Michael Chee-Kam charged with assault on Uber driver

[T.S Quint]

That's fine - I was illustrating why the action was taken in those instances.

As others have said, blanket rules don't work. Each case as it comes (and no I don't think they always get it right, Matt Lodge is an easy example).

‘Each case as it comes’ just means inconsistency, favoritism and possible corruption.

Make it easier for the NRL by introducing blanket laws, then the fans and players will have nothing to complain about when a suspension is handed down. The players should already know the outcome of their bad deeds and so will have to think twice before acting like a f**kwit.

 

[The Charlatan]

MCK would be the last footballer I would have picked to get into a Uber driver. The guy is red hot with his religion and by all accounts a really nice kid. Sadly he probably has two drinking sessions a year. Anyway absolutely no excuse to belt anyone, but I hope there is a roads back at some stage if he is proven guilty of the charges

Just say ten Hail Mary's and all is forgiven.

 

[Valheru]

‘Each case as it comes’ just means inconsistency, favoritism and possible corruption.

Make it easier for the NRL by introducing blanket laws, then the fans and players will have nothing to complain about when a suspension is handed down. The players should already know the outcome of their bad deeds and so will have to think twice before acting like a f**kwit.

That won't work.

You have already put forward the idea that the NRL or any other business should be able to protect their commercial interests by not hiring or firing employees if they think it will be a detriment to said interests.

Surely you then promote the reverse, that a business should be able to continue to hire or employ someone if they have weighed the risk and still believe it is in their commercial interests to keep the person on board? I can guarantee you there will be circumstances where this is the case.

 

[Timmah]

The NRL aren’t party to the contract?

In some sports the governing body of sport are a party to the contract so they can be involved. Say in the unlikely event a club goes bust, the league takes on responsibilty for the contract and payment. Etc etc etc

They are the authority that registers the contract.

‘Each case as it comes’ just means inconsistency, favoritism and possible corruption.

Make it easier for the NRL by introducing blanket laws, then the fans and players will have nothing to complain about when a suspension is handed down. The players should already know the outcome of their bad deeds and so will have to think twice before acting like a f**kwit.

'Inconsistency' makes no sense as each case will always be different. There's no single set of circumstances that are identical in any case.

As for "fans and players will have nothing to complain about" LOL good joke

 

[Fat Tony Kandos]

‘Each case as it comes’.

Respectfully, that is exactly what should be done (call it what you wish. 'Each case as it comes', 'case-by-case', 'the merits', etc.)

We are dealing with human lives here, not data that can be put into a computer to arrive at a just outcome.

And look, I think the NRL were incorrect with their Matthew Lodge decision. It happens.

On the other hand, I think the NRL made the correct decision with Russell Packer (and the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection agrees with me).

And besides, crime is good for the show business economy. The OP in this thread linked a Daily Telegraph article when this information is easily found on the NSW Police Force's website and NRL club's websites. Think of all the journalists that will be put out of work if they are unable to write their 'news' articles.

You know it makes sense.

 

[Timmah]

Respectfully, that is exactly what should be done (call it what you wish. 'Each case as it comes', 'case-by-case', 'the merits', etc.)

We are dealing with human lives here, not data that can be put into a computer to arrive at a just outcome.

And look, I think the NRL were incorrect with their Matthew Lodge decision. It happens.

On the other hand, I think the NRL made the correct decision with Russell Packer (and the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection agrees with me).

And besides, crime is good for the show business economy. The OP in this thread linked a Daily Telegraph article when this information is easily found on the NSW Police Force's website and NRL club's websites. Think of all the journalists that will be put out of work if they are unable to write their 'news' articles.

You know it makes sense.

The OP was a 9news article, and at the time the information didn't appear anywhere else that named the offender.

 

[super_coach]

The problem with it being a moralistic stance is it isn't up to the NRL to tell me, you or anyone else what is and isn't appropriate in society. Keep in mind I am not necessarily referring to serious crimes which any reasonable person would consider as ethically wrong. Some people may think any DUI is cause for a lengthy ban, some may not, some people may think players deserve a 2nd chance after assault or DV issues especially first offenders who are young, some may not. So it then becomes a debate of severity and we will never get agreement on that.

The NRL (and any other business) absolutely has the right to refuse to employ people it thinks will damage their image. Ignoring the fact the NRL doesn't actually employ the players for a second, commercial considerations cause another issue here because what happens when not hiring or continue to a hire an employee/player is actually worse commercially for the NRL or club. As a random example using 2 players from my club, I can promise you that the roosters/NRL would have no problem taking a moralistic and harsh stance against say Lindsay Collins but I can promise you James Tedesco wouldn't cop the same treatment as he is too valuable so yes they can make a decision to not hire based on commercial impact but with that naturally comes inconsistency and double standards as not everyone is equal to the club/NRL so quite clearly blanket bans aren't viable.

