Time will tell.
Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Time will tell.
NRL club bosses can’t agree if Jack de Belin should continue to play
Paul Crawley, The Daily Telegraph
17 minutes ago
Subscriber only
This is not going to please the majority of rugby league fans.
- DANGER: Sharks, Manly abandon Brookvale
- ANSWERS: Dragons speak on de Belin
But a snap-poll of NRL clubs were split right down the middle at Friday’s chief executives conference in Melbourne when the question was asked:
Should Jack de Belin be benched from playing until his rape case is settled in court?
The Saturday Telegraph can reveal that when NRL boss Todd Greenberg put that question to the room opinion was completely “divided”.
It was described as “heated but healthy discussion”.
But as one club boss later told The Saturday Telegraph: “Judging from what I heard, if was a betting man I’d say (de Belin) will be playing this year.”
While that might anger many fans, it is understood there was an overall feeling in the room of empathy given Greenberg’s unenviable predicament.
The question it all goes back to is whether NRL players deserve the same legal rights as the rest of society?
Will de Belin play? Picture by Simon Bullard.
As it stands de Belin has pleaded not guilty to a charge of aggravated sexual assault of a 19-year-old woman in a Wollongong apartment last December.
And while the matter has been adjourned until April 17, there is every chance it could take up to 18 months for the case to be completed, which is a huge problem for the NRL.
There has been enormous public outrage over the summer after a series of serious allegations relating to violence against women and calls for tougher penalties.
But when it comes to walking the talk, this meeting highlighted just how tough it is.
Some would say is not Greenberg’s job to please everyone but rather it is his job, and that of the ARL Commission, to do what is in the game’s best interests.
And sometimes that means making the unpopular decision, which appears to be the case now.
The problem for the NRL is that it is currently stated in the player code of conduct that when a player is charged with a criminal offence, the NRL would not seek to impose any sanction until the court process had been completed.
Will Greenberg step im? Picture by Adam Yip.
This could all change at an Australian Rugby League Commission meeting on February 28 that will determine if the game has the legal power to force immediate change.
It is understood the ARL Commission is now investigating its legal options, and whether imposing a sanction on de Belin would prejudice his legal case.
There is a feeling within the governing body that the onus should be on de Belin here, or his club, to make the call that it seems the NRL cannot.
But as one club boss explained, you put yourself in the Dragons’ boots?
In reality, it is the Commission, led by chairman Peter Beattie and Greenberg that implements the rules for clubs to follow.
And if they can’t make the call here, then surely the Dragons should not be expected to make it for them.
Dragons chief executive Brian Johnston finally broke his silence in a statement that simply toed the legal line.
“I acknowledge the interest and opinions surrounding the Jack de Belin legal proceedings,” Johnston said.
“This is a very difficult, complex and polarising issue, particularly for those involved, and as a club we have an obligation for player welfare.
“Aside from various contractual and welfare obligations, advice suggests that any action taken by the club may have significant ramifications and may interfere with the fairness of the judicial process.
De Belin has not been stood down by the Dragons. Photo by Matt King/Getty Images.
“As a club we support the desire and need to improve the standards of player behaviour across the game and our history would suggest that we are not afraid to take action where allegations have been proven.”
But “proven” is still the key word in all this.
In essence, if the Dragons or the NRL made the call to stand down de Belin now, and he was ultimately proved innocent, there would be hell to pay, especially given past history where players have been wrongly accused.
As Greenberg explained: “Under our current policy we have made it very clear that these are matters before the courts and that the NRL is very strong on applying natural justice to its players.
“In saying that, that’s our current policy but we’ve made it clear that we need to consider that very carefully.
“And again, each case needs to be judged on its merits and on this occasion with in the information available to the public it is very difficult.
“I understand why people are debating that.
“But the principles of our policy stand clear at the moment, that when a player is before the courts, we will stand back and allow that process to take place.”
While that might not please the vocal majority at this point, it is what it is.
That ex detective should have told you if a victim has noticeable injuries & her record of events tells them how she got them, they can only act on her statement (as also the Judge), it is up to the lawyers & jury to ask the questions to find the truth of Guilty or Innocent. If he's guilty, put him away, You & others obviously have him guilty before he has his day in court to tell his side of the story.
Of course he’s entitled to the presumption of innocence. What’s that got to do with your claim of plenty of cases where it was just made up? How many made up cases get to this point and have ‘a reasonably strong case’?
For me the call should be with the NRL and the NRL need to take responsibility and change their rules with regards to matters like this. I believe the NRL should have all player contracts changed to include clauses in relation to player's charged with an offence to include the following:NRL club bosses can’t agree if Jack de Belin should continue to play
Paul Crawley, The Daily Telegraph
17 minutes ago
Subscriber only
This is not going to please the majority of rugby league fans.
- DANGER: Sharks, Manly abandon Brookvale
- ANSWERS: Dragons speak on de Belin
But a snap-poll of NRL clubs were split right down the middle at Friday’s chief executives conference in Melbourne when the question was asked:
Should Jack de Belin be benched from playing until his rape case is settled in court?
