Has Matthew Johns been treated unfairly?

[myanonymoususername]

Except these incidents occurred long before he was employed with either Channel 9 or the Storm.

So what? I'd guarantee his contract would have words in it to do with maintaining a good reputation, a so called "morals clause" sort of thing and probably some sort of statement where he would have agreed to make full and frank disclosures of anything likely to compromise his or the channel's reputation.

 

[Mr Angry]

Kimmorley on the bench, those were the days................

Do not tar all with one brush.

 

[Apey]

Shorty/Stormchaser;

You seem like you're both under the impression that only one person is to blame in all this, and that there is only one victim all in all of this, which is quite simply not true. Naturally, anyone who disagrees with either of you are 'pre-historic apes'.

I'm not sure if any of your 'constructive input' on this thread (and topic) is in relation to me, but the way I see it it's completely narrow-minded to think the woman is the only victim of this, and that there is only one dimension to this whole event. Why is it that when people pursue another dimension of it (say, the media's role, or the female's role, etc) you immediately assume they are implying nobody else is to blame?

I can't speak for everyone in this thread but I can certainly speak for myself when I say just because I believe Matthew Johns is a victim too, does not mean I think every other opinion and tangent on the matter is hence null and void.

If I have misinterpreted you, then honestly, maybe you should post a little more than 'FMD dese guyz r stuck in the past', time warp this blah blah blah.

 

[Ice Ice Brady]

Except these incidents occurred long before he was employed with either Channel 9 or the Storm.

He had his opportunity to air his side of the story last Thursday when they opened The Footy Show with his apology.

Either he and his team misjudged what was going to happen or he has a bunch of idiots running his PR, because if he had the chance to speak again on Thursday I guarantee he would have done a better job helping himself.

 

[Ice Ice Brady]

By the way, I would compare some of the people in this thread who are blaming the woman for what has happened to this guy:

The sheik then said: "If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred."
He said women were "weapons" used by "Satan" to control men.
"It is said in the state of zina (adultery), the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time on the woman. Why? Because she possesses the weapon of enticement (igraa)."

 

[Chook Norris]

was anything illegal? no one has even mentioned the word "rape"

How long ago did this occur? 7 years...
Why is it finally being brought up? who the f**k knows
Why is Matt Johns the only player mentioned? because he's the only one she remembered..

 

[Kiki]

i feel a bit sorry for him as far as she didn't remember any one elses name. but thats about it.

i hope this teaches young players that every action has a consequence, perhaps even years later. is it 'fair'? i dunno...what is fair? the concept of fairness is totally subjective so of course we are all going to argue.

for Channel 9 it was a no brainer. they simply cannot have him on their channel talking about footy any more.

 

[Shorty]

Shorty/Stormchaser;

You seem like you're both under the impression that only one person is to blame in all this, and that there is only one victim all in all of this, which is quite simply not true. Naturally, anyone who disagrees with either of you are 'pre-historic apes'.

I'm not sure if any of your 'constructive input' on this thread (and topic) is in relation to me, but the way I see it it's completely narrow-minded to think the woman is the only victim of this, and that there is only one dimension to this whole event. Why is it that when people pursue another dimension of it (say, the media's role, or the female's role, etc) you immediately assume they are implying nobody else is to blame?

I can't speak for everyone in this thread but I can certainly speak for myself when I say just because I believe Matthew Johns is a victim too, does not mean I think every other opinion and tangent on the matter is hence null and void.

If I have misinterpreted you, then honestly, maybe you should post a little more than 'FMD dese guyz r stuck in the past', time warp this blah blah blah.

Apey, are you saying that the woman involved is to blame for Matty Johns being punted?
Are you telling me that it isn't actually Matthew and his fault alone that he was stood down?

From what I've seen here, people are forever blaming the woman (how dare she complain about the events that occured back then...she has no right!:roll and also the good old media.
Let's play hypothetical - If Matthew had not played a part in such an act would the media be doing this same story with him mentioned?
No.

