Isaac Gordon should be given a life ban immediatley.

[AuDragon]

So you're all for rehabilitation, but upon completion of said rehabilitation you're also for further punishment for the offender?

I'm not trying to defend what Metcalf did, but he served his time. His debt to society over that incident, as reprehensible as it was, is over.

Sure, he'll never be able to get a job where he needs a security clearance now, but there's no pre-requisite for NRL players to not have criminal records.

So a job in construction or the mines, is punishment? :sarcasm:

He's out of prison and can get on with his life within certain parameters. Being someone of dubious character, you don't get things such as security clearance or traveling overseas where any country will not allow you entry anyway, and no nice cushy jobs. For life!

You're confusing punishment with reward. Playing in the NRL is a privilege, from which serious criminal ofenders should be barred. If that's no pre-requisite... it should be! Because as far as I'm concerned, once you commit the kind of crime Metcalf committed, you forfeit the right to such privileges.

 

[Eels Dude]

I'm all for rehabilitation, but the nature of the crime has to count for something.

In Metcalf's case, attempted murder of his unborn child by kicking his girlfriend in the belly, almost killing her in the proces, goes a bit beyond the Robert Lui, GI or Isaac Gordon's of this world... :crazy:

The fact that the NRL accepted his registration shows that any thug is welcome to play rugby according to this administration, which is why this doesn't surprise me in the least.

As I said that was a long time ago... When Metcalfe was 15 or 16 at the time I believe? I agree it was a disgusting thing to do and his age is no excuse, but where do you draw the line as to when you stop punishing someone for a crime they committed, and in this case a juvenile. 10 years? 20 years? When do you draw the line the line that this person has no re-enter society and make an honest living for themself. If you can answer this question in black and white i'll be very impressed.

 

[RLNY]

How about a personal conduct policy for the NRL, like they have in the NFL?

 

[betcats]

Yes and it is f**king wrong and turns me off the game. The NRL are not the law.

Yeah fair enough, i thought u were talking bout this instance only.

 

[betcats]

It doesnt bother me much, im pretty sure i wouldnt have my job if i had that conviction on my record,. A life ban is a bit strong though.

 

[Generalzod]

FFS, we have the police, the justice department for a reason.

It has been dealt with by the law, the NRL is not the f**king law.

Well said...

 

[betcats]

Like it or not the NRL, like all businesses, has a reputatation(terrible one maybe) to uphold, these merkins are f**king that up, they should be punished by the nrl is some way imo.

 

[grouch]

Cronulla have never really been about building a strong culture within their club - the only reason they sacked the likes of Bird and Latu was to prevent precious sponsors leaving. The fact that they show no signs of cutting a - let's face it- borderline average first grader, after such a despicable (and criminal) act, speaks volumes about the lack of character within the organisation.

 

[drago brelli]

Unfortunately boys there will probably be more atrocities in 2012 and the single factor involved will be alcohol.

 

[Marshall_magic]

He deserves what ever the Sharks and/or the NRL decide to do. Grub.

 

[Ron's_Mate]

He was saving her and now they love each other berry berry much.

GI sits on the couch & his missus brings him snacks of white bread & Coca Cola. Happy days.

 

[Mr Angry]

I was agreeing with you...

appologes.

 

[Perth Red]

Thought it was too good to be true that we culd go through a full off season without someone fricking up and dragging the game into the papers for the wrong reasons again.

As for him being man enough to plead guilty, I am sure the deal with the police to drop the more serious charge was a more motivating factor than some suddden remorse and character reformation!

 

[AuDragon]

As I said that was a long time ago... When Metcalfe was 15 or 16 at the time I believe? I agree it was a disgusting thing to do and his age is no excuse, but where do you draw the line as to when you stop punishing someone for a crime they committed, and in this case a juvenile. 10 years? 20 years? When do you draw the line the line that this person has no re-enter society and make an honest living for themself. If you can answer this question in black and white i'll be very impressed.

I did, read the rest of the thread, when I replied to skeepe. You seem to be channeling eachother, so the reply to him should be good enough... ;-)

 

[THE CHAMP]

You are pathetic.
Just because Inglis didn't get a conviction doesn't mean he didn't do it.
In a perfect world anyone found guilty of violence against women should be banned. Including Greggy boy 'protecting' his Mrs.

Ya just not that bright are ya?

 

[adamkungl]

Thought it was too good to be true that we culd go through a full off season without someone fricking up and dragging the game into the papers for the wrong reasons again.

This happened months ago...

 

[no name]

Ya just not that bright are ya?

Enlighten me, Genius. What about my post says that I'm not bright?

 

[wibble]

This is why the IC needs to be up and running ASAP. Although it too, will likely be vulnerable to "moral outrage" influencing its decisions, a fairly comprehensive set of guidelines and a judiciary for off field incidents (should the IC feel the need to promote a particular sanitized version of the players) should help make judgments and punishments about players for off field indiscretions a bit fairer.

If I assaulted anyone (I can't see how their gender would matter, and nor would my employer) I would be instantly sacked with no hope of ever working again in the industry, and fair enough too, I say. If I am accused of assaulting someone I can be removed from my role (which I love) with little hope of reinstatement and no chance to defend myself, even if the police decide not to prosecute. So I don't think NRL players are treated particularly poorly.

But I do agree we could have a better codified system that allows some indiscretions to be dealt with in a fair and consistent manner without necessarily costing players any chance of playing again. "Assault" is a wide variety of actions, and when we think of violent acts against relatively helpless victims we are probably imagining "aggravated assault", which should be dealt with pretty harshly.