What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Jack De Belin

Status
Not open for further replies.

blacksafake

Guest
Messages
5,877
I can see it coming now..

No 3rd trial

De Belin is reluctantly allowed by the NRL to come back n play..

Makes a tackle on a falling player, with incidental contact to the head.

Suspended for the rest of the season.
yeah you could just see it now.
He hits someone with one of his trademark rib ticklers & he gets charged with the charge being since you've been away the game has changed we are now playing under oztag rules so you can't tackle anyone hard.:rolleyes:
 

Dragon David

Juniors
Messages
2,301
We know that the NRL is clamping down and penalising players for head high tackles and is possibly wanting limited contact during training sessions to reduce these types of injuries as part of players' welfare.

Our training guys will need to make sure that our players are practising better tackling techniques so as to not hit high but also not to have our defending players hit their heads in making tackles which is said to cause concussion injuries more than head high tackles. Tackling technique is so critical now with the new rules.

Hopefully we will not have a repeat of last weekend and be further decimated.

Jack De Belin has a great tackling technique and his way of tackling should be taught to many of our players.
 

Slippery Morris

First Grade
Messages
6,175
Go figure, there is now a chance Saints will have him on the field before Maguire and Tyrell depending how the courts go. He would be handy to have on the field this weekend that is for sure. Maybe even as quick as next weeks game which is the same day or is that impossible. Surely Saints can ask if they can name him in their line up in case he does succeed. It would be the same as naming a player depending on if he passes a Capt's run.

Do you think Saints will ramp up his training and have him train with the first grade squad? I heard Hook has him separated from the FG not sure if that still applies?
 

Dragonslayer

First Grade
Messages
6,928
The DPP is under no obligation to announce any decision prior to the 28th even if they have/will decide not to proceed to a 3rd trial.

DeBelin wouls not be able to be selected in the team list until the NRL rubber stamps his return, as far as I know.
 
Messages
4,638
Go figure, there is now a chance Saints will have him on the field before Maguire and Tyrell depending how the courts go. He would be handy to have on the field this weekend that is for sure. Maybe even as quick as next weeks game which is the same day or is that impossible. Surely Saints can ask if they can name him in their line up in case he does succeed. It would be the same as naming a player depending on if he passes a Capt's run.

Do you think Saints will ramp up his training and have him train with the first grade squad? I heard Hook has him separated from the FG not sure if that still applies?
Hook said he’s as fit as a fiddle, had him do a mini pre season to get ready. He’s good to go.
 

hewi

Juniors
Messages
2,496
I think it’s all the same they just play the jury a video of the original trial witness evidence
 

Dragon David

Juniors
Messages
2,301
I believe the DPP have already decided which way they will go.

And even if they don't proceed they will wait until the next court date to say.
Seeing that the DPP have up to and including 28 May, they will be using the time to evaluate everything over and over so as not to leave any stone unturned and hoping upon hope that some new evidence/witness can come to light.
 

possm

Coach
Messages
13,900
Seeing that the DPP have up to and including 28 May, they will be using the time to evaluate everything over and over so as not to leave any stone unturned and hoping upon hope that some new evidence/witness can come to light.
Why? if they can't get a guilty verdict, their trumped-up charges deserve to provide them with as much hell as possible. Fancy the police lying to the court to try and make the alleged victims case look stronger.
 

Dragon David

Juniors
Messages
2,301
Why? if they can't get a guilty verdict, their trumped-up charges deserve to provide them with as much hell as possible. Fancy the police lying to the court to try and make the alleged victims case look stronger.
The DPP might think that out of the 5 remaining charges, they might be able to achieve guilty on 2 or 3 of the main charges which might see the defendants serving time, that is why they could very well be looking at which of the charges they could form a good argument for in another trial for all of the panel to give a guilty verdict for those 2-3 charges.

The police lying to me should have warranted the case to be dismissed in the first trial in my opinion.
 

Old Timer

Coach
Messages
13,499
The DPP might think that out of the 5 remaining charges, they might be able to achieve guilty on 2 or 3 of the main charges which might see the defendants serving time, that is why they could very well be looking at which of the charges they could form a good argument for in another trial for all of the panel to give a guilty verdict for those 2-3 charges.

The police lying to me should have warranted the case to be dismissed in the first trial in my opinion.


Why? if they can't get a guilty verdict, their trumped-up charges deserve to provide them with as much hell as possible. Fancy the police lying to the court to try and make the alleged victims case look stronger.

In all honesty these types of assertions are really annoying.

Whilst I am not insinuating guilt or innocence the fact that the jury has failed to reach a verdict does not indicate that the charges are trumped up it means the jury can't decide on a majority basis one way or the other.

