Jdb case

[getsmarty]

Dragons want NRL to pay for De Belin replacement if court bid fails
Adrian ProszenkoApril 30, 2019 — 7.00pm

• Send via Email

Leave a comment

St George Illawarra will revisit the prospect of the NRL footing the bill for Jack de Belin’s replacement if the star forward’s legal bid to return to the field fails.

The validity of the game’s new "no fault" stand down policy will soon be determined following a four-day hearing in the Federal Court earlier this month. However, there is no guarantee Justice Melissa Perry will hand down her verdict this week, meaning de Belin could remain in limbo.

A favourable decision for de Belin will result in his immediate return to the team, while there could also be ramifications for suspended players Tyrone May and Dylan Walker. If unsuccessful, the NRL will allow affected clubs to apply for a salary cap exemption to replace banned players.

Waiting game: Jack de Belin.Credit:AAP

While that money won’t be included in the cap, clubs will have to stump up the extra costs, while still paying for a player they aren’t able to use. The Dragons have previously demanded the NRL incur the costs for a replacement, although the governing body has indicated it would not.

The Herald understands the Red V will re-explore the issue with powerbrokers at Rugby League Central if the Federal Court rules against de Belin.

De Belin’s current three-year contract was worth $500,000 in 2018, $545,000 this season and $595,000 in 2020. Aside from the issue of who pays for a replacement, the Dragons will struggle to find a representative-quality forward on the open market straight away. They are also conscious they could invest in a replacement only to find de Belin is acquitted or his criminal case is thrown out of court soon afterwards.

The Dragons had internally discussed potential contingency plans, including Melbourne forward Joe Stimson. However, they are hopeful their NSW backrower could be reintroduced back into the team in coming weeks.

The Federal Court case has already caused fractures in the game, as evidenced by some of the documents tendered by both parties.

The Rugby League Players’ Association is an advocate for the previous policy, which allowed players to continue to take the field until their court matters were finalised.

The RLPA urged the NRL not to change the protocols in a letter from its chief executive Ian Prendergast to NRL counterpart Todd Greenberg a week before they were announced.

Prendergast cited the case of Brett Stewart, who was cleared of sexual assault allegations. The Manly fullback was stood down for four weeks and Manly was fined $100,000 for his behaviour preceding the incident. A decade has past and it is still a sore point for Stewart and some Sea Eagles powerbrokers.

“Unfortunately, unsubstantiated allegations are often made against players from members of the public,” Prendergast wrote. “Brett Stewart’s case should serve as a warning against the perils of adopting a change in policy. It is highly likely Brett’s career would have been prematurely ended if he had been suspended during the criminal two-year process, not to mention the mental, psychological, emotional and financial harm that likely would have been caused him.”

The RLPA described any change in policy as "reactionary and outside what was agreed under the collective bargaining agreement. Players can now be suspended for up to two years, which goes outside of the agreed maximum suspension of two years allowed under the agreement.

The NRL’s hardline stance drew support from Our Watch CEO Patty Kinnersly, who described the NRL’s leadership on the issue as “courageous”.

“This is such a tricky issue, I feel you have come up with a proposal that is fair and serves to make a clear statement to all,” Kinnersly stated in a letter to the NRL. “This type of action could only have been led by one of our leading codes, and I hope it serves as a catalyst for other sports in the country.”


https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/dr...ement-if-court-bid-fails-20190430-p51ilw.html

 

[ST Tangles 01]

I have just read in the SMH an article by Roy Masters in which he says JDB has been banned from attending as a spectator Cantebury cup and Jersey Flegg games. IMO that’s outrageous.

I hope for his sake that he is innocent.
I've never seen them ban a player from being a spectator.
I can see the compensation figure rising if he is.

 

[RedV Resurgence]

I have just read in the SMH an article by Roy Masters in which he says JDB has been banned from attending as a spectator Cantebury cup and Jersey Flegg games. IMO that’s outrageous.

How does that align with the no fault standdown?

I think the NRL are showing their hand here and have used this issue to overcome the summer incidents. Beattie and GreenBurg better hope he is found guilty or they need to go

 

[Glenn012]

I get the innocent until proven guilty argument but lawyers, teachers, policemen, nurses and many others would be immediately stood down / suspended on full pay if charged with a serious offence while they were waiting for the chase to be dealt with. As much as some would like to think that NRL players are the only ones to which a stand down situation applies are wrong....

If a teacher, policeman, lawyer, nurse was charged with rape but he pleaded not guilty and adamantly, uncompromisingly claimed innocence, he would be immediately stood down??? Really? Well then in the 30-40% of cases where the accused is found not guilty, there are going to be a lot of lawsuits against law firms, schools, the police and etc.

You obviously don't understand many things.
The sand down rule applies only to serious offences.
Serious offences cannot just be created out of nothing there needs to be a body of evidence.
Courts do not contest such matters without the DPP stating that there is enough evidence that a conviction might be arrived at.
There are severe penalties for people making vexatious claims against other parties.
The likelihood of malicious and false claims being made in an effort to get players suspended is ludicrous.

