Jdb case

[bad boy bubby]

For me, if you are going to change the rules when it suits you, you have to be prepared to compensate the collateral damage. Otherwise, the NRL should have said that the next player to have allegedly done XYZ will face the new consequences. The Dragons club are the entirely innocent party to be SEVERELY messed up because of it. In my simple understanding, if they are going to throw this on JDB, they can afford to let us replace him with a like player in the meantime. I don't think it is fair to say it is just bad luck because they are controlling the situation. Why isn't it just bad luck for Souths that Inglis retired and left a gaping hole in their squad?

I actually agree with the policy but quite clearly the NRL apply certain precedents to certain clubs to make a point. You see it happen with refereeing rules constantly. Who can forget the way they made an example of Frizell, the cleanest player in the game, when he unconsciously brushed up against a referee?

yep, that is quite fair. Would the Dragons have to pay for the new player, or should it be extra on the salary cap?

 

[rednwhites]

yep, that is quite fair. Would the Dragons have to pay for the new player, or should it be extra on the salary cap?

I'll be honest mate, I don't have an in depth understanding exactly how salary caps work. Obviously some clubs like the Roosters know how to work the system which, as far as I am concerned, makes a mockery of the sport or at least a mockery of all the other clubs. Again, what would seem fair to me, is that they would be given the space in the cap to replace him but need to offload if/once JDB situation is resolved. Maybe share the actual cost? Of course from this point on, the rule is in effect, and they wouldn't have to compensate.

 

[Old Timer]

Can I ask a question here please. I'm not here to stir up anything as this is far too serious an issue.
To all the people saying that the NRL should compensate your team, I ask you this, what type of compensation are you asking for? Money for DeBellin's wage? Money for another player? or an extra spot on the roster to cover DeBellin?
The NRL are already paying Jack's wage. They cover the whole salary cap. Are you asking that they pay his wage, again? or more money than other teams for another player?
I'm truly not sure what compensation you are looking for here.

Simple really
We have a player in the roster who cannot play so we need another player to fill his position.
To do that we would need to have some salary cap dispensation otherwise we would go over the cap and be penalised as JDB is still being paid and a new player would also need to be paid.
To add to that drama we don't know how long JDB is out of the game so we don't know how long a contract a replacement player might / will want.
The club is asking the NRL to clarify exactly what the ruling is so we can be on a level playing field with other clubs because at the moment we are 1 high quality player down every week before we begin.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Emotion aside, the issue of
(a) compensation, and
(B) player replacement
Is actually very technical and not as easy as like for like.

JDB is contracted to us until the end of 2020, therefore, under the stand down rule he has to he paid his salary until a decision on the court case is heard and judgement passed. Therefore, his salary has to be part of our cap.
Unfortunately, this maybe seen as a flaw in the rules set down in the stand down policy, however, there are many permutations this case can turn on, including;
(A) Police withdrawing the charge (maybe based on evidence etc), and
(B) the plaintiff withdrawing the charge.
This could happen at any time, remote as it may be. If this was to happen then JDB would be free to play immediately together with his included cap salary. If we had like for like compensation we would effectively have to release another player or players to fall back under the cap, otherwise it is "unfair advantage", for want of a better terminology.

The only other ways to get like for like is for us or the NRL, to tear up his contract. Given the oresumption of innocence and the player welfare concept, this would be very unlikely to happen. The other option is for JDB to walk away and quit the game himself (this is the same with the Inglis case). The final option is for him to actually do an Inglis, quit the game as a player, the club hire him in a capacity such as coaching staff or whatever until his options above are done. He could then be re-registered as a player (assuming innocence of charges of course) Its wether we have space in our cap at that time is the issue.

There is a lot of angst and assumption about our CEO and the suggested 100k compensation. We DONT KNOW if BJ has requested full compensation and lobbied hard for it. Unfortunately, its the decision by the NRL not by the club. Given the scenarios above the reasoning is there however unlikely they may seem.

 

[bad boy bubby]

I'll be honest mate, I don't have an in depth understanding exactly how salary caps work. Obviously some clubs like the Roosters know how to work the system which, as far as I am concerned, makes a mockery of the sport or at least a mockery of all the other clubs. Again, what would seem fair to me, is that they would be given the space in the cap to replace him but need to offload if/once JDB situation is resolved. Maybe share the actual cost? Of course from this point on, the rule is in effect, and they wouldn't have to compensate.

Personally I have no problem with compensation.
Would the NRL be fine with paying another players wage (Of equal value) on top of DeBellin?
Would the other 15 clubs be ok with the Dragons getting more salary cap than them?
These are tough questions, I don't expect answers, just have to be mindful that it's not so black'n'white a situation.
Thanks for replying. Hope it works out for everyone involved.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Emotion aside, the issue of
(a) compensation, and
(B) player replacement
Is actually very technical and not as easy as like for like.