The fact that the police lied is indeed annoying but that action by them should not preclude the young girl from having her day in court and she should not be penalised because of the actions of the police and that hopefully is how the DDP view it as well.

The entire saga is a sad affair indeed with only losers and whilst there is much to wonder as to who did what, when, to who and that includes the NRL introducing a new rule and applying it retrospectively the one thing to remember IMO is that from making a professional business decision us having kept a roster position open for this long is incredulous and it still goes on and may go on even longer.

I say that on the basis that I can't see that any of the top teams would have subjected themselves to thinking their rosters were strong enough to carry 1 less player let alone one of SOO quality.
 

epDragon62

Bench
Messages
4,443
In all honesty these types of assertions are really annoying.

Whilst I am not insinuating guilt or innocence the fact that the jury has failed to reach a verdict does not indicate that the charges are trumped up it means the jury can't decide on a majority basis one way or the other.

The fact that the police lied is indeed annoying but that action by them should not preclude the young girl from having her day in court and she should not be penalised because of the actions of the police and that hopefully is how the DDP view it as well.

The entire saga is a sad affair indeed with only losers and whilst there is much to wonder as to who did what, when, to who and that includes the NRL introducing a new rule and applying it retrospectively the one thing to remember IMO is that from making a professional business decision us having kept a roster position open for this long is incredulous and it still goes on and may go on even longer.

I say that on the basis that I can't see that any of the top teams would have subjected themselves to thinking their rosters were strong enough to carry 1 less player let alone one of SOO quality.
Respectfully, "annoying" is not suitable as a description of the police conduct.
 

BBTB

Juniors
Messages
479
In all honesty these types of assertions are really annoying.

Whilst I am not insinuating guilt or innocence the fact that the jury has failed to reach a verdict does not indicate that the charges are trumped up it means the jury can't decide on a majority basis one way or the other.

The fact that the police lied is indeed annoying but that action by them should not preclude the young girl from having her day in court and she should not be penalised because of the actions of the police and that hopefully is how the DDP view it as well.

The entire saga is a sad affair indeed with only losers and whilst there is much to wonder as to who did what, when, to who and that includes the NRL introducing a new rule and applying it retrospectively the one thing to remember IMO is that from making a professional business decision us having kept a roster position open for this long is incredulous and it still goes on and may go on even longer.

I say that on the basis that I can't see that any of the top teams would have subjected themselves to thinking their rosters were strong enough to carry 1 less player let alone one of SOO quality.
Once false evidence, was proven to be fabricated, the case needed to be dismissed... Immediately... The case has been tainted
by the "Police Investigation "... So where dose this false evidence, start & where dose it stop.?
 

Dragon David

Juniors
Messages
2,301
Once false evidence, was proven to be fabricated, the case needed to be dismissed... Immediately... The case has been tainted
by the "Police Investigation "... So where dose this false evidence, start & where dose it stop.?
What's happened to the policeman who falsified the evidence? Has he been suspended or fined or what?

You are right BBTB, the case was tainted at the start. The police just wanted a conviction and they thought that they could help by lying!!
 

hewi

Juniors
Messages
2,496
What's happened to the policeman who falsified the evidence? Has he been suspended or fined or what?

You are right BBTB, the case was tainted at the start. The police just wanted a conviction and they thought that they could help by lying!!

Why hasn’t he been charged with perjury and dismissed from the police force. Oh no we couldn’t do that we just turn the other cheek and hope it goes away.
 

Morotti

Juniors
Messages
326
The DPP might think that out of the 5 remaining charges, they might be able to achieve guilty on 2 or 3 of the main charges which might see the defendants serving time, that is why they could very well be looking at which of the charges they could form a good argument for in another trial for all of the panel to give a guilty verdict for those 2-3 charges.

The police lying to me should have warranted the case to be dismissed in the first trial in my opinion.

They could have done that in the first two trials though couldn't they? Convicted him on 2 our 3 counts and dismissed the rest? He has been found not guilty of one count.

I expect that if the charges are not proceeded with to a third trial, then he will play reserves for a few weeks to gauge match fitness. 2.5 years without a proper game, you can't just walk straight back in. Training is not playing.
 

Dragon David

Juniors
Messages
2,301
They could have done that in the first two trials though couldn't they? Convicted him on 2 our 3 counts and dismissed the rest? He has been found not guilty of one count.

I expect that if the charges are not proceeded with to a third trial, then he will play reserves for a few weeks to gauge match fitness. 2.5 years without a proper game, you can't just walk straight back in. Training is not playing.
Definitely if no third trial and given the green light to return to playing league, will need some time in reserves to gain some match fitness and get used to all the new rules since his last game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top