Look, you nasty, senile fool. I tried to be reasonable with you but no, I see now it's impossible.

Firstly, your bias against JDB is proven and admitted. So anything you say should be taken with a grain of salt. just saying that for anyone else who reads you messages.

Secondly, it's patently absurd to even suggest organized crime, or even somewhat less organized crime, couldn't take advantage of the situation. Even if the accuser could be proven to have lied, specially in rape cases they typically don't face any sanction. Even if she (or he for something like assault or something other than rape) were told, you will keep your mouth shut, do 1-2 years and get 1mil when you get out. Not only is it possible, it's likely at some point.

Thirdly, if the stood down player is found not guilty, there is going to be hell to pay. The NRL is goi9ng to get taken to the cleaners. Something organized crime could also take advantage of.

Finally, if it weren't for the #MeToo political movement, I doubt JDB would have been chaged. Due to the movement, cops had no realy choice even if it's the word of 2 guys over one girl.

I have just read in the SMH an article by Roy Masters in which he says JDB has been banned from attending as a spectator Cantebury cup and Jersey Flegg games. IMO that’s outrageous.

It's a political decision. They have gone to war with JDB due to nervousness he is going to win. So if they can give him back all these things, he won't take them to the cleaners financially.

 

[The Damo]

If a teacher, policeman, lawyer, nurse was charged with rape but he pleaded not guilty and adamantly, uncompromisingly claimed innocence, he would be immediately stood down??? Really? Well then in the 30-40% of cases where the accused is found not guilty, there are going to be a lot of lawsuits against law firms, schools, the police and etc.



Look, you nasty, senile fool. I tried to be reasonable with you but no, I see now it's impossible.

Firstly, your bias against JDB is proven and admitted. So anything you say should be taken with a grain of salt. just saying that for anyone else who reads you messages.

Secondly, it's patently absurd to even suggest organized crime, or even somewhat less organized crime, couldn't take advantage of the situation. Even if the accuser could be proven to have lied, specially in rape cases they typically don't face any sanction. Even if she (or he for something like assault or something other than rape) were told, you will keep your mouth shut, do 1-2 years and get 1mil when you get out. Not only is it possible, it's likely at some point.

Thirdly, if the stood down player is found not guilty, there is going to be hell to pay. The NRL is goi9ng to get taken to the cleaners. Something organized crime could also take advantage of.

Finally, if it weren't for the #MeToo political movement, I doubt JDB would have been chaged. Due to the movement, cops had no realy choice even if it's the word of 2 guys over one girl.

It's a political decision. They have gone to war with JDB due to nervousness he is going to win. So if they can give him back all these things, he won't take them to the cleaners financially.

Holy shit pal. Calm down. It’s not OT’s fault you’re as thick as pig shit

 

[_Johnsy]

If a teacher, policeman, lawyer, nurse was charged with rape but he pleaded not guilty and adamantly, uncompromisingly claimed innocence, he would be immediately stood down??? Really? .

I can’t speak on behalf of lawyers, but Police, Nurses & Teachers100% Yes.

 

[Gareth67]

Holy shit pal. Calm down. It’s not OT’s fault you’re as thick as pig shit

- you can say that again !

 

[pfrano]

A - that was a much less serious charge. Stewart was facing a maximum of 14 years, Jack is facing a maximum of life. Obviously if ether case were proved they wouldn’t attract the highest possible penalty, but that should give you an idea of the difference in severity.
B - cases like Brett’s are extremely rare. Like less than 1% of cases rare. Theyd be even rarer for the charge Jack is facing. It’s not good practice to make rules based on the rarest circumstances in any scenario.
C - I imagine the DPP remembers that case better than anyone except Brett. I don’t believe there was any medical evidence supporting the allegations in his case.

I can't understand your ramblings as they are not on point.

 

[pfrano]

No indeed I have not.
The JDB case is specific in its own right and regardless of what happened to Stewart it should have no bearing whatsoever.
Every case is entitled to be judged on its own merits and not be influenced by any prior happenings to anyone else.

Yes you have, otherwise you would have thought better before wording your last sentence on the original post.

 

[rednwhites]

Why is it the NRL can block De Belin and we be left in limbo not knowing how and when we can replace the origin star, and Rabbitohs lose Inglis to retirement and are given the green light within a week or two to procure another origin star??

Is it our club that's not pushy enough? We do not have a culture of 'win at all costs', that's a given.
Is it injustice on behalf of the NRL? Are there just two different rule books as it is with the refs?
Or is it just the circumstances being so different and our bad luck?

All I know is, we just seem to be pillaged left right and centre as if we are a burden to the NRL. Does NRL even exists without us?

 

[LINESPEED]

Why is it the NRL can block De Belin and we be left in limbo not knowing how and when we can replace the origin star, and Rabbitohs lose Inglis to retirement and are given the green light within a week or two to procure another origin star??

Is it our club that's not pushy enough? We do not have a culture of 'win at all costs', that's a given.
Is it injustice on behalf of the NRL? Are there just two different rule books as it is with the refs?
Or is it just the circumstances being so different and our bad luck?