It is his fault and his fault alone, the media played the part that it gave 9 no choice but he is responsible for his own actions.
The woman involved, well how is it her fault? For speaking about it? For going to the media?

Another logical post by Kiki, phew some sense prevails!

 

[hrundi99]

I'm absolutely disgusted with this overblown situation. Bloody oath Johns has been treated unfairly.

Why is Shane Warne contracted with channel 9 after numerous sexual escapades even one inluding blow up dolls??

The girls in Warne's shenanigans were willing participants. They were only with him, not a conga line of blokes...

Why is Matthew Newton allowed to act on Underbelly which is on Channel 9 after the physical abuse of his Mrs?

It's a tv show, and they're actors...censorship of violent/sexual material on the tv is a separate conversation.

 

[Cletus]

Another interesting bit of information I heard on the radio today on the (Steve Price show) was that she was approached by the two players the night before. She knocked them back saying she had a boyfriend. When approached by the players the next night, she agreed to go with them.

Says a lot about the morals of this "lady" if she is willing to cheat on her bf with a couple of footballers she just met.

The point I would make is that there has been poor judgement, low morals and poor behaviour by all involved. It is wrong to single out one party for punishment when each of them played their role in this whole situation.

As opposed to a married man with two kids asking the same woman for sex twice in two days???

Look I find what Johns did morally questionable but that isn't what I have a problem with. What I have a problem with is the other guys who seem to think they can f**k her because she wants to f**k one of their teammates? And as for saying no or resisting, with ten drunk footballers in the room what happens if she does that and they don't care?

 

[Apey]

for Channel 9 it was a no brainer. they simply cannot have him on their channel talking about footy any more.

I agree with this. Now that it has been brought up again, they have no option

I'm just of the opinion that it was unfair that;

a) it was brought up again and he's being punished for it being brought up again. He is not being punished for what he did. He's being punished for the media bringing it up. Unfortunately a lot of self-righteous high-horsers can't seem to comprehend that doesn't necessarily mean I'm implying it's the media's fault alone. It just makes matters worse. Of course it wouldn't have been a problem if he never did anything - that is just common sense and you'd figure that most people would be able to grasp that... BUT! that is not the only factor present here, and that's what my point is and I'm sure that's what a lot of other people's points are (albeit they probably don't express them very well..)

b) he and he alone is being punished. He is definitely a scapegoat. That article El D published is brilliant. It's taking up another, less-popular tangent of the debate and it makes some good points.

 

[Kiki]

well Shorty is right, if Matthew didn't put himself in that position to begin with...this whole thing wouldn't be happening. so in that sense yes, it is his fault.

however i do think it's a bit crap it happened so long ago and is being dragged up now. not saying it wasn't gross and wrong, coz it totaly was.

but say if he got involved in a group sex scandal THIS year i think people would have alot less sympathy for him. doing something like that in the current environment would have a whole other feel.

then again he wasn't a young rookie, he probably woulda been the oldest player in that room and thats a little disturbing because the young boys look up so much to the older guys.

 

[Kiki]

i watched the footy show on thurs nite with a whole bunch of league people and we were all a bit shocked at how flippant his 'apology' was. he didn't even seem sorry. i really think that screwed him over.

 

[Ice Ice Brady]

I think another issue that the documentary was trying to focus on is the ability for the NRL and/or clubs to keep this stuff quiet (in this case 7 years).

Anyone who knows a young attractive girl living in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney would know of similar stories or speculation. You just need to go to the Eastern on a Wednesday night or Clovelly Hotel on a weekend to see how it begins.

 

[Shorty]

I agree with this. Now that it has been brought up again, they have no option

I'm just of the opinion that it was unfair that;

a) it was brought up again and he's being punished for it being brought up again. He is not being punished for what he did. He's being punished for the media bringing it up. Unfortunately a lot of self-righteous high-horsers can't seem to comprehend that doesn't necessarily mean I'm implying it's the media's fault alone. It just makes matters worse. Of course it wouldn't have been a problem if he never did anything - that is just common sense and you'd figure that most people would be able to grasp that... BUT! that is not the only factor present here, and that's what my point is and I'm sure that's what a lot of other people's points are (albeit they probably don't express them very well..)

