Jack DeBelin interview

[BennyV]

Because law says you are innocent until proven guilty so based on that and the fact he was still paid but not allowed to fully work and practice his trade.

It shows some bias towards public perception and others to keep him away from view
he and others have been stood down because of the bad look in simple terms.

Yes I know police and govt get stood down pending inquiries etc and plenty of other work instances that happens
but his work and his type of employment if you’re not continuing to fully work that has a potential for you to lose ability and physicality and income afterwards to carry out your work duties if you get a non-guilty verdict after such a long time

in regards to the contract I refer you to their website. Too late.. Agreed to terms of course I assume if found not guilty if all charges

In a legal sense, he is allowed the presumption of innocence unless proven otherwise in court, but that doesn’t entitle him to go about his business in any way he wishes while he is the subject of such a serious charge. The charges themselves, the active investigation and pending trial all bring negative attention to a business that relies heavily on sponsorship, viewership and good PR. Therefore the NRL brought in a policy to distance him from its image while still allowing him to be paid under his contract. He tried to challenge that twice before in court and failed, so attempting it again if/when he is found ‘not guilty’ would be foolish, as is claiming he has the ability to sue them for it.

As for the club - yes, unfortunately he seems to be locked in. I’d hoped we were looking to turn a corner culture-wise and it doesn’t look like that’s the case.

 

[Gareth67]

i like private eye COLUMBO, and detective Sargent donger, and magnum PI

Same blue bags . All 3 of those gentlemen left one with a lasting impression - especially Sargent Donger with that huge 40 gallon gut of his .

 

[BLM01]

In a legal sense, he is allowed the presumption of innocence unless proven otherwise in court, but that doesn’t entitle him to go about his business in any way he wishes while he is the subject of such a serious charge. The charges themselves, the active investigation and pending trial all bring negative attention to a business that relies heavily on sponsorship, viewership and good PR. Therefore the NRL brought in a policy to distance him from its image while still allowing him to be paid under his contract. He tried to challenge that twice before in court and failed, so attempting it again if/when he is found ‘not guilty’ would be foolish, as is claiming he has the ability to sue them for it.

As for the club - yes, unfortunately he seems to be locked in. I’d hoped we were looking to turn a corner culture-wise and it doesn’t look like that’s the case.

I get your point about the PR and why the NRL did it. ..although personally dont agree with it but the courts did.
After all these years RL had survived after plenty of other crimes took place before someone had their day in court.without a no-fault stand down policy....
I look at what happened to Brett Stewart (although suspended for 4 weeks), Coffs Harbour affair and others in recent memory + perceptions by those not in the know.
But all I was saying was that is why some people believe he should sue and the potential 2 + years out of the game culd possibly end his current career and potential future earnings if found not guilty of all ....but I dont agree he should go down that path.
As for the club..my perception is they are closer to the issue and know more than we do.

 

[redandwhite4evr]

I get your point about the PR and why the NRL did it. ..although personally dont agree with it but the courts did.
After all these years RL had survived after plenty of other crimes took place before someone had their day in court.without a no-fault stand down policy....
I look at what happened to Brett Stewart (although suspended for 4 weeks), Coffs Harbour affair and others in recent memory + perceptions by those not in the know.
But all I was saying was that is why some people believe he should sue and the potential 2 + years out of the game culd possibly end his current career and potential future earnings if found not guilty of all ....but I dont agree he should go down that path.
As for the club..my perception is they are closer to the issue and know more than we do.

I agree that the Brett Stewart case should sound alarm bells for cases of this type which revolve around that elusive word - consent. It can be not given in the first place, given and taken away as events unfold or unclearly communicated and thereby misunderstood from the outset.

Athletes, very often without other marketable qualifications, who have a ten year window of opportunity to set themselves up for life are clearly disadvantaged by the current rules so to that extent I have some sympathy for De Belin's plight. I don't like his morality but it's not his morals which are on trial.

 

[possm]

What bugs me the most is the claim by many (admittedly, mainly on social media) that a not guilty verdict should see Jack sue the NRL for not letting him play and even lay defamation charges against the accuser! It’s super special.

A not guilty verdict doesn’t mean this was made up, or even that it didn’t happen. It means that it couldn’t be proven beyond reasonable doubt, which is extremely hard in many circumstances. Regardless of the verdict, Jack has been dragged through the mud and absolutely put himself, the club and the NRL into negative light. I hope the club throws that ‘in principle’ contract in the bin the second this is over.