JDB is contracted to us until the end of 2020, therefore, under the stand down rule he has to he paid his salary until a decision on the court case is heard and judgement passed. Therefore, his salary has to be part of our cap.
Unfortunately, this maybe seen as a flaw in the rules set down in the stand down policy, however, there are many permutations this case can turn on, including;
(A) Police withdrawing the charge (maybe based on evidence etc), and
(B) the plaintiff withdrawing the charge.
This could happen at any time, remote as it may be. If this was to happen then JDB would be free to play immediately together with his included cap salary. If we had like for like compensation we would effectively have to release another player or players to fall back under the cap, otherwise it is "unfair advantage", for want of a better terminology.

The only other ways to get like for like is for us or the NRL, to tear up his contract. Given the oresumption of innocence and the player welfare concept, this would be very unlikely to happen. The other option is for JDB to walk away and quit the game himself (this is the same with the Inglis case). The final option is for him to actually do an Inglis, quit the game as a player, the club hire him in a capacity such as coaching staff or whatever until his options above are done. He could then be re-registered as a player (assuming innocence of charges of course) Its wether we have space in our cap at that time is the issue.

There is a lot of angst and assumption about our CEO and the suggested 100k compensation. We DONT KNOW if BJ has requested full compensation and lobbied hard for it. Unfortunately, its the decision by the NRL not by the club. Given the scenarios above the reasoning is there however unlikely they may seem.

Also, just to add.
If we were granted 550k compensation for like for like replacement ir means spending it in 1 player only and that player would have to;
Play lock forward - so you cant say go after Oates for example, he's not a lock
Be at SOO standard
Be off contract or want to request a release
Want to play Dragons footy
Want to be coached by McGregor

I cant see anyone that fits that criteria.

 

[ST Tangles 01]

Can I ask a question here please. I'm not here to stir up anything as this is far too serious an issue.
To all the people saying that the NRL should compensate your team, I ask you this, what type of compensation are you asking for? Money for DeBellin's wage? Money for another player? or an extra spot on the roster to cover DeBellin?
The NRL are already paying Jack's wage. They cover the whole salary cap. Are you asking that they pay his wage, again? or more money than other teams for another player?
I'm truly not sure what compensation you are looking for here.

The NRL stood him down on a no fault policy which I don't have an issue with if done correctly.

For this reason I believe they should allow any club that they are standing a player down from a dispensation to sign another player of equivalent value on the cap for the period the player is stood down.

From my understanding they are offering a 100K dispensation as this covers a minimum wage player.

If it truly is a no fault stand down policy the Club involved shouldn't suffer.

 

[ST Tangles 01]

Personally I have no problem with compensation.
Would the NRL be fine with paying another players wage (Of equal value) on top of DeBellin?
Would the other 15 clubs be ok with the Dragons getting more salary cap than them?
These are tough questions, I don't expect answers, just have to be mindful that it's not so black'n'white a situation.
Thanks for replying. Hope it works out for everyone involved.

Just on would the other clubs be happy

If it truly is a no fault stand down we should be covered as should they if this happens as the NRL is standing the player down

They bought the rule in on the fly

Now should be the time to work out the finer details

 

[ST Tangles 01]

Emotion aside, the issue of
(a) compensation, and
(B) player replacement
Is actually very technical and not as easy as like for like.

JDB is contracted to us until the end of 2020, therefore, under the stand down rule he has to he paid his salary until a decision on the court case is heard and judgement passed. Therefore, his salary has to be part of our cap.
Unfortunately, this maybe seen as a flaw in the rules set down in the stand down policy, however, there are many permutations this case can turn on, including;
(A) Police withdrawing the charge (maybe based on evidence etc), and
(B) the plaintiff withdrawing the charge.
This could happen at any time, remote as it may be. If this was to happen then JDB would be free to play immediately together with his included cap salary. If we had like for like compensation we would effectively have to release another player or players to fall back under the cap, otherwise it is "unfair advantage", for want of a better terminology.

The only other ways to get like for like is for us or the NRL, to tear up his contract. Given the oresumption of innocence and the player welfare concept, this would be very unlikely to happen. The other option is for JDB to walk away and quit the game himself (this is the same with the Inglis case). The final option is for him to actually do an Inglis, quit the game as a player, the club hire him in a capacity such as coaching staff or whatever until his options above are done. He could then be re-registered as a player (assuming innocence of charges of course) Its wether we have space in our cap at that time is the issue.

There is a lot of angst and assumption about our CEO and the suggested 100k compensation. We DONT KNOW if BJ has requested full compensation and lobbied hard for it. Unfortunately, its the decision by the NRL not by the club. Given the scenarios above the reasoning is there however unlikely they may seem.

Great questions
I think the 100k dispensation is so you can put a minimum wage player in your squad so you are carrying the correct number of players

This just shows how fast the policy was thrown together.

