NRL players attitude towards domestic violence

[_Johnsy]

This poll was taken from the 2015 NRL players poll in Rugby League Week

Absolutely disgusting

Personally I think it should be a life ban. Yet in what other job would you receive a life ban from your current employment. Zero tolerance is a must in society, we should expect the NRL to take a lead, but why should the rules be different to any other "role models". Fire fighters, cricketers,teachers, doctors, police, soccer players, AFL, Olympic athletes.... etc

 

[southwalesrabbitoh]

I reckon Sean Connery would agree with most of the players.

 

[elbusto]

Completely irrelevant because every EVERY nrl player is a man. Thus unless there are a few homosexuals scattered around the only violence towards partners that is relevant to this survey is male on female.

Agreed

 

[God-King Dean]

Court ruling is enough

 

[Pete Cash]

Also that's not a very good chart as an aside. It's not labeled for starters.

Anyways lets look at the numbers

33 percent- no Nrl punishment
19 percent- depends on how bad it is
38 percent the nrl should take some action.

So its fairer to say a plurality of nrl players believe that the nrl should take some action and a clear majority believes the nrl should step in if its bad enough.

 

[veggiepatch1959]

Of course but the point of the survey is about rugby league players belting their partners. Obviously it doesn't take into account players who are homosexual but they are an extreme minority.

I'm not doubting that men can be the victims of DV its just irrelevant here. So we can all put away the agendas.

How do you know that? Show me the link to the article to verify that because the OP had no link whatsoever.

 

[adamkungl]

They are not saying they condone violence against women, they are saying let the courts deal with them as the most appropriate body to do so, the fact they believe that should then not impact their playing career is naivety more than anything. But it gives the righteous something to be outraged about for today.

Pretty much this. The whole 'debate' about domestic violence has reached ridiculous levels. It's at the point where if you don't support the echo chamber life ban nonsense or point out that hitting a woman once, while reprehensible, isn't actually the worst most heinous crime of all time, you get labelled as an enabler or part of the problem.

I support the NRL's current stance. A season out of the game is a reasonable punishment for a crime that a court doesn't even deem jail worthy.

If a player received a jail sentence, their prison term + 1-2 years out of the NRL would be reasonable in my books - in a lot of cases that would be enough to end a career anyway.

However for the lower scale of crimes, I think the NRL can do more good supporting rehabiliation and reform rather than immediately cutting loose a young man with obvious issues.

This is my view on any crime committed by a player, not just domestic violence. I don't believe it should be treated any differently and I don't believe in life bans except for the most extreme of circumstances.

 

[roostersrule2]

Pretty much this. The whole 'debate' about domestic violence has reached ridiculous levels. It's at the point where if you don't support the echo chamber life ban nonsense or point out that hitting a woman once, while reprehensible, isn't actually the worst most heinous crime of all time, you get labelled as an enabler or part of the problem.

I support the NRL's current stance. A season out of the game is a reasonable punishment for a crime that a court doesn't even deem jail worthy.

If a player received a jail sentence, their prison term + 1-2 years out of the NRL would be reasonable in my books - in a lot of cases that would be enough to end a career anyway.

However for the lower scale of crimes, I think the NRL can do more good supporting rehabiliation and reform rather than immediately cutting loose a young man with obvious issues.

This is my view on any crime committed by a player, not just domestic violence. I don't believe it should be treated any differently and I don't believe in life bans except for the most extreme of circumstances.

Agree with this.

 

[Perth Red]

haha here we go! Yes of course some women beat men up, but I suspect not too many NRL players are getting beat up by their wives or GF's! Not surprised, alot of them are young kids with no real sense of the world or what the normal society thinks is ok or not yet. Now a days most have been nothing but footballers since 14 in a blokey culture and now paid signifcant amounts of money and hero worshipped as media stars. Are we surprised their moral compass may be slightly out of kilter?

Of course not all, the majority are probably decent blokes who find DV equally disgusting as most of us real men.

 

[Pete Cash]

How do you know that? Show me the link to the article to verify that because the OP had no link whatsoever.

....why would the nrl be punishing a woman beating up a rugby league player.

 

[Packy]

It's a loaded question. How many weeks should your colleagues get for belting their missus?

There is no right answer from the players. The clubs and NRL have a duty to take care of their brand but at the end of the day, any justice they can dish out should and will be less than the courts action.

 

[Pete Cash]

I think the players answered it fine if you ignore the fast one the graph is trying to pull. The only reason do nothing wins is because do something is split into 4 to 5 different options.

 

[Last Week]

They are not saying they condone violence against women, they are saying let the courts deal with them as the most appropriate body to do so, the fact they believe that should then not impact their playing career is naivety more than anything. But it gives the righteous something to be outraged about for today.

I agree with this.

At the end of the day, Rugby League is and should have a good moral center, but it should not be the ones to pass on punishments for criminal matters. It is not their place.

 

[Last Week]

it's disgusting that the general public has been deluded by the media and authorities that the male is always the perpetrator of dv while the female is always the victim.

Without further information from the op, i would be my left nut that anyone viewing that graph would assume that it was male on female domestic violence.

A father can belt his son or daughter and vice versa. A wife can belt her husband, son or daughter. A son or daughter can belt their mother or father, and it doesn't stop there.

Most people think of dv as physical violence - bullshit!!

Verbal, financial, social and psychological abuse, etc, form a part of dv that can be committed by anyone within a family unit.

Dv is still dv regardless of who is the perpetrator.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M0MW6ON484&feature=youtu.be

 

[Pete Cash]

Again how is any of this relevant. It's about professional rugby league players playing in the NRL. They are all men ? Sooooooooo

 

[eozsmiles]

The question they asked was designed to get the response it got. They probably thought the % would be higher. It would be interesting to see how people in other industries would answer that question and what the general public expected the results to be.

"Do you think your employer should be able to hand out punishments for crimes not involving them, above or beyond any punishment handed down by a court of law?" - They would've got closer to 0% if they asked that.

"Is bashing girls wrong?" - Would've got 100% (I hope) if they asked that.

 

[veggiepatch1959]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7M0MW6ON484&feature=youtu.be

I like that. Just shows the ingrained bias of the general public when it comes to DV.

Guy abuses girl = everyone rushes to HER aid.

Girl abuses guy = everyone stands back, laughs and yells "You go girl!!".

If the guy getting slapped around finally has had enough and snots the girl, odds on the laughers and hecklers would be jumping up coming to HER aid.

And forget the size and physical strength myth. When female perpetrators of DV do it in the most serious way (e.g murder, manslaughter or grievous bodily harm), it is usually done by stealth, such as drugging or while their victim is asleep. No strength required there!

Katherine Knight ring a bell??

 

[Pete Cash]

Hmm all that is very interesting but literally 100 percent of NRL players are men. Do you think that the NRL should be punishing women for some reason ???

 

[SLRBRONCOS]

There is still a fair bit of shaming women when they come forward.

A mate of my housemate was dating an up and coming football player and she was forced to flee to a refuge. We should be encouraging them all to come forward. I don't really think that if a bloke is abused we will be saying "you go girl". When it comes to not coming forward women can be just as timid as men.

 

[Garbler]

Again how is any of this relevant. It's about professional rugby league players playing in the NRL. They are all men ? Sooooooooo

It?s also illegal to physically assault someone (regardless of gender) so why is OP and many others outraged at the most (approriate) response of players to leave justice to the court system?

You can't make judgements based on gender and then complain when people bring up other gender-related problems that doesn't reinforce your own position.