Dylan Brown - charged sexual touching

[Jake the snake]

As I said weeks ago, will not play again this season, nor should he. The NRL did the right thing in standing him down.

He is now officially our new peanut and I’d be tempted to sack him unless he agreed to change aspects of his lucrative contract in particular re: alcohol consumption assuming it was a contributing factor in his dickhead behaviour.

Agree. What an absolute air head. That’s someone’s daughter or sister, he deserves what he gets. He’s always come across as a bit slow.

 

[chiefy1]

He will be back against the warriors.

Don't see how they can enforce otherwise

He'll get id say a 10 - 12 week suspension backdated to when he was initially stood down.

 

[lucablight]

And this is without any comment or judgment on Dylan or the process.

But from a legal standpoint and considering the sentence, I'd be surprised if they continue to enforce the stand down.

You think the nrl will let him continue to play?

 

[Gronk]

Interestingly that random tweet was 40 minutes ago, yet no news outlet has published anything since.

Nah, confirmed

NRL star had '15-20 alcoholic drinks' before groping woman in Sydney pub, court told

Dylan Brown was charged with five counts of sexual touching without consent. In court today, he pleaded guilty to two of the charges while the remaining three were dropped by police.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Angry_eel]

He'll get id say a 10 - 12 week suspension backdated to when he was initially stood down.

backdated would be great for us. That's before the finals. 10 weeks is the finals.

 

[Chipmunk]

Nah, confirmed

NRL star had '15-20 alcoholic drinks' before groping woman in Sydney pub, court told

Dylan Brown was charged with five counts of sexual touching without consent. In court today, he pleaded guilty to two of the charges while the remaining three were dropped by police.

www.abc.net.au

I wasn't saying it wasn't accurate, but the rugby league media don't seem in any rush to report on it.

 

[Gronk]

Well we have one opinion of he'll play vs Warrior and another that he won't see 2023.

I have NFI because I just find the NRL to be too unpredictable to even take a wild guess.

 

[Tooooks]

He will be back against the warriors.

Don't see how they can enforce otherwise

You think the nrl will let him continue to play?

They let Curran play after he bashed a kid.

 

[Gronk]

Can I just throw this in before anyone thinks Dylan can appeal any NRL suspension, De Belin took the NRL to the Federal Court to test their right to stand down players and sought a judgement of restraint of trade. Importantly - see bullet point three.

• The Federal Court has concluded that the National Rugby League (NRL) lawfully stood down Jack de Belin under their new “no fault stand down” rule while he awaits a verdict in criminal proceedings.
• The decision of Perry J concluded that, although the rule constituted a restraint of trade, the restraint was justified because it was reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the Australian Rugby League Commission (ARLC) and the NRL.
• The decision highlights that the contractual arrangement surrounding NRL players means that players are “more than just employees” and can be described as “live advertising space”. Her Honour found that players’ reputations could significantly influence attendance, viewership, and by extension, the attractiveness of the game to sponsors and broadcasters.
• The Rugby League Players Association (RLPA) has flagged a possible appeal of the “no fault stand down rule” in a bid to have the “no fault stand down” rule overturned and de Belin reinstated.

The Federal Court recently handed down its decision in De Belin v Australian Rugby League Commission Limited [2019] FCA 688. The lengthy judgment of Perry J concluded that the ARLC’s and NRL’s controversial “no fault stand down” rule was lawful, and that the decision to sideline Jack de Belin while he awaits a verdict in criminal proceedings was valid pursuant to that rule.

 

[Gronk]

You think the nrl will let him continue to play?

They let Curran play after he bashed a kid.

True.

The Warriors backrower was placed on a 12-month good behaviour conditional release order.

Curran also had charges of reckless grievous bodily harm and larceny withdrawn and dismissed.

Port News reports Curran will also replace the teenager’s lost phone.

Grogin said that although the offence was proven, without opposition from the prosecution, Curran was not being convicted.

Warriors star guilty of assaulting teenager in nightclub

The incident took place on the night of last year’s NRL grand final.

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[yy_cheng]

Club Statement: Dylan Brown

Dylan Brown today faced court regarding an incident that took place on 3 June 2023.

www.parraeels.com.au

 

[Tooooks]

I think it would read better if Dylan had written his own apology.

 

[yy_cheng]

I think it would read better if Dylan had written his own apology.

He probably can't write

 

[Legal Eel]

Well we have one opinion of he'll play vs Warrior and another that he won't see 2023.

I have NFI because I just find the NRL to be too unpredictable to even take a wild guess.

Agree its unpredictable - I'm just hazarding an opinion on what their advice may be on commercial liability and unreasonable restraint.

Your stance might be wiser - with the NRL it's a crapshoot.

 

[84 Baby]

I wasn't saying it wasn't accurate, but the rugby league media don't seem in any rush to report on it.

None of them wanted to get in too early with their outrage pieces

 

[Angry_eel]

He probably can't write

Mate, let's not attack the NZ education system because a player has done something stupid

 

[Legal Eel]

Can I just throw this in before anyone thinks Dylan can appeal any NRL suspension, De Belin took the NRL to the Federal Court to test their right to stand down players and sought a judgement of restraint of trade. Importantly - see bullet point three.

• The Federal Court has concluded that the National Rugby League (NRL) lawfully stood down Jack de Belin under their new “no fault stand down” rule while he awaits a verdict in criminal proceedings.
• The decision of Perry J concluded that, although the rule constituted a restraint of trade, the restraint was justified because it was reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the Australian Rugby League Commission (ARLC) and the NRL.
• The decision highlights that the contractual arrangement surrounding NRL players means that players are “more than just employees” and can be described as “live advertising space”. Her Honour found that players’ reputations could significantly influence attendance, viewership, and by extension, the attractiveness of the game to sponsors and broadcasters.
• The Rugby League Players Association (RLPA) has flagged a possible appeal of the “no fault stand down rule” in a bid to have the “no fault stand down” rule overturned and de Belin reinstated.

The Federal Court recently handed down its decision in De Belin v Australian Rugby League Commission Limited [2019] FCA 688. The lengthy judgment of Perry J concluded that the ARLC’s and NRL’s controversial “no fault stand down” rule was lawful, and that the decision to sideline Jack de Belin while he awaits a verdict in criminal proceedings was valid pursuant to that rule.

True

But the judgment in question went into greater detail on the particulars of offending and the commercial realities.

I think they will allow him to play

 

[Twizzle]

Id assume so as well.

However it'll be trial by media and policy on the run with the NRL from here on in. Will be an interesting upcoming week.

you mean trial by Hadley

 

[84 Baby]

Your stance might be wiser - with the NRL it's a crapshoot.

Rugba leeg was built on pokies

 

[Chipmunk]

Interesting to see what the NRL outcome is. Obviously there is no huge rush as we're not playing this week and don't need to name a side again until Tuesday.

What are the similar precedents?