I think you hit the nail on the head, like most things in life it’s never going to be a level playing field. The higher the profile the less chance you have of being rubbed out. Although Brett Stewart was a exceptionto the rule, that was just a case of the NRL caving into the media. Look back at Joey Johns, walked out of the game a clean skin, one of the great mysteries of all times. Anyway MCK and Musgrove if found guilty will get smashed, but JDB might get a better deal because of his profile. As Ihave always maintained, the NRL is a secret society

 

[Fat Tony Kandos]

The OP was a 9news article, and at the time the information didn't appear anywhere else that named the offender.

After about 24 hours you can put two and two together via the NSW Police Force website, then, the Tigers release.

I would not think this would not be too much effort for those advocating for the NRL establishing a kangaroo court.

But if it is too much effort for the jurists here, then yes, as I said, it is good for the show business economy, correct?

 

[mave]

NRL should be looking at ways to reduce areas of inconsistency, perceived or otherwise.

You would think now that Lodge and Packer were able to play on, you would basically have to be convicted of murder to get rubbed out, but sure as the day is long, some poor schmuck will soon get a hefty ban for not much, simply to appease the media.

 

[Timmah]

After about 24 hours you can put two and two together via the NSW Police Force website, then, the Tigers release.

I would not think this would not be too much effort for those advocating for the NRL establishing a kangaroo court.

But if it is too much effort for the jurists here, then yes, as I said, it is good for the show business economy, correct?

What's stopping you from doing just that then?

 

[Fat Tony Kandos]

What's stopping you from doing just that then?

What is stopping anyone from doing just that then?

 

[Perth Red]

I find it interesting how the NRL and clubs feel the responsibility to "look after" a player who fcks up. If any of us fcked up so badly it was sack-able offence we'd be out the door and off you go. We certainly wouldn't have our employee paying for counselling, rehab or a trip to Thailand! Players are such cosseted highly paid people these days its no wonder they have little concept of consequence or the real world.

Then again compared to European soccer players they are paupers doing it hard lol.

 

[Valheru]

I find it interesting how the NRL and clubs feel the responsibility to "look after" a player who fcks up. If any of us fcked up so badly it was sack-able offence we'd be out the door and off you go. We certainly wouldn't have our employee paying for counselling, rehab or a trip to Thailand! Players are such cosseted highly paid people these days its no wonder they have little concept of consequence or the real world.

Then again compared to European soccer players they are paupers doing it hard lol.

Perhaps they are worth more to their employee than we are?

 

[Timmah]

What is stopping anyone from doing just that then?

Nothing, but I'm not really sure what you're getting at?

 

[Fat Tony Kandos]

Nothing, but I'm not really sure what you're getting at?

Fair enough.

My point is this: Any publicity is good publicity, especially in the entertainment industry which the NRL operates within.

MCK has not damaged the game at all. The fact that media organisations believe it is profitable to publish stories such as his demonstrates this. I would be more concerned when media organisations do not publish stories about NRL players as that will be a clear sign that 'the game' is in trouble.

As such, the NRL is doing so well they should keep up their excellent work and stick solely to administering the sport, and, not distract themselves by branching out into the realm of punishing and penalising players. The Australian judicature will do this.

 

[Perth Red]

Fair enough.

My point is this: Any publicity is good publicity
.

Try telling Gerald Ratner that!

https://www.businessblogshub.com/20...s-multi-million-dollar-company-in-10-seconds/

 

[super_coach]

Perhaps they are worth more to their employee than we are?

It’s the same in all industries, take the aviation industry, a pilot does something pretty bad,he will get a second or third chance, it cost the company to much cash in training to flick. On the other hand a cleaner does the same thing, he is out the door. Sadly it’s life

 

[Rhino_NQ]

It’s the same in all industries, take the aviation industry, a pilot does something pretty bad,he will get a second or third chance, it cost the company to much cash in training to flick. On the other hand a cleaner does the same thing, he is out the door. Sadly it’s life

I’d it be a bigger deal if the cleaner tried to take off with coke in his system

 

[The Book of Steeden]

Perhaps they are worth more to their employee than we are?

That’s the long & the short of it (for better or worse).

 

[The Book of Steeden]

I’d it be a bigger deal if the cleaner tried to take off with coke in his system

If the general public knew exactly how heavily automated 21st Century commercial piloting is, they would hardly be worried.