Dylan Brown - charged sexual touching

[Happy MEel]

I dont want our club to be asking to financially penalise our players .... i dont think that will result in club harmony

I don’t think going out getting shit faced and feeling up a lady on the dance floor, when the playing group decided to lay low over the bye weekend, will result in great club harmony either.

If it would be an option (although unlikely), I absolutely want the club to push the fine angle over the suspension. Drown needs to be read the riot act and reprimanded by the club, not just the NRL. The fine element does this without impacting the team…and fans

 

[Angry_eel]

Actually what protects Western women is the feminisation of Western men. Testosterone levels are in heavy decline and so few men are threatening these days that women feel safe enough to display their secondary sexual characteristics. In Egypt/India/etc, very few men have undergone the same level of feminisation, so their libidos are high and sexual harassment is rampant. These ancient religious/legal codes all say that sex outside of marriage is wrong (which includes raping strangers) so that isn't the cause. The fact is humans are animals and respond to animal urges. The reason men get less aggressive as they age is because their testosterone levels drop away. For the same reason, young men with less testosterone are less aggressive than young men with more. I'm sure NRL players would have far more testosterone than the average man. They are outliers.

I don't think it's feminisation as you say but it's the education to do the right thing and the confidence and support of Women to report Sexual Assaults.

Anyway, high Testosterone isn't such a great thing if it's linked to sexual assaults like the Syrian and Iraqi immigrants raping girls in Germany or Pakistani grown men grooming 12 year olds in the UK.

 

[Gazzamatta]

I don’t think going out getting shit faced and feeling up a lady on the dance floor, when the playing group decided to lay low over the bye weekend, will result in great club harmony either.

If it would be an option (although unlikely), I absolutely want the club to push the fine angle over the suspension. Drown needs to be read the riot act and reprimanded by the club, not just the NRL. The fine element does this without impacting the team…and fans

Hed be on $25k per game. Should/would he be fined the $175k while he is stood down?
Potentially a $200k hit to the back pocket.

 

[Gary Gutful]

There's not a single post on here that says clothing choice is an "excuse" for sexual touching. See, if you want to discuss issues like this you can't be going around misrepresenting what others say. It happens too much in discussions like this - which is one of the reasons consensus is seldom reached.

Well said Ivor.

 

[the phantom menace]

There's not a single post on here that says clothing choice is an "excuse" for sexual touching. See, if you want to discuss issues like this you can't be going around misrepresenting what others say. It happens too much in discussions like this - which is one of the reasons consensus is seldom reached.

No, but there was a string of posts in close succession which very much started to give that impression.

It started before pneuma's post you'd quoted, and they went like this:

I didn't know what a nork was, but now I do. Ok, well that's offensive behaviour, but not the end of the world. He should cop a ban, learn from it and move on. Avoid alcohol, avoid bars where woman are dressed provocatively.

Why should what a woman is wearing impact how someone interacts with them?

It has an effect. Obviously if a woman is scantily clad it can provoke sexual feelings, compared to if she was wearing a long dress. The very reason why the bible advises woman to dress modestly.

Perhaps because by dressing provocatively a woman is intending to arouse sexual interest and desire from others.

...and so it continued, with various other posters getting involved.

Maybe you just had to be reading live at the time to "get the vibe" of these posts which resulted in the questions and discussions about the related issues? I don't believe anyone's been misrepresented, but note of the posters above that only Emjaycee has been forthcoming in subsequently clarifying their posts weren't looking to create a clothing-based excuse for behaviours such as Dylan's.

 

[Eelogical]

Sexual healing.

 

[the phantom menace]

The club should approach the NRL today, pointing out the decision to allow a Panthers player to play in the final series previously (for the fans), and given the circumstances that the NRL has withdrawn a number of our senior players from our team list this week (for the fans), and we should ask for him to play this weekend (for the fans) and then he serves the remaining 4 matches from next week. This will mean that he will miss the Dragons game instead.

I'd agree with this - that May decision for the NRL to suspend their supension until after the finals was a pandora's box, and needs to be explored.

As others have said, I'd be comfortable the club accepting a higher fine on teh player in return for a reduced suspension too. (Stop these selfish f**ks doing a Matterson, and hit them in the hip pocket to reinforce the lesson.)

 

[Suitman]

Oh dear.

 

[Jake the snake]

Now Dylan has been received his deserved punishment. Where are the authorities and media when it comes to responsible service of alcohol at the Golden Sheaf? What’s been done by them? Who’s investigating. Surely this is a significant breach. Or will the these arrogant eastern suburbs f**kers get away with it?

 

[emjaycee]

No, but there was a string of posts in close succession which very much started to give that impression.

It started before pneuma's post you'd quoted, and they went like this:





...and so it continued, with various other posters getting involved.

Maybe you just had to be reading live at the time to "get the vibe" of these posts which resulted in the questions and discussions about the related issues? I don't believe anyone's been misrepresented, but note of the posters above that only Emjaycee has been forthcoming in subsequently clarifying their posts weren't looking to create a clothing-based excuse for behaviours such as Dylan's.

FYI, you may have missed the subtlety but my early post about dressing provocatively to attract interest, was a direct quote from the Oxford Dictionary definition of provocative.

 

[Gary Gutful]

Sexual healing.

When I get that feeling.

 

[the phantom menace]

FYI, you may have missed the subtlety but my early post about dressing provocatively to attract interest, was a direct quote from the Oxford Dictionary definition of provocative.