These situations should of been discussed and a set of rules / guidelines sent out to clubs.

 

[TruSaint]

Can someone please point me to a link where the NRL has offered 100K ?

 

[possm]

The issue of compensation is all on Johnston and the board, nothing to do with Mary or Millward, no matter how much you want to blame them for everything. Come to think of it, deficiencies in Mary or Millward's performance are also on Johnston and the board...

Sorry I do not agree with you. It is up to Millward and Mary to bring the seriousness of the NRL teams plight to the CEO who should recommend action to the Board. An agreement with the NRL regarding compensation should have been agreed to previous to the handing down of the decision.

 

[possm]

Can I ask a question here please. I'm not here to stir up anything as this is far too serious an issue.
To all the people saying that the NRL should compensate your team, I ask you this, what type of compensation are you asking for? Money for DeBellin's wage? Money for another player? or an extra spot on the roster to cover DeBellin?
The NRL are already paying Jack's wage. They cover the whole salary cap. Are you asking that they pay his wage, again? or more money than other teams for another player?
I'm truly not sure what compensation you are looking for here.

The compensation I believe should be paid to SGI is:
a. De Belin's wage - now if they are already paying this that is good.
b. SGI salary cap - to delete De Belin from the salary cap 550k

If the above two measures of compensation are given by the NRL, I'd say this is fair and SGI to move on.

 

[rasaint]

Hi All a bit of perspective.

JDB was charged by Police with a very serious crime. He vehemently denies the charge.It is to be heard in a court of law, apparently finalising in 18 months time. The NRL decided to push ahead with a stand down law. It is obvious from the media reports both press and on TV that the club strongly opposed this action. All the club CEOs except Dragons I understand voted for it. Apparently, of these it was the so called ‘big hitters’ Politis and the Melbourne bloke that led the charge for a stand down.
This situation had nothing to do with Dragons CEO who publicly strongly opposed the stand down and Mary who didn’t shirk strong opposing comments either.

It went to the Federal Court who supported the stand down policy and rejected JDB’s case. Again nothing to do with Brian Johnston or the Board of the Dragons.

I have no doubt that Brian would already be representing the dragons case in the strongest terms possible. He is a principled and well qualified guy with a great Dragons history. A gentleman but assertive. Many years back I spent some time with him off and on. He knows his stuff.

Remember the NRL and Commission have the whip hand here. They are now cock a hoop with a big legal victory and I have no doubt couldn’t give a rats about the dragons, the salary cap dilemma we find ourselves in nor Dragons fans. In fact reading essential comments by the judge the NRL won the day by a country mile. Other CEOs remember voted bthe stand down in and again why would they care.

Welcome to the new world fellow dragons fans.

 

[Como Connection]

Also, just to add.
If we were granted 550k compensation for like for like replacement ir means spending it in 1 player only and that player would have to;
Play lock forward - so you cant say go after Oates for example, he's not a lock
Be at SOO standard
Be off contract or want to request a release
Want to play Dragons footy
Want to be coached by McGregor

I cant see anyone that fits that criteria.

Merrin would fit that spot.
CC

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Not at all.

It’s not a case of the charges being different”..

One player has been cleared of his charges, the other is still facing his..

Clearly you weren’t aware of the facts and are now trying to dig up..

Not sure how you didn’t know though. Both cases have been all over the news and this website..

Well, if I were clear of the facts I wouldn’t have preempted my earlier question by prefacing it with “I wonder”.

Rudimentary logic 101.

And as others have pointed out, the cases ARE different: one for alleged grievous sexual assault and the other relating to domestic violence, of which, the charges have been subsequently dropped.

As also indicated, I incorrectly thought Walker’s victory was related to the NRL’s “No Fault” policy only.

 

[muzby]

Well, if I were clear of the facts I wouldn’t have preempted my earlier question by prefacing it with “I wonder”.

Rudimentary logic 101.

And as others have pointed out, the cases ARE different: one for alleged grievous sexual assault and the other relating to domestic violence, of which, the charges have been subsequently dropped.

As also indicated, I incorrectly thought Walker’s victory was related to the NRL’s “No Fault” policy only.

You f**ked up..

Own it..

Move on..

Stop wasting everyone’s time..

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

You f**ked up..

Own it..

Move on..

Stop wasting everyone’s time..

You f**ked up..

Own it..

Move on..

Stop wasting everyone’s time..

Haha...ok.

Going back to my penultimate post, I acknowledged I was incorrect. Did you blink at that point or was there still something unclear in that muddled headed pea brain of yours?

I’ve move on from you yonks ago, too.

 

[muzby]

I’ve move on from you yonks ago, too.

Interesting..

 

[Saint_JimmyG]

Interesting..

If you stopped “fapping” everytime you see one of my posts, you’d might realise it too.

 

[muzby]

If you stopped “fapping” everytime you see one of my posts, you’d might realise it too.

Interesting...