Is it time for the NRL to stand down (with pay) players charged with a violent crime?

[firechild]

Rubbish, of course de Belin should be stood down. I've bn proved right today, I'm also right that we should go to 11 a side with a 5m defensive line, no kicking in the oppositions half.

At least with the second part of your post you proved that the first part shouldn't be taken seriously.

 

[taipan]

And when Greenburg has met the criteria to be appointerd as a judge in a court of law, then I would agree that he is in a position to make captains calls on these issues.
Until then, we are left with inconsistencies and junior girls touch footy teams opinions.

It was hardly Greenberg acting alone ,the Commission does the arm twisting.
If a court of law can't be consistent, anyone running an organisation(and that includes Greenberg) is going to be either the same or worse as to consistency.
Human nature at times is not consistent.
And whose going to replace the huge monetary loss that Telstra and Harvey Norman put in, and apparently threatened to pull out if nothing was done? It wasn't one issue over the off season, it was a number of incidents.
I'm prepared for a one off and even a couple of incidents over a period of a few months, as has happened in the past, but seriously with all the crap ,it was an embarrassment.And it damaged the game, ask clubs seeking sponsors.

 

[taipan]

Why are you only upset when the allegations relate to women?

I'm hardly upset, the code's decision has been vindicated whether we like it or not.No one expected the stand down to be popular.
For a start the overwhelming number of allegations were made by women.Women ever since I've been growing up ,need to be protected.The allegations are not exactly in the traffic offence category.
Domestic violence overwhelmingly is against women.Political parties acknowledge that fact.

Do you know a guy who played for the Dragons now the Tigers ,who decked some guy and was jailed.And is now a model citizen.

Do you think I agreed with that Broncos guy ,playing after the dramas in New York.It's still not a good look and I found the decision to let him play ordinary.And Kee Cham should have received a longer time off.

What would the reaction be with sponsors, fans ,media, if all the players at the centre of the allegations, continued on playing?Applause? It's a no fault order.The court has adjudicated it that way.Complain to Judge Judy.

And I read somewhere that Penn, thought the no fault stand down decision was the right one.

 

[mave]

It was hardly Greenberg acting alone ,the Commission does the arm twisting.
If a court of law can't be consistent, anyone running an organisation(and that includes Greenberg) is going to be either the same or worse as to consistency.

I'm sure I read that Beattie and the Commission had given Greenberg the ability to make "captains calls", see Walker as an example #1.
Chee Kam wasnt sanctioned under this policy by Greenburg.

My issue is that we have a bloke who has said that he takes advice from the local girls touch footy team on these matters, who also happens to think that consistency is over-rated, and the guy that thinks giving favourable character references to speeding drunks is a good idea, has the sole power to decide who does and doesnt get this new rule thrown at them.

And as always, the few favoured clubs will be favoured, and the rest get shafted.

 

[t-ba]

I'm sure I read that Beattie and the Commission had given Greenberg the ability to make "captains calls", see Walker as an example #1.
Chee Kam wasnt sanctioned under this policy by Greenburg.

My issue is that we have a bloke who has said that he takes advice from the local girls touch footy team on these matters, who also happens to think that consistency is over-rated, and the guy that thinks giving favourable character references to speeding drunks is a good idea, has the sole power to decide who does and doesnt get this new rule thrown at them.

And as always, the few favoured clubs will be favoured, and the rest get shafted.

Speeding Drunks who were under the same cloud of suspicion as one of the players he stood down not too long ago...

 

[taipan]

I'm sure I read that Beattie and the Commission had given Greenberg the ability to make "captains calls", see Walker as an example #1.
Chee Kam wasnt sanctioned under this policy by Greenburg.

My issue is that we have a bloke who has said that he takes advice from the local girls touch footy team on these matters, who also happens to think that consistency is over-rated, and the guy that thinks giving favourable character references to speeding drunks is a good idea, has the sole power to decide who does and doesnt get this new rule thrown at them.

And as always, the few favoured clubs will be favoured, and the rest get shafted.

Mate I have never stated there has been consistency.Greenberg is the CEO ,the decisions was as I understand it, anyone involved with allegations that could lead to X numbers of years in prisons to be stood down on a no fault basis.

Those of a lesser charge ,would be up to Greenberg.The decision for Greenberg to have that authority IMO would have been one also discussed with the commission.
We've had drinks drivers at the Telegraph and a guy who did malicious damage to a car, and they retained their jobs.Go figure.

Mate I have daughters too, and I know their reaction to the off seasons's crap,Greenberg's local girl's touch footy team are not alone.

If you believe having all these players ,going around under a cloud of serious charges is going to assist the game, then I'm not here.

I'm not a Rooster's fan far from it, and that club is one that is supposed to get favoured treatment.Pearce does a dumb thing on social media not a serious offence, in the scheme of things and look how he was whacked.The Titan's guys a few years back.The Tigers guy who ripped off a charity re jumpers.Carney at the Sharks.The Canberra fullback.All clubs have issues, in the past, and a stand needs to be made, else the code is stuffed.