The NRL's mistake was that it judged De Belin, before he had his day in court. If they sat down with De Belin and the Dragons and worked out a deal where De Belin was to stand down, Dragons on be penalised and the NRL take all financial and health repsonsibility until the end of the case, then the NRL would be on more solid ground.

If De Belin wins, I hope he goes the NRL and settles for a huge payout.

 

[possm]

I agree that the Brett Stewart case should sound alarm bells for cases of this type which revolve around that elusive word - consent. It can be not given in the first place, given and taken away as events unfold or unclearly communicated and thereby misunderstood from the outset.

Athletes, very often without other marketable qualifications, who have a ten year window of opportunity to set themselves up for life are clearly disadvantaged by the current rules so to that extent I have some sympathy for De Belin's plight. I don't like his morality but it's not his morals which are on trial.

Yes I agree. I also think that such cases should not be publises at, all when the player pleads not guilty and the case should be held in closed court with all evidence remaining secret until the court gives it's verdict.

 

[Forbes Creek Dragons]

Is this the Jack de Belin thread. If so can you all go to church and pray Jack will be Back. I know it's the weekend but try your best thanks.

Some subjects just need to be changed. I was intrigued as much as anyone at the start of the trial but what we are hearing through the media it is all just a huge mess that I have no idea how anyone can prove anything. Be it mates giving eyewitness statements after changing them or help messages been sent out on the gold standard medium for requesting help Snapchat with its instantly deleted messages. Its most definitely time to just leave this case to the courts and just focus on other things for the time being.

 

[T-Boon]

Hopefully DeBellin has been smart enough to spend the last 2 years wisely, working on his game so he can at least kick on in England but also getting himself some qualifications (university degree for example) for an eventual post NRL career.
Not enough players do this and that is partly the clubs faults. In my opinion 100 percent of them should be working towards something post football.

 

[muzby]

I agree that the Brett Stewart case should sound alarm bells for cases of this type which revolve around that elusive word - consent. It can be not given in the first place, given and taken away as events unfold or unclearly communicated and thereby misunderstood from the outset.

I disagree.

Consent in a sexual nature can be given and taken away at any time, depending on what someone feels comfortable with or what they do or don’t want to do.

Athletes, very often without other marketable qualifications, who have a ten year window of opportunity to set themselves up for life are clearly disadvantaged by the current rules so to that extent I have some sympathy for De Belin's plight. I don't like his morality but it's not his morals which are on trial.

I can’t see how DeBelin needs sympathy for being disadvantaged.

He’s still earned close to $1.2m in the past two years and has his employment guaranteed if he beats the charges.

There are plenty of others worse off.

Plenty.

 

[BLM01]

Hopefully DeBellin has been smart enough to spend the last 2 years wisely, working on his game so he can at least kick on in England but also getting himself some qualifications (university degree for example) for an eventual post NRL career.
Not enough players do this and that is partly the clubs faults. In my opinion 100 percent of them should be working towards something post football.

You are wrong to blame the clubs..the clubs go over the top in educating young men in a lot of things PC, facets of life including education and offer plenty of opportunites and avenues and support if they so choose.
But not all want a tertiary or UNI qualification either..but Yes something to lean back on would not go astray
But blame their supposed new life coaches....no..not the parents..no..not the club but ....player managers..or then again
Players should start using some stuff they were taught from the parents if happened and make their own decisions for their future..many are old and mature enough to do so.

 

[possm]

I disagree.

Consent in a sexual nature can be given and taken away at any time, depending on what someone feels comfortable with or what they do or don’t want to do.



I can’t see how DeBelin needs sympathy for being disadvantaged.

He’s still earned close to $1.2m in the past two years and has his employment guaranteed if he beats the charges.

There are plenty of others worse off.

Plenty.

Now your statement could have some credibility if it was the Dragons who stood him down. But it was the NRL, a third party and a party who took no financial responsibility.

 

[muzby]

Now your statement could have some credibility if it was the Dragons who stood him down. But it was the NRL, a third party and a party who took no financial responsibility.

This makes absolutely no sense.

He has been paid in full for the past two seasons and has employment afterwards if he clears the charges.

 

[T-Boon]

You are wrong to blame the clubs..the clubs go over the top in educating young men in a lot of things PC, facets of life including education and offer plenty of opportunites and avenues and support if they so choose.

