Jdb case

Discussion in 'St George Illawarra Dragons' started by tumbidragon, Dec 13, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Glenn012

    Glenn012 Juniors

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2019
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    86
    Okay. I can't prove it so can only take you at your word. But it's a feeling I get regardless. Just as the feeling Jack got when the NRL admin asked him to stand down voluntarily amounted to a tacit admission of guilt.
     
  2. Glenn012

    Glenn012 Juniors

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2019
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    86
    WoyD4LWoy likes this.
  3. SGMax

    SGMax Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    455

    Thanks JD for spotting what everyone seems to miss.
    The NRL think if they just name the policy "no fault" then its ok to treat him like he is guilty.
    I don't know if he is guilty, and the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle, but they can't sacrifice someone's rights on an unknown.

    If there had been some additional evidence such as footage of him harassing her or stalking her etc, then I might agree.
    Basing a stand down decision solely on an accusation for a period that may be 2 years cannot be justified.
     
    j0nesy and 2218 like this.
  4. WoyD4LWoy

    WoyD4LWoy Juniors

    Joined:
    May 28, 2017
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    382
    I just noticed that...but article is on sporting news.com
     
  5. Willow

    Willow Administrator

    Joined:
    May 19, 2003
    Messages:
    79,563
    Likes Received:
    2,786
    Einfeld has also made the case that there are a plethora of reasons why people might walk away from the game including refereeing controversies, concerns about concussion and alcohol and gambling advertising.

    If I was to single out one thing that is harming any sport, it would be the gambling. The alcohol advertising is not far away in second place. We did away with cigarette advertising, even though it was resisted.

    In his testimony on Wednesday, Greenberg said that he was concerned about the impact player behaviour was having on women and that they would walk away from the game.

    He told the court some of his daughter’s friends had told him they were refusing to play casual touch rugby league because of the game’s so-called “summer from hell”.


    My immediate thoughts on this are 'what's going on in women's touch rugby league?' Is he seriously suggesting that these friends have suddenly stopped playing touch because of totally unrelated incidents?

    With the greatest respect, Greenberg's daughter's friends are not witnesses. They can have their opinions but their opinions have nothing to do with the case in question.

    Even if we were to entertain their opinions as a valid reason for the NRL's stance, then surely there's more to this story. More likely it is indicative of the NRL's inability to promote the game to women over a much longer period preceding this so-called "summer from hell". That's assuming if Greenberg has got it right.
     
    The Damo likes this.
  6. The Damo

    The Damo Juniors

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,638
    Likes Received:
    2,060
    Speaking as someone who supports the decision - my god the nrl and Greenberg have been staggeringly incompetent in how they’ve defended it. To come up with that rubbish on the stand after having time and advice to prepare is breathtakingly bad.
     
    SEAT 1A and RedV Resurgence like this.
  7. possm

    possm Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2011
    Messages:
    11,123
    Likes Received:
    8,511
    Yes, and without an investigation or facts supporting the Stand Down Rule, the ARLC/NRL should have deferred to the line of thinking contained in this order.
     
  8. Eastview

    Eastview Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2016
    Messages:
    227
    Likes Received:
    215
    I cannot believe Greenberg used his daughter and his friends as an example of why he introduced the rule. So if his daughter and her friends said they weren't going to support/play rugby league because they thought, for example, the Roosters (or any other club) needed to be moved to WA he would simply just tell the club to move or be booted?
     
    SEAT 1A and 2218 like this.
  9. Old Timer

    Old Timer Coach

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    10,255
    Likes Received:
    13,053
    And exactly what are you trying to say with that post?
    And while you are explaining that get back to me where I slandered him according to you.
     
  10. 2218

    2218 Juniors

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    67
    This is exactly right willow. I’ve argued so much over this. It would surprise me greatly if the federal court don’t agree with this as well
     
    j0nesy likes this.
  11. Old Timer

    Old Timer Coach

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    10,255
    Likes Received:
    13,053
    You are s complete knob jockey
    You are trying to draw some ridiculous comparison between what I posted re his football ability and a criminal matter.
    You state I have an agenda we’ll go into all my posts re the charges and impending trial and find one post where I have wavered from saying let the judicial system do its work.
    If I had an agenda I would hardly be saying that he should be stood down with full pay surely I would say just stand him down or sack him.
    You seem to be having a hard time getting the reality or gravity of what is at hand.
     
