gus gould - deregister the offenders automatically

[nqcowboy87]

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...uld-be-deregistered-gould-20130620-2okkz.html

Panthers boss and league pundit Phil Gould believes NRL stars should face immediate deregistration when they are sacked for bad behaviour by their clubs in the future.
Gould's strong stance comes with poor behaviour by NRL stars in the spotlight. This week, Canberra's NSW winger Blake Ferguson was stood down from State of Origin II as well as club duties after being charged with indecent assault following a night out with St George Illawarra fullback Josh Dugan. South Sydney prop George Burgess was also stood down for two matches after causing damage to a car during a night out in Cairns.
The plight of Canberra, who sacked Dugan for repeated misdemeanours only to see him resurface at St George Illawarra and are now deciding Ferguson's fate, was used by Gould to show that the NRL needed to get tougher on players who had been terminated by a club.


He said the NRL's Integrity Unit needed to take decisions away from the clubs.

"The recurrence of these incidents, and very serious incidents, and the fact that the players just don't seem to be getting the message . . . I think this Integrity Unit has got to stand up and start to make some real rules about these things, to take it out of the hands of the club," the former Origin coach said on Fairfax Media's The Phil Gould Show. "The club, Canberra Raiders, over the years have had to lose players like Todd Carney and more recently Josh Dugan . . . they're in the spotlight to lose a bloke like Blake Ferguson if he goes again. They're reluctant to lose him, because they want to compete, and they want to win, but it should be the game saying, 'if you don't respect being a professional footballer, you should be gone'."
Gould, the Panthers executive general manager of rugby league, said it had reached the point where "the game just has to deregister them"
"And in the instance of Blake Ferguson - he's due his day in court, and we can't assume guilt until that's proven in court - but if it comes down that serious charges like this, put them out of the game. I think that's the only deterrent," he said.
"You have a club that will sack a player for . . . behavioural issues, only to see that player reappear with another club down the track, if he's talented, playing against them.
"Let's use the Dugan case. Canberra Raiders sacked Dugan at the start of this year, and within a month, he's playing with the Dragons, he's on good money, and now he's got a Blues jersey. How do you explain that? How, as a game, do we justify that, that a player can be sacked from a club, for breach of behaviour . . . then be rewarded with a Blues jersey?
"That's not a deterrent, at all. I think the game really needs to be serious about this, and if a club sacks a player for breach of behaviour, then they need to be deregistered for a couple of years, as a real deterrent for what they're doing."
Gould added the Integrity Unit needed to consider the effect that instances like those of this week had on the clubs and the game, when players "continually thumb their nose at the system and authority, and think they're bigger than the game".
"In 35 years, I've seen it all," Gould said. "I've supported players, and I've stuck up for them, and I've given them second chances. It's wearing me out, to be honest."

 

[BunniesMan]

He's very right.

Canberra should be able to sack Ferguson if they want to after they've already given him a last chance without fearing that it is only going to benefit a rival. Same goes for any other player at any other club.

 

[Matchball]

f**k Gus. He would cover up a players indescretions if it affected the Panthers.

 

[herbert henry1908]

IMO if you're going to have the NRL decide who gets sacked from a club , it would have to be some sort of process like the judiciary , with a right of appeal.

It needs to be open and transparent.

 

[herbert henry1908]

f**k Gus. He would cover up a players indescretions if it affected the Panthers.

Have you been paying attention ?!

He publicly shamed Michael Jennings when he stuffed up.


And even if what your saying is true , he's asking for the decision to be taken out of his hands anyway.

 

[Spanner in the works]

I think there could be a lot of problems with taking this line, although I tend to agree with the idea. There's two scenarios in my mind:

If it involves the judicial system then I think taking this path undermines innocent until proven guilty considerably, a value that many of us defend jealously. In my mind it comes down to "What if we just deregistered a player who the courts later find to be innocent?". Up until the point the court delivers its judgement, I think a player should remain on the books at a club. There is certainly valid reasons to stand them down with pay in the meantime, but we need to defend innocent until proven guilty. If they are found to be guilty - and the appeal period has passed - then come down as hard as we can on them i.e. deregister them, big fines etc etc.

If it's an internal issue then I think there may be cases where deregistering is appropriate, but I think the clubs and NRL would need to be very transparent in their decision-making process, and there would need to be an appeal process available, ideally overseen by an independent panel.

 

[kmav23]

So the nrl should sack the whole of cronulla.

 

[Card Shark]

So the nrl should sack the whole of cronulla.

Someone ought to put you in a sack & chuck you in the harbour!

 

[DeeJ]

He's very right.

Canberra should be able to sack Ferguson if they want to after they've already given him a last chance without fearing that it is only going to benefit a rival. Same goes for any other player at any other club.

and then we just give another player to rugby union.

 

[Noa]

Gross overreaction.

Taking Ferguson as an example why should he be sacked for something that gets most booked either a slap in the face, a drink thrown over them or a smack in the head from the boyfriend..

 

[kmav23]

and then we just give another player to rugby union.

If they want scum .... Then they can take it.

They can also take Robert lui.

 

[Alsmug]

So the nrl should sack the whole of cronulla.

umm? what have they been charged with? as much as I am all for derigistration of repeat offenders when its a police matters or any incidents that bring the game into disrepute, the Cronulla team do not fit this criteria, why should they all be deregistered, do tell?