Where are you hearing this? Genuine question because I don't really hear much supporting that being the case.
I think the NRL clubs do everything half heartedly that isn't DIRECTLY linked to them increasing their likelihood of winning premierships.

 

[BennyV]

The NRL's mistake was that it judged De Belin, before he had his day in court. If they sat down with De Belin and the Dragons and worked out a deal where De Belin was to stand down, Dragons on be penalised and the NRL take all financial and health repsonsibility until the end of the case, then the NRL would be on more solid ground.

If De Belin wins, I hope he goes the NRL and settles for a huge payout.

If that’s your position then you obviously aren’t aware of the intent and justification behind the ‘No fault’ stand down policy. The NRL did not judge him guilty. No one did. He was removed from the game in order to remove the association from the ongoing negative attention, because it would compromise sponsorship and viewership. He was paid. He attempted to have it overturned and failed.

‘Going the NRL’ will not be successful in court and will negatively affect DeBelin and the Dragons a lot more than they already are.

 

[BennyV]

I get your point about the PR and why the NRL did it. ..although personally dont agree with it but the courts did.
After all these years RL had survived after plenty of other crimes took place before someone had their day in court.without a no-fault stand down policy....
I look at what happened to Brett Stewart (although suspended for 4 weeks), Coffs Harbour affair and others in recent memory + perceptions by those not in the know.
But all I was saying was that is why some people believe he should sue and the potential 2 + years out of the game culd possibly end his current career and potential future earnings if found not guilty of all ....but I dont agree he should go down that path.
As for the club..my perception is they are closer to the issue and know more than we do.

“It’s happened before and the NRL survived” isn’t really good justification for allowing it to continue. The issue is that the NRL should have brought in the stand down policy well before JDB got stung. Should have been in place immediately after the Brett Stewart case.

Yes, the club is a lot closer than many of us. Which makes it that much more disappointing that they kept him around the playing group, rallied for him to play and have extended his signature. It’s no longer about innocence or guilt, it’s perception. ‘Not guilty’ doesn’t mean innocent either. Through all of it, his name is being dragged through the mud and our club is being associated with that, and we are just OK with that. It’s indicative of the dramatic decline in standards and leadership at the club over the last 9 years.

 

[BLM01]

Where are you hearing this? Genuine question because I don't really hear much supporting that being the case.
I think the NRL clubs do everything half heartedly that isn't DIRECTLY linked to them increasing their likelihood of winning premierships.

I disagree..it is all half heartedly.
But agree a club's goal is to win premierships but that is not linked to failing to educate.
How do I know...I have been involved with a CRL club for 30 years and in the past 20 coaching, Exec Committee, in all roles including development of juniors and seniors players with transitions to NRL clubs.
From that level the NSWRL and CRL do their best re education but the issue there is $$$ and getting enough people around to educate all.
I have dealt indirectly with mainly 3 NRL clubs..being Wests Tigers, Parra & in St George Illawarra's case directly with their CEO and coaches and NRL talent scouts.

NRL clubs spend a fair bit of time at schools educating,
Some kids have gone off into NRL systems as 14-15 years odds being selected and encouraged to pursue a dream, some even have to get player managers because their parents cant keep up by the time they are 17/18 and then their life becomes in someone else's hands.
But education comes 1st before NRL..and then its the life and PC education, alcohol, voilence against women women, drugs you name it..they try and cover it.
They cant make evry kid sit there..no different to school..they can make em learn and prove it..but cant make em take it all in and regurgitate it 2 or 3 years later or follow what they have learned. It does not happen in reality.

Some players make it through the NRL pathways..many dont and have stories to share when they come back home to park level
I can not speak about all NRL clubs, I can only speak about those 3 but I am sure it is unison across the NRL banner.
Could things be done better..hell yeh!. More money channelled through the whole system down to grass roots instead of up top. Definitely and a clear omission by the NRL with their billions!
But I cant not get away from the role PM's play, some poor parenting and the individual on their decision making
Of course clubs make mistakes and take their eye of the ball..but in the main they have enough staff to cover all of it.
But hey all that is my opinion..happy to hear your's and other's opinions on here with their direct experiences, not via 3rd party versions from disgrunted persons with axe's to grind.
I can go back 10 maybe 15 years and the NRL education then was no where near the level it is today.

