Knight Russell Packer jailed for two years

[age.s]

The prosecution didn't have to prove guilt because He PLEADED GUILTY.

Ahh missed that. It can still impact on the Judge sentencing though which is again, not a good thing.

 

[Pierced Soul]

Because the Knights ripping up his contract could influence the case. Either by the prosecution arguing it proved his guilt, spoke against his character etc, or the defense arguing the move prejudices the case against their client.

the defence could whinge (thats what its there for), but the knights internal policy breaches arent necessarily criminal offences and have no bearing on the prosecution's case. the knights may have sacked packer for breaking an alcohol ban -thats not a criminal matter so the reasons the knights actually terminated him (in this case cos he's was unavailable for 2 years and they're copping shit from supporters) are irrelevant to the prosecution or judicial system

 

[Usain Bolt]

The Knights are scum

/thread

 

[innsaneink]

Why?? If they knew he was going to plead guilty to assaulting a man without provocation and stomping on his head while he was on the ground why do they need to wait for the courts before they sack him??

Knowing what he had done he should of been sacked as soon as he admitted it.

Obviously waiting to see what the court were gonna do before they decide whether to rip up his contract.

Thats your assumption.

How do you know they wouldnt have done the same had he got a bon/fine/non custodial sentence?

 

[magpie4ever]

Absolutely horrendous article.

The key difference being they didn't need Marvin to answer criminal charges before they sacked him. Newcastle were always going to wait until after the criminal case was done and dusted before they did anything. As it was he pleaded and guilty and was sentenced on the same day and was always going to be sacked at that point. The Knights followed the exact process that should be done. Stand him down from all duties immediately pending the outcome of the charges. Make a final decision after he is found guilty

Also it seems Russell got a $150k per year pay rise in the last week or so. I swear it was another Newcastle Herald article quoting $250k per year last week

I agree, I'm sure Bennett has said in the past that he would never pay a front rower more than 250k/season (Petro). $400k seems over the top

 

[DJShaksta]

$400k is less than what they paid to get Snowden back.

 

[betcats]

Thats your assumption.

How do you know they wouldnt have done the same had he got a bon/fine/non custodial sentence?

Of course thats my asumption, its also the scenario that makes the most sense.

Give me some other reasons why they would of waited to sack him when they knew he was pleading guilty other then 'legal process'.

Being found guilty was a forgone conclusion, what sentence he got was the only thing that was up in the air, i assume had he not been jailed they would of pushed for a suspension from the NRL and some rehabilitation work to go along with some community work ala Robert Lui.

Why are you assuming he was going to be sacked no matter what sentence he got?

Seriously sometimes I like to stick my head in the sand too.

 

[Loudstrat]

And sign players who have just been sacked by another club...

Can someone please remind me the last time Parramatta did that?

[/I][/B]

I agree, I'm sure Bennett has said in the past that he would never pay a front rower more than 250k/season (Petro). $400k seems over the top

Good point. Bennett is leaking hypocrisy like a seive

$400k is less than what they paid to get Snowden back.

To be fair, Tinkler signed Snowdon, not Bennett.

With Tinkler and Bennett running the ship, of course there would be hypocrisy.

 

[betcats]

Can someone please remind me the last time Parramatta did that?

Reni?

 

[innsaneink]

Of course thats my asumption, its also the scenario that makes the most sense.

Give me some other reasons why they would of waited to sack him when they knew he was pleading guilty other then 'legal process'.

Being found guilty was a forgone conclusion, what sentence he got was the only thing that was up in the air, i assume had he not been jailed they would of pushed for a suspension from the NRL and some rehabilitation work to go along with some community work ala Robert Lui.

Why are you assuming he was going to be sacked no matter what sentence he got?

Seriously sometimes I like to stick my head in the sand too.

Whay are you assuming I was thinking that way?

Maybe the Knights wouldve sacked him regardless...all we know is what HAS happened....if's and buts just make you out to be a creative writer

 

[magpie4ever]

Can someone please remind me the last time Parramatta did that?


Good point. Bennett is leaking hypocrisy like a seive


To be fair, Tinkler signed Snowdon, not Bennett.

With Tinkler and Bennett running the ship, of course there would be hypocrisy.

Yeah true, Bennett's hypocrisy possible lies in the character reference for someone he would have had little to do with.

 

[betcats]

Whay are you assuming I was thinking that way?

Maybe the Knights wouldve sacked him regardless...all we know is what HAS happened....if's and buts just make you out to be a creative writer

Yeah ok champ take a walk you have nothing obviously.

You asked about my assumption and I gave my reasoning. There is nothing that says im wrong, what HAS actually happen supports my assumption.

 

[BranVan3000]

[/I][/B]

I agree, I'm sure Bennett has said in the past that he would never pay a front rower more than 250k/season (Petro). $400k seems over the top

What was the average wage back then compared to now though?

 

[betcats]

What was the average wage back then compared to now though?

Good point, the salary cap and wages have gone up quite a bit since Bennet said that.

 

[Loudstrat]

Reni?

Fair enogh, but he had served his time. Like Saints signing Wendell. It's not like this situation though.

The only one I can think of that comes close is Chayse Blair who was punted from the Roosters -Im not sure if any misdemeanors were the cause aka Sandor Earl.

There are a few clubs that avoid fresh offenders.

 

[Canard]

[/I][/B]

I agree, I'm sure Bennett has said in the past that he would never pay a front rower more than 250k/season (Petro). $400k seems over the top

This must be misattributed surely, as historically Bennet has bought the best props on the market, guys like Lazarus, Backo, Dowling for example.

Those guys would have had contracts on par with 400k+ when factored up to today's cap and dollars.

 

[magpie4ever]

What was the average wage back then compared to now though?

Fair point, it was made more in reference to a poster stating that in one newspaper report, it was stated his contract per season was $250k and in a later report it was at $400k.

Really I believe, only a minor issue in the whole sacking saga.

 

[El Diablo]

papers have nfi what players earn or they would have known the Storm were cheating for years

 

[magpie4ever]

This must be misattributed surely, as historically Bennet has bought the best props on the market, guys like Lazarus, Backo, Dowling for example.

Those guys would have had contracts on par with 400k+ when factored up to today's cap and dollars.

Mate, I'm only going on reports that Bennett said it in relation to contract negotiations which saw Petro head to Penrith.

Who knows if he actually made the comment.

 

[innsaneink]

Yeah ok champ take a walk you have nothing obviously.

You asked about my assumption and I gave my reasoning. There is nothing that says im wrong, what HAS actually happen supports my assumption.

It doesnt support it.
Its merely a factor that may well have taken place...or may not have
I never said you were wrong, and I dont claim to have ''anything''...just what we all already know, I'll 'walk' with that...you go with your assumptions.