 

[Perth Red]

Dugan wasn;t convicted of anything was he? If Raiders wanted to put up with him being a fckwit they could have but chose not to. The fact St's have decided they don;t mind employing a fckwit is there own look out.

Different where criminal charges are involved and if serious then lengthy bans should be in place. Having said that they would just move to Union or SL so not like they are being punished that harshly really.

 

[Griffoshark66]

umm? what have they been charged with? as much as I am all for derigistration of repeat offenders when its a police matters or any incidents that bring the game into disrepute, the Cronulla team do not fit this criteria, why should they all be deregistered, do tell?

He would but he is an ignorant moron.

 

[herbert henry1908]

Gross overreaction.

Taking Ferguson as an example why should he be sacked for something that gets most booked either a slap in the face, a drink thrown over them or a smack in the head from the boyfriend..

Huh?

He allegedly grabbed a woman between the legs.

If true, its an outrageous act that deserves a lot more than just a slap in the face or a drink thrown over him.

 

[Alsmug]

i see he sounds like some of the raiders supporters here, I am that dissapointed with the majority of the mentality of the raiders supporters on his site, I am thinking of changing my support to the sharks a club full of hard work, honesty and loyalty , the bulk of the raiders supporters here are self righteous, fabricate stats,try the old troll tail to scare one away lol dumb asses, one would think we are coming first in the comp the way a few carry on, they are insecure ,loose in the mind and cannot handle criticism, real oxygen thief's and need a bib to capture the dribble that comes out of their mouth r69 , pete cash are the worst offenders , they are a kinda a tag team duo the smell each others farts and get off to it,maybe? sad, sad state of affairs .Yet they maintain true canberra/the home of verbal spin(parliament house) , grammar errors corrections a priority as they struggle to read between the lines and child psychology, as the are that deluded they think they know more ,lol its so funny

 

[byrner]

Dugan wasn;t convicted of anything was he? If Raiders wanted to put up with him being a fckwit they could have but chose not to. The fact St's have decided they don;t mind employing a fckwit is there own look out.

Different where criminal charges are involved and if serious then lengthy bans should be in place. Having said that they would just move to Union or SL so not like they are being punished that harshly really.

Exactly, Dugan broke no laws. He acted like a dick, but if that was illegal half the people on this forum would be locked up.

 

[Grapple]

I think the whole thing is becoming cringeworthy. They should just be treated like normal individuals with normal jobs - not some f**kin super hero footy star who's above all morals.

That's where the problems start - the NRL/Media & everyone else should stop trying to take the high moral road claiming we don't stand for this stuff in the NRL and admit that sometimes our players (like everyone else in society) are f**kin morons who act like idiots in the public and generally don't follow the rules and have a drink when they shouldn't (again, like everyone else).

If the club decides they can't perform to their standards - then sack them according to their contract - not for "the game's image" or some other rubbish ideal, especially when nobody can even agree on what that image is or how it should look.

Let another club either pick them up and deal with their rubbish, or not. If you sign him and he's going off the rails you decide as a club whether he's worth the effort to fix, or not and you either take responsibility for him when you sign him, or you stay out of it - at your decision.

Let the person who's f**ked up either work their way back into contention and prove themselves, or not. Pretty bloody simple I would've thought.

 

[byrner]

I think the whole thing is becoming cringeworthy. They should just be treated like normal individuals with normal jobs - not some f**kin super hero footy star who's above all morals.

That's where the problems start - the NRL/Media & everyone else should stop trying to take the high moral road claiming we don't stand for this stuff in the NRL and admit that sometimes our players (like everyone else in society) are f**kin morons who act like idiots in the public and generally don't follow the rules and have a drink when they shouldn't (again, like everyone else).

If the club decides they can't perform to their standards - then sack them according to their contract - not for "the game's image" or some other rubbish ideal, especially when nobody can even agree on what that image is or how it should look.

Let another club either pick them up and deal with their rubbish, or not. If you sign him and he's going off the rails you decide as a club whether he's worth the effort to fix, or not and you either take responsibility for him when you sign him, or you stay out of it - at your decision.

Let the person who's f**ked up either work their way back into contention and prove themselves, or not. Pretty bloody simple I would've thought.

Great post.

 

[kmav23]

I think the whole thing is becoming cringeworthy. They should just be treated like normal individuals with normal jobs - not some f**kin super hero footy star who's above all morals.

That's where the problems start - the NRL/Media & everyone else should stop trying to take the high moral road claiming we don't stand for this stuff in the NRL and admit that sometimes our players (like everyone else in society) are f**kin morons who act like idiots in the public and generally don't follow the rules and have a drink when they shouldn't (again, like everyone else).

If the club decides they can't perform to their standards - then sack them according to their contract - not for "the game's image" or some other rubbish ideal, especially when nobody can even agree on what that image is or how it should look.

Let another club either pick them up and deal with their rubbish, or not. If you sign him and he's going off the rails you decide as a club whether he's worth the effort to fix, or not and you either take responsibility for him when you sign him, or you stay out of it - at your decision.

Let the person who's f**ked up either work their way back into contention and prove themselves, or not. Pretty bloody simple I would've thought.

So bloody true....

People are blaming others for not supervising them.

WTF they are grown men take responsibility.

Clubs should stop worrying about if another team sign them.

Have some morals and sack him after chance 3.

Telling everyone this is his last chance everytime he stuffs up is disgraceful.