 

[redv13]

At the end of the day Jack put himself in an extremely vulnerable and stupid situation which at the end of the day HE could have avoided but HE chose not too. The old saying you play with fire......

 

[ALSGI]

Regardless of the verdict I’ll never cheer or support him again, he’s a stain on the club and the game imo.

I can’t imagine not supporting the Dragons after over 50 years, but if he plays for us again I honestly don’t know.

Don’t care what people like to do in the bedroom but I do care about player behaviour from the club and game I proudly support and literally wear on my sleeve.

I’m not blaming the club or game for his behaviour but I don’t think I can support either if he beats the charges (or is proven completely innocent - with vexatious or false allegations) and plays for us again.

His behaviour was completely unacceptable for a high profile professional and role model.

If he beats the charges good luck to him in the future, hope he gets his shit together but he’s done for me as someone I will support and I hope the club and game piss him off.

There’s been almost nothing on young Sailor but FMD.

Dragons - please be a club I can continue to support because I’ll be devastated if I can’t support you but I’m close now.

Piss him off now.

 

[BLM01]

“It’s happened before and the NRL survived” isn’t really good justification for allowing it to continue. The issue is that the NRL should have brought in the stand down policy well before JDB got stung. Should have been in place immediately after the Brett Stewart case.

Yes, the club is a lot closer than many of us. Which makes it that much more disappointing that they kept him around the playing group, rallied for him to play and have extended his signature. It’s no longer about innocence or guilt, it’s perception. ‘Not guilty’ doesn’t mean innocent either. Through all of it, his name is being dragged through the mud and our club is being associated with that, and we are just OK with that. It’s indicative of the dramatic decline in standards and leadership at the club over the last 9 years.

Paragraph 1..agree. Even before then
Paragraph 2. Disagree. (except the declines in leadership but not on this issue alone
It will be about about innocence or guilt and people only move in one direction based on that now. Perception is your thing. different across everyone. Yours is different to mine etc. and no one should cast aside on perception alone.
All clubs stand by their players until their day in court..not just the Dragons
We have all forgotten about Tristan who has left the club..club is still supporting him.
I disagree our club is mud to people because of this..majority understand why the club stand by him I reckon. Again that is yours and this is my perception. Means nothing.
I am OK with the club supporting him. If it turns out bad for him the cord will be cut forever.

 

[be55]

“ Which makes it that much more disappointing that they kept him around the playing group, rallied for him to play and have extended his signature. It’s no longer about innocence or guilt, it’s perception. ‘Not guilty’ doesn’t mean innocent either. Through all of it, his name is being dragged through the mud and our club is being associated with that, and we are just OK with that. It’s indicative of the dramatic decline in standards and leadership at the club over the last 9 years.

Judging by your recent posts on this matter you want Jack hung drawn and quartered no matter what the outcome of this case is, but I would just like to point out a few things to you, although I'm sure you are aware of these things, but choose to overlook them nonetheless...

You do realize that , at this point in time, the only thing that Jack is guilty of, is cheating on his pregnant partner.

You do realize that this is Australia and that everyone is afforded the right to a presumption of innocence under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

You do realize that Jack has pled "NOT GUILTY" to all charges and that he, and his defence team, are alleging that all sexual activity was consensual between the two parties.

Considering all these things, i find it hard to believe that you are advocating that the club should have torn up his contract, kicked him out of the club and thrown him on the trash heap to fend for himself. And you want all those things to have been done to someone who SAYS HE DID NOTHING WRONG and that he is innocent of what he is being accused of.

It sounds like you would have fitted in nicely back in the days when women were accused of being witches and that was enough to burn them at the stake even though they were often accused by people who had personal grievances against them and nothing more.

I don't know what type of life you have led, but people make mistakes ,like being unfaithful to their partners. This happens every day in the real world and i don't think many employers would treat situations like that as a sackable offence. Human beings are flawed, and to my knowledge their has only ever been one perfect person, and he was around a long time ago, and i don't think their has been one since.

I just hope you don't ever have a close family member or close friend accused of something that they say they didn't do, although, if this did happen, it would probably give you a perspective that may change your attitude towards how the club has treated Jack through all of this.

For what it is worth, in my view, it is simple, if he's found guilty let the court deal with him and if he's found not guilty then let him get on with his life. That's how our judicial system works. The last time i checked this was Australia we are living in and not North Korea and thank God for that..