Rape allegation

[Iamback]

Because that fits the level the NRL has decided is an unacceptable risk to it's own brand.

Are you this arced up when a bloke gets sacked for calling his employer useless and incompetent on Facebook?

What is worse someone convicted of crime?

Or

Someone accused of a crime?

As for the 2nd question.

I'd have no problem with that as long as the rule is consistent which this isn't

 

[Bazal]

What is worse someone convicted of crime?

Or

Someone accused of a crime?

As for the 2nd question.

I'd have no problem with that as long as the rule is consistent which this isn't

Pointless question. You can spin it however you want to suit your pov.

What's worse for the image of a billion dollar business? A player going through a lengthy front page rape trial, and possible appeals etc? Or a player convicted of drink driving?

The point you still miss is that the NRL is entitled to make that call regardless of your opinion. It's their image

 

[MRN]

This guy is an ABC commentator and sports reporter, not sure if he is a reliable source or not

x.com

x.com

 

[King hit]

This guy is an ABC commentator and sports reporter, not sure if he is a reliable source or not

x.com

x.com

lol the abc that’s a fine organisation to be respected

 

[League Unlimited News]

This guy is an ABC commentator and sports reporter, not sure if he is a reliable source or not

x.com

x.com

Zane Bojack, ABC Sport Commentator
"Officially @QldPolice say “investigations are ongoing” into the NRL rape case.. but it’s my understanding charges are very unlikely

Some relief for the NRL & club involved ahead of #MagicRound

No word on whether the “player” will be stood down as investigations continue."

 

[reanimate]

This guy is an ABC commentator and sports reporter, not sure if he is a reliable source or not

x.com

x.com

Don’t know if I trust a talking horse.

 

[Iamback]

Pointless question. You can spin it however you want to suit your pov.

What's worse for the image of a billion dollar business? A player going through a lengthy front page rape trial, and possible appeals etc? Or a player convicted of drink driving?

The point you still miss is that the NRL is entitled to make that call regardless of your opinion. It's their image

of course it is their image and their decision

BUT

NRL are the masters of seeming like they are doing something when they aren't

Take this case.

They can hardly take the high road for standing down an alleged sex pest

Yet in the same breath they allow a convicted sex pest in Dylan Brown stay in the game

 

[Vlad59]

of course it is their image and their decision

BUT

NRL are the masters of seeming like they are doing something when they aren't

Take this case.

They can hardly take the high road for standing down an alleged sex pest

Yet in the same breath they allow a convicted sex pest in Dylan Brown stay in the game

You might be comparing apples with bananas there mate. A bloke accused of rape can’t be allowed to participate in the game under the NRLs rules and rightfully so. A bloke convicted of what is, relatively speaking, a misdemeanour can. I’m not defending Brown. I just think the comparison is shaky.

 

[Iamback]

You might be comparing apples with bananas there mate. A bloke accused of rape can’t be allowed to participate in the game under the NRLs rules and rightfully so. A bloke convicted of what is, relatively speaking, a misdemeanour can. I’m not defending Brown. I just think the comparison is shaky.

Brown was stood down under the no fault stand down policy.

Goes to court gets convicted then is allowed back in the game.

Is that outcome a better look for the game?

 

[yobbo84]

Tom Burgess' offence was March 2022.

He got to court and found not guilty Oct last year.

Had he of been stood down that time, His career would of been ended early.

Tristan Sailor's contract expired whilist stood down. He is now bumming around in QCup.

So while Hayne is a reason for the rule. There are more against that rule

* George Burgess, not Tom.

Poor Tom, the white sheep of the family, always cops guilt by association because his brothers are morons. Seems a top lad with a clean sheet.

2nd most capped Rabbitoh of all time for a reason.

 

[Brutus]

Zane Bojack, ABC Sport Commentator
"Officially @QldPolice say “investigations are ongoing” into the NRL rape case.. but it’s my understanding charges are very unlikely

Some relief for the NRL & club involved ahead of #MagicRound

No word on whether the “player” will be stood down as investigations continue."

ABC LOL

Worst media organisation in the country comrade.

 

[Dr Dr Gimedanews]

ABC LOL

Worst media organisation in the country comrade.

ok Rupert.

 

[Vlad59]

Brown was stood down under the no fault stand down policy.

Goes to court gets convicted then is allowed back in the game.

Is that outcome a better look for the game?

Ffs check the charge as against rape. Check the punishment. Stop whinging.

 

[Iamback]

Ffs check the charge as against rape. Check the punishment. Stop whinging.

Dylan Brown was never up on a rape charge.

He was stood down because any offence against a woman is deemed to be bad enough for the no fault stand down.

If the charge is bad enough to be stood down then how can being convicted on that same charge see a player be reinstated?

 

[Vlad59]

Dylan Brown was never up on a rape charge.

He was stood down because any offence against a woman is deemed to be bad enough for the no fault stand down.

If the charge is bad enough to be stood down then how can being convicted on that same charge see a player be reinstated?

NRL 2023: Dylan Brown banned for four matches over sexual touching charges

amp.smh.com.au

If that’s not a tough enough penalty then I can’t help you. If he’d been found guilty of rape the penalty both by the NRL and the court would have been far more severe. If you don’t understand that I can’t help you and I’m not going to bother.

 

[Iamback]

Brown touched a girls tits without consent on the dance floor.

Correct.

We can argue whether it was Stand down worthy or not

BUT

The issue I have is.

Players are stood down, Some have had contracts expire during the process to then be found not guilty and they have missed so much football that they fall behind.

Even those

Brown and May come to mind who are found guilty are later let back into the game.

So what is the point of the rule?

Better off not naming the players, let the courts play out and than punishing once they are found guilty

 

[Iamback]

NRL 2023: Dylan Brown banned for four matches over sexual touching charges

amp.smh.com.au

If that’s not a tough enough penalty then I can’t help you. If he’d been found guilty of rape the penalty both by the NRL and the court would have been far more severe. If you don’t understand that I can’t help you and I’m not going to bother.

So why is he treated the same as a potential rapist before court then?

 

[Vlad59]

Correct.

We can argue whether it was Stand down worthy or not

BUT

The issue I have is.

Players are stood down, Some have had contracts expire during the process to then be found not guilty and they have missed so much football that they fall behind.

Even those

Brown and May come to mind who are found guilty are later let back into the game.

So what is the point of the rule?

Better off not naming the players, let the courts play out and than punishing once they are found guilty

I’m humming Dixie.

 

[simmo05]

ABC LOL

Worst media organisation in the country comrade.

Lol, ya reckon?

 

[Frailty]

Correct.

We can argue whether it was Stand down worthy or not

BUT

The issue I have is.

Players are stood down, Some have had contracts expire during the process to then be found not guilty and they have missed so much football that they fall behind.

Even those

Brown and May come to mind who are found guilty are later let back into the game.

So what is the point of the rule?

Better off not naming the players, let the courts play out and than punishing once they are found guilty

Cool, I'm sure the NRL has pull to change each states' laws. FMD.