The Saturday Telegraph can reveal that when NRL boss Todd Greenberg put that question to the room opinion was completely “divided”.
It was described as “heated but healthy discussion”.
But as one club boss later told The Saturday Telegraph: “Judging from what I heard, if was a betting man I’d say (de Belin) will be playing this year.”
While that might anger many fans, it is understood there was an overall feeling in the room of empathy given Greenberg’s unenviable predicament.
The question it all goes back to is whether NRL players deserve the same legal rights as the rest of society?
Will de Belin play? Picture by Simon Bullard.
As it stands de Belin has pleaded not guilty to a charge of aggravated sexual assault of a 19-year-old woman in a Wollongong apartment last December.
And while the matter has been adjourned until April 17, there is every chance it could take up to 18 months for the case to be completed, which is a huge problem for the NRL.
There has been enormous public outrage over the summer after a series of serious allegations relating to violence against women and calls for tougher penalties.
But when it comes to walking the talk, this meeting highlighted just how tough it is.
Some would say is not Greenberg’s job to please everyone but rather it is his job, and that of the ARL Commission, to do what is in the game’s best interests.
And sometimes that means making the unpopular decision, which appears to be the case now.
The problem for the NRL is that it is currently stated in the player code of conduct that when a player is charged with a criminal offence, the NRL would not seek to impose any sanction until the court process had been completed.
Will Greenberg step im? Picture by Adam Yip.
This could all change at an Australian Rugby League Commission meeting on February 28 that will determine if the game has the legal power to force immediate change.
It is understood the ARL Commission is now investigating its legal options, and whether imposing a sanction on de Belin would prejudice his legal case.
There is a feeling within the governing body that the onus should be on de Belin here, or his club, to make the call that it seems the NRL cannot.
But as one club boss explained, you put yourself in the Dragons’ boots?
In reality, it is the Commission, led by chairman Peter Beattie and Greenberg that implements the rules for clubs to follow.
And if they can’t make the call here, then surely the Dragons should not be expected to make it for them.
Dragons chief executive Brian Johnston finally broke his silence in a statement that simply toed the legal line.
“I acknowledge the interest and opinions surrounding the Jack de Belin legal proceedings,” Johnston said.
“This is a very difficult, complex and polarising issue, particularly for those involved, and as a club we have an obligation for player welfare.
“Aside from various contractual and welfare obligations, advice suggests that any action taken by the club may have significant ramifications and may interfere with the fairness of the judicial process.
De Belin has not been stood down by the Dragons. Photo by Matt King/Getty Images.
“As a club we support the desire and need to improve the standards of player behaviour across the game and our history would suggest that we are not afraid to take action where allegations have been proven.”
But “proven” is still the key word in all this.
In essence, if the Dragons or the NRL made the call to stand down de Belin now, and he was ultimately proved innocent, there would be hell to pay, especially given past history where players have been wrongly accused.
As Greenberg explained: “Under our current policy we have made it very clear that these are matters before the courts and that the NRL is very strong on applying natural justice to its players.
“In saying that, that’s our current policy but we’ve made it clear that we need to consider that very carefully.
“And again, each case needs to be judged on its merits and on this occasion with in the information available to the public it is very difficult.
“I understand why people are debating that.
“But the principles of our policy stand clear at the moment, that when a player is before the courts, we will stand back and allow that process to take place.”
While that might not please the vocal majority at this point, it is what it is.
Well mate if you don't know the answer to that I'm not going to tell you ....
I'm saying, the part of the story how the injuries occurred, is my question, not just in rape claims but in many assault allegations victims have claimed they received certain injuries & accused the defendant of causing them (FACT). I would question the extent of these injuries to shoulders, abdomen & knees, as instantly everyone gets a visual in their head of her being dragged against her will & brutally beaten, compared to a girl going willing back to an apartment ( for what ever means) calling an uber & all returning back to club together. Once you add the injuries, people assume he is guilty of the most hidious crime without question. As you & others are saying "geez she's got all the injuries, he must have done it".
I will add to this...or hearing the females full version or her testamony which will be also heard in court.
Couldn't have said better. Anyone who had questioned the series of events hoping he was innocent instantly think he must be guilty of the highest degree if she has all these injuries, that is my point & why I had to comment. ( regretting that decision to comment or not ).
Ok, what I’m saying is that her story and how she acted after the alleged incident is not actually unusual in any way. In fact the most unusual aspect of it is that she reported it and got treatment and soon as she did. There are plenty of cases where victims waited longer before they felt able to do that (FACT). What there isn’t, is ‘plenty’ of cases where someone makes up a story and it makes it to trial with sufficient corroborating evidence. That’s actually really rare in these types of cases. There are plenty of cases where allegations are made and they don’t go to trial because prosecutors don’t think there’s enough evidence.
It is like social media has taken us back 200, 500, 1000 or 2000 years..where the village people went to watch and cheer people being burned who they thought were witches on a stake, watching people being thrown into a lions den or crucified..because some ruling person did not like them.
FFS, are you serious? I was speaking hypothetically, which I made clear if you would have been so kind as to quite the entire message.
