No worries, good to hear.
Who was making wild assumptions?
Could you please refer me back to where I "stated" that I knew what was going on with Seymour? Thanks
Your comments infer you have difficulty believing his remorse.
That is your choice, however the Club has taken his admissions and desire to reform on face value and offered to support him. The ball is in his court now and if he does screw up again, he will be gone. The Club has shown they have no desire to put up with ongoing poor off field behaviour.
At what? Himself? From what I have seen, his childish statements are that of a 15 year old boy that has no clue.
What ever age he is and what ever motivation, his statement that Seymour is a good bloke, should be taken on face value, if you know Seymour personally, I am happy to hear you view. Seymour has a drinking problem, it does not make him a bad bloke.
I remember him admitting that he likes the drink back at the broncos too (before he got fired for the very same reason). Yet, here we are again, in the same situation, however only this time, he didnt knock someone out. How many times does he have to admit that he likes the grog before he whales on someone again? Same with all NRL players. VERY SOON, it's going to happen. Someone is going to be killed through this idiocy.
So you were there were you? He knocked someone out did he? Anyway that's beside the point. As I already said, he is a repeat offender. It ahs been made clear this is his last opportunity to get the help he needs to value himself and his opportunities as a first grade league player. If he doesn't he will only have himself to blame.
Why you talk about someone being killed, when discussing Seymour is beyond me. He did not hurt or attempt to hurt anyone.
Exactly my point. You're a biased sharks fan, fair enough. HOWEVER, you cannot tell me any other way that these players are FORCED by the club to apologise for their actions. This is business, the question mark is that how many of them truthfully are apologetic?
Well neither of us know what come from the heart or not. the proof is in Seymours actions going forward.
Mate you are deadset throwing out assumptions left right and center based on previous possible debates you have had with other individuals from other clubs, all probably on this forum.
Show me where I said I disliked Cronulla?
Show me where I said I disliked Seymour?
Seymour is a drunken idiot, does that mean I dislike him? Hmm? Only I can tell you that.
Do you? Please be honest.
Absolutely rubbish mate. So in your defence, it's ok if they're 18-21, they can go out and assault people willy nilly because they're young and naive? That's what you're saying in the above mate. And I'm as diehard a rooster as you'll get.
Take my love for Caesar Soliola. Same thing, if he went out and beat his lovely girlfriend up, I'd hang on him as well (however he's quite a classy young bloke with good family values, unlike your friend maxpower who seems to believe that he's a true man because he can call his girlfriend a skank whilst holding hit nuts in the palm of his hands)
You are unfortunately, just another "fan" that is happy to allow these kids to get away with this rubbish yet in "real life", a normal 18 year old will get hung out to dry by authorities and public in general by committing the very same crimes that they idiots are committing (that's in relation to the Cherrington case as well).
It's hypocrisy of the highest order.
You commit the crime, you do the time.
WTF are you on about. I am not talking about anyone that has assaulted another person. I am talking about the kid caught DUI. Yes, madness and deserving of both Club/NRL and Court action. Yes he has to learn a lesson. Show me where I stated he should not!
My point was that the level of fine + ban was disproportionate in my opinion. Those who are not NRL players are not fined by their employer then by the courts, however in accepting his actions creates a detrimental view of the game in the eyes of the public and sponsors, action by the club / NRL is appropriate. IMO a 19yo on 50 grand coping 10 grand and a ban is disproportionate to that of players on 200 - 250 grand and a similar ban. I am not suggesting he should not be subject to the same rules, just that in this case he is hit harder than Seymour and Stewart given his standing (remuneration) in the game.
Finally, I assume you are trying to debate and not argue. If it is the later, don't bother. I have work in the morning and can't really be bothered
Cheers Rooster