    TruSaint likes this.
  12. 2218

    2218 Juniors

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    67
    Damo I would suggest that it was a bad decision to start with however they couldn’t retract the decision as it would make them look incompetent and somewhat supportive. Best outcome for them was to leave it in a judges decision as they can always say they tried.
     
  13. Slippery Morris

    Slippery Morris First Grade

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,716
    Likes Received:
    2,568
    Greenberg is an idiot saying his daughter is turned off by this particular case and not the other off-field incidents especially the ones she was unfortunate to see footage of on Social Media. That is understandable as the footage is pretty degrading to woman and shows what idiots we have playing the game. I am sure that would be the big turnoff if she saw those not a court case where we are still waiting on an outcome.

    Bring back David Gallop. He was around during the Coffs Harbour incident and he handled it so much better than this clueless mob.

    Greenberg knew about the Ben Barba incidents with his wife and swept that under the carpet when he was at the Dogs and "prepared a statement" for Ben to say he had a gambling habit and was seeking help? Greenberg sat him out for 6 weeks and let him come back to finish the season in the hope he will win them a comp. That backfired. Does he really have that short of a memory. Jeez
     
    2218 and RedV Resurgence like this.
  14. Glenn012

    Glenn012 Juniors

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2019
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    86
    Correctamundo!!! If you don't like him as a RL player or even don't like him personally or think he is a cat (which is what I saw you clearly suggest without stating outright. Utterly ridiculous comment considering how tough he has always played but that's another story.), that's fine. You should be able to state your opinion. But this is a criminal matter so leave your f**king agenda out of it:mad:.
     
  15. Glenn012

    Glenn012 Juniors

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2019
    Messages:
    171
    Likes Received:
    86
    He is grasping at straws. It's f**king ridiculous! Basing the laws governing the competition on how his daughter feels!!! FFS, this guy has been skillful going with the prevailing political winds. pursuing things with zeal to please the powers that be either way but I afraid for him and happy personally he seems to have screwed up here.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 18, 2019
  16. Old Timer

    Old Timer Coach

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    10,255
    Likes Received:
    13,053
    I’ll try again to see if I can make the point which I think is important.
    If people are using the argument “innocent until proven guilty” or “entitled to the presumption of innocence” then they are quoting how they generally believe how the law interprets matters before they go to trial.
    If that is how people interpret how the law works then you can’t shift the goal posts by saying “kept in context and addressed on a case by case basis”
    You either believe in the principal or you don’t.
    If you believe in it then it has to apply in all situations as no one is aware of the brief of evidence that will be contested at trial and who are we to judge if one persons innocent plea is any more honest or meritorious than any other persons.
    If as you say “addressed on a case by case basis” then you are being the judge and jury with no evidence at hand to guide the decision making and therefore never use the “innocent until proven guilty argument”
    Imo any deviation by people means they are selective in their application of the law.
    My argument in this instance is not about whether JDB is guilty or not whether he should be stood down but us about people making a general statement and then putting a fence round it.
     
    The Damo likes this.
  17. Old Timer

    Old Timer Coach

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    10,255
    Likes Received:
    13,053
    And exactly where did I make any connection between my interpretation of his football ability (alll posted long before any charges were made) and the criminal matter?
    The only one making that connection is you because you have a very poor ability in respect of having a rational discussion.
    By all means turn the light in and see if you can find your way out of the hole you are digging.
     
  18. SaintPauli

    SaintPauli Juniors

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2016
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    1,308
    Agree when it comes to courts there is NO RUSHING! A major flaw as I have already posted. The NRL cannot and should not be the law in making its own "assumptions! " We are talking about the livelihood of a player and his family.
    The repercussions are big. Innocent unless proven guilty.
     
  19. 2218

    2218 Juniors

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2018
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    67
    If there was damning evidence jack would of been refused bail by police. Then I’d say the nrl would seriously consider suspending or cancelling his contract ie barba with video footage ie Tyrone May video footage. Debelin has not even breached code of conduct. To blanket a stand down for all offences that carry 11 years without any process involved is ludicrous and not even the bail act has that in place unless it’s a show cause offence.
     
    ST Tangles 01 likes this.
  20. Old Timer

    Old Timer Coach

    Joined:
    May 1, 2014
    Messages:
    10,255
    Likes Received:
    13,053
    No damning evidence you say.
    Well then how is it that he is going to court?
    Do you think the police, DPP and the legal system are running this case based on nothing?
    Did you miss the judges statement when the matter was brought before him?
    As I say leave it the judicial system to work it out.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page