Yeah shits me no end when people say it's victimless. Mother Teresa isn't the one supplying the stuffUsing illegal drugs supports organised crime. In some places these f**kwits are so strong they terrorise the poor merkins living in their territories. All enabled by a bunch of safe, wealthy middle class deadshits wanting to get their rocks off.
...and there we have it. Greenberg is satisfied with the Storm punishment.Melbourne has stood him down. We're yet to see if the nrl intervene and/or hand down an additional punishment. It's obvious Melbourne are hoping the nrl see the 2 weeks as a sufficient penalty. Time will tell.
Edit
Weak........... as............piss!...and there we have it. Greenberg is satisfied with the Storm punishment.
http://wwos.nine.com.au/2017/05/08/12/55/greenberg-satisfied-with-bromwich-sanction
Weak........... as............piss!
Toddy the fraud.
What crime did Pearce get convicted of????What offence has Bromwich been convicted of?
I thought they got it wrong with Norman, but he was convicted of an offence in a court of law.
What crime did Pearce get convicted of????
Using illegal drugs supports organised crime. In some places these f**kwits are so strong they terrorise the poor merkins living in their territories. All enabled by a bunch of safe, wealthy middle class deadshits wanting to get their rocks off.
2 weeks is ridiculous after Norman and Pearce got 8. The NRL CEO told us all they were going to come down hard on drug users and Nek Minnit it's two weeks.Pearce is a repeated pest with a massive problem on the drink.
Just because they got it wrong in the past doesn't mean they have to continue getting it wrong now.
2 weeks is ridiculous after Norman and Pearce got 8. The NRL CEO told us all they were going to come down hard on drug users and Nek Minnit it's two weeks.
The inconsistency is a joke.
Why wasn't Bromwich tested by the NRL and ASADA???Yes but Bromwich wasn't convicted of anything so you can't compare the punishments. His stance is basically "I was so drunk I have no idea what I took". Norman was convicted of possessing an illegal substance.
There's a massive difference.
Surely a smart marine biologist such as yourslef can see its really just semantics whether you get caught with some in your pocket as opposed to filmed with it up your nose .... end of the day its the same shit - footballer taking an illegal substanceWhat offence has Bromwich been convicted of?
I thought they got it wrong with Norman, but he was convicted of an offence in a court of law.
Why wasn't Bromwich tested by the NRL and ASADA???
So being drunk is an excuse???
4 weeks would of been a fair outcome, because the 8 marker weeