being worse, i would say just as bad as for example Storm still had a lot of planning with their by having a second set of books shows planning and a deliberate breaking of the salary cap.

Funniest part is Smith is still burning over the 2016 Grand Final lol.
Makes it worse is that he doesn’t get on with Gallen .
Sharks won’t be stripped and the Storm won’t get theirs back up up Cronulla

 

[220]

A big problem that has allowed breaches and kind of makes a salary cap redundant is back ending contracts and third party deals. They need to scrap both of these and stick to just the salary cap and what it's purpose was intended for.

To right, clubs back ending deals are allowed to put together rosters that are worth well over the salary cap.
Why they dont have a independent body valuing players for salary cap purposes I dont know.
It would eliminate any grey areas, clubs would be compliant or the wouldn't. No need to look at books or anything else, if the club is paying 50% or 200% of the independent value it wouldnt matter they would still be valued at 100% for salary cap purposes.