Well because the media is only doing what it's job is to do.
You can't fire a gun if you don't have the bullets.
Of course the media has played a part but I feel like blaming the media is pretty pointless.

As it is, Matt Johns could have cleared himself a bit more - Unfortunately he was only remorseful really for it being brought to attention and his family.

b) he and he alone is being punished. He is definitely a scapegoat. That article El D published is brilliant. It's taking up another, less-popular tangent of the debate and it makes some good points.

This I do agree with - Everyone should have been named and shamed.

 

[Ice Ice Brady]

i watched the footy show on thurs nite with a whole bunch of league people and we were all a bit shocked at how flippant his 'apology' was. he didn't even seem sorry. i really think that screwed him over.

He seriously misjudged the situation and if he had his time again he'd say something better.

Hell, if he had his time again he'd accept the invitation to come onto the show. With Gallop and the Knights being on there, they have come out of this with far less damage. (Maybe not so that Knights player who said that bit at the end).

 

[Non Terminator]

It's a tv show, and they're actors...censorship of violent/sexual material on the tv is a separate conversation.

Referring to the actual crime he did commit, not one on the show.

 

[Lego_Man]

Could someone enlighten me as to who the winner is out of all of this?

Johns's career in tatters. His family life (along with presumably many of the Sharks on that team list) would be severely if not irreparably damaged. A code's reputation lies in ruins once more and every cleanskin still has to look over their shoulder and cop the snide insults and insinuations.

All for the belated revenge of a woman who will now go back to her life and find that destroying other's lives hasnt helped her at all.

 

[El Diablo]

I think another issue that the documentary was trying to focus on is the ability for the NRL and/or clubs to keep this stuff quiet (in this case 7 years).

Anyone who knows a young attractive girl living in the Eastern Suburbs of Sydney would know of similar stories or speculation. You just need to go to the Eastern on a Wednesday night or Clovelly Hotel on a weekend to see how it begins.

how was it kept quiet?

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-50937342.html

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-51000782.html

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-51778710.html

 

[Apey]

Apey, are you saying that the woman involved is to blame for Matty Johns being punted?
Are you telling me that it isn't actually Matthew and his fault alone that he was stood down?

No, where did I say the woman is to blame for him being punted? I don't believe it all. Would he have been punted for this incident had it not resurfaced? Of course he wouldn't have. Why did it re-surface? Did Matthew Johns do something recently?

From what I've seen here, people are forever blaming the woman (how dare she complain about the events that occured back then...she has no right!:roll and also the good old media.
Let's play hypothetical - If Matthew had not played a part in such an act would the media be doing this same story with him mentioned?
No.

Oh I'm definitely not blaming the woman. That's what some people are doing I'm sure. I am saying the media has a large part in this though. Yes, Johns shouldn't have done this in the first place, but I don't really see how in 'fairness' he has to pay for a crime he didn't commit now in the present. He has to pay for it because it resurfaced. Why did it resurface? He is not being punished for what he did so much, but for the incident coming to light again. How is this, by itself, his fault?

It is his fault and his fault alone, the media played the part that it gave 9 no choice but he is responsible for his own actions.
The woman involved, well how is it her fault? For speaking about it? For going to the media?

It's not really her fault he got sacked. I'm sure if we got into discussing the actual incident I'd happily admit that I believe she was partly (reads: not just her, and not her primarily, other people too) at fault, but for him being sacked she isn't at fault at all.

I don't really think it's his fault alone. Everyone can respect the argument that if he didn't do it in the first place (whatever 'it' may be depending on how much you believe of the story), but it's happened, and there's no denying that. What this thread is trying to discuss is whether there are other factors in his punishment - and to say there isn't is really quite odd. I'm not sure how anyone can dispute that this wouldn't have come back up again if it wasn't for the media. As I said earlier:

SARAH FERGUSON: Four minutes of news footage, a blanket denial from the team's management and the story disappeared from view.

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/conte...9/s2567972.htm

And that's how it should have stayed.