All I know is, we just seem to be pillaged left right and centre as if we are a burden to the NRL. Does NRL even exists without us?

We’ve had weak leadership since Frank Facer’s era

 

[The Damo]

I can't understand your ramblings as they are not on point.

My apologies, I’ll try to make it simple. The Brett Stewart case is not as relevant as you think it is. I explained why not in previous post. Were there any particular parts you had trouble understanding?

 

[Morotti]

I have just read in the SMH an article by Roy Masters in which he says JDB has been banned from attending as a spectator Cantebury cup and Jersey Flegg games. IMO that’s outrageous.

I wasn't sure in the article whether he means in an official capacity as a dragons ambassador or simply as a spectator. Be interested to know.

 

[Morotti]

Why is it the NRL can block De Belin and we be left in limbo not knowing how and when we can replace the origin star, and Rabbitohs lose Inglis to retirement and are given the green light within a week or two to procure another origin star??

Is it our club that's not pushy enough? We do not have a culture of 'win at all costs', that's a given.
Is it injustice on behalf of the NRL? Are there just two different rule books as it is with the refs?
Or is it just the circumstances being so different and our bad luck?

All I know is, we just seem to be pillaged left right and centre as if we are a burden to the NRL. Does NRL even exists without us?

Part of me likes the fact that we don't play things out in the media and the spotlight as a club. That is a good thing and it has led to a lot of stability at the club around things like major sponsors etc.

Alternatively sometimes I wonder as you do what is actually going on behind the scenes and how much we lobby the NRL.

 

[ST Tangles 01]

Why is it the NRL can block De Belin and we be left in limbo not knowing how and when we can replace the origin star, and Rabbitohs lose Inglis to retirement and are given the green light within a week or two to procure another origin star??

Is it our club that's not pushy enough? We do not have a culture of 'win at all costs', that's a given.
Is it injustice on behalf of the NRL? Are there just two different rule books as it is with the refs?
Or is it just the circumstances being so different and our bad luck?

All I know is, we just seem to be pillaged left right and centre as if we are a burden to the NRL. Does NRL even exists without us?

Me personally I think the club is still caught in the mindset of owing the NRL money.

When we owed them money we towed the company line and that continues.

We need to move forward debt payed we owe them nothing.

 

[BBTB]

Not quite sure why the testy response? I can assure my reply was not intended to be argumentative
My response was merely offering some information as to other professions and what might happen in similar circumstances and then a general comment re why I believe some people want JDB to be available to play
I made no attempt to link your post to people supporting JDB but if you feel the need to think that way then that’s really on you.

But how about make up a new rule, and then making it retrospective.. Where & when does a board or cooperation, get to do that?

 

[Dragonslayer]

Do you guys think the longer this current appeal drags on would be better or worse for JDB (as far as the outcome is concerned)?

 

[Carlton]

I have refrained from making comments about this and I cant decide what rights or whose rights should be respected over others.

1. I am not happy about JDB's actions whether he is guilty or innocent and would be OK with the club moving him on (regardless of how good a player he may be).
2. I think the media have influenced his case and reputation regardless of his innocence or guilt.
3. Individual clubs should not be commenting on the case.
4. Beattie and Greenburg in my opinion should be sacked for incompetence.
5. If JDB is guilty I hope they throw the book at him.
6. If a player is innocent it seems unfair that their career would effectively be terminated by the new stand down policy.
7. The assumptions and conclusions made by some people, who do not have any real knowledge of the events range from naive to outright disgusting.
8. The degree of blatant hypocrisy shown by some of the people within the game is disappointing at the least.
9. The situation with JDB's employment is not on all fours with most other employment situations.
10. I believe there is the spectre of false or unreasonable stand downs given this new policy and dont like the idea of the NRL acting as if they are a legal body. You can call it a No Fault policy but the name is irrelevant, it implies fault simply by the fact it is initiated when someone is charged.
11. There is a girl in the centre of this who, if JDB is guilty, also has the right for her grievance to be fairly heard and treated with respect.

 

[redandwhite4evr]

I can’t speak on behalf of lawyers, but Police, Nurses & Teachers100% Yes.

I worked in School Education and Teachers were routinely removed from the classroom on full pay and given other work to do if there was a conduct or teaching performance problem which had to be investigated and/or resolved. I used to have them sitting outside my office- up to two years in some cases- and they were given the unflattering acronym of TOADs ie Teachers on Alternate Duties.

As with nurses, teachers and police, I suspect this has to do with duty of care as all these occupations have a protective role as part of their duties. You could hardly say that JDB has a protective role when he is belting an opposition forward.

 

[2010]

Might be off topic but not that long ago there was a college player in the states that was virtually going to play in the NFL.
A girl accused him of rape and he was jailed. The girl got one million from the college, she went on to blow the lot and then came forward and said she was not raped.
The player was released from jail but his football career was gone. One club signed him for one year and the player was happy to have been given a chance to play with the big boys.
I am not trying to say that this could have happened with JDB, it’s just an example of how high profile players can be taken advantage of.
If this post is not seen to be relevant I would ask the mods to delete it