My reply to Lingard was more to highlight where the conversation on the issue actually started i.e. with Pumpkin's contributions, well before Pneuma (as was asserted).

Pumpkin was the first to throw in the "avoid bars where women dress provocatively" as some sort of solution to the Dylan Brown situation/reason for him being in this predicament.

 

[Suitman]

FYI, you may have missed the subtlety

Quite likely.

 

[lingard]

No, but there was a string of posts in close succession which very much started to give that impression.

It started before pneuma's post you'd quoted, and they went like this:





...and so it continued, with various other posters getting involved.

Maybe you just had to be reading live at the time to "get the vibe" of these posts which resulted in the questions and discussions about the related issues? I don't believe anyone's been misrepresented, but note of the posters above that only Emjaycee has been forthcoming in subsequently clarifying their posts weren't looking to create a clothing-based excuse for behaviours such as Dylan's.

So nobody said it was an excuse, but
"a string of posts started to give that impression"? And you "got that vibe".
Well, no worries, then. You go, mate.

 

[Bandwagon]

I don’t think going out getting shit faced and feeling up a lady on the dance floor, when the playing group decided to lay low over the bye weekend, will result in great club harmony either.

If it would be an option (although unlikely), I absolutely want the club to push the fine angle over the suspension. Drown needs to be read the riot act and reprimanded by the club, not just the NRL. The fine element does this without impacting the team…and fans

I'd think that for the club to go down that path they'd have to consult with Brown over it ( after all it's Brown who has to respond to the breach notice )

And if Brown was to agree to copping a greater fine and fewer matches, to me that'd send a pretty good message to the playing group, even if the NRL was to turn it down.

 

[Happy MEel]

I'd think that for the club to go down that path they'd have to consult with Brown over it ( after all it's Brown who has to respond to the breach notice )

And if Brown was to agree to copping a greater fine and fewer matches, to me that'd send a pretty good message to the playing group, even if the NRL was to turn it down.

The club statement indicates that both the club and Dylan have a 5 day period to respond. I’m happy for the club to make that call to be honest.

 

[Gronk]

Eels consider adding conditions to Brown’s ban​

Parramatta will consider adding further conditions to Dylan Brown’s NRL-imposed suspension for sexual touching without consent before he returns to the Eels line-up.

Brown, 23, was issued a further four-game ban and $40,000 fine (half of which is suspended) by the NRL on Monday, having already missed three games while observing the game’s no-fault stand-down policy as his case was heard.


The Eels have until the end of the week to respond to Brown’s breach notice, but are expected to accept the punishment and add more club-based conditions in the coming days.

Brown pleaded guilty to two charges of sexual touching without consent following an incident at The Golden Sheaf Hotel in Double Bay in late May. He was sentenced to an 18-month Community Correction Order after police withdrew three other charges


It emerged in court last week Brown had consumed up to 20 alcoholic drinks.

Club sources, speaking on the condition of anonymity given the breach notice response is yet to be submitted, said Brown’s approach to alcohol will be a key focus of discussions with the young playmaker

An outright alcohol ban is unlikely to be proposed, rather a focus on education and training programs beyond those already imposed by the NRL.
An apology written by Brown to the victim was read out during his court case. It was followed by a statement from the Eels half in which he said he “takes full responsibility for my actions”.

Senior figures at Parramatta view the offences as a serious wake-up call for Brown. Any further potential indiscretions would put his multimillion-dollar Eels deal under scrutiny.

The club is mindful that Brown’s offence occurred while he was intoxicated and is at odds with his character when it comes to fans and charity work.
Brown also apologised to his Parramatta teammates and was especially popular with fans who attended training on Tuesday as part of an Eels members’ day, giving his boots to a family that had travelled from Newcastle for the meet-and-greet.

“The NRL’s come out with a punishment and obviously Dyl will take whatever the NRL give him,” teammate and friend Will Penisini said.
“It’s obviously disappointing not having him and he knows he let the team down. He’s apologised to us and he’s now put his head down and is working on himself every day.”

Eels consider adding conditions to Brown’s ban

The star five-eighth will miss another four matches after pleading guilty to sexual touching without consent in what is viewed as a serious wake-up call by senior Eels figures.

www.smh.com.au

 

[eels_fan]

Now Dylan has been received his deserved punishment. Where are the authorities and media when it comes to responsible service of alcohol at the Golden Sheaf? What’s been done by them? Who’s investigating. Surely this is a significant breach. Or will the these arrogant eastern suburbs f**kers get away with it?

If it went to trial I’m sure cctv and transaction records would have come into the investigation but its a closed deal now.

dylan could have been loaded before he arrived and not even had a drink inside

Someone may have been buying them for him

he may not even have had as many as his lawyer claimed and he was using inebriation as a mitigating circumstance

 

[hineyrulz]

So nobody said it was an excuse, but
"a string of posts started to give that impression"? And you "got that vibe".
Well, no worries, then. You go, mate.

 

[T-Boon]

No, but there was a string of posts in close succession which very much started to give that impression.

It started before pneuma's post you'd quoted, and they went like this:





...and so it continued, with various other posters getting involved.

Maybe you just had to be reading live at the time to "get the vibe" of these posts which resulted in the questions and discussions about the related issues? I don't believe anyone's been misrepresented, but note of the posters above that only Emjaycee has been forthcoming in subsequently clarifying their posts weren't looking to create a clothing-based excuse for behaviours such as Dylan's.

Why don’t you drop it dude. We get it you really care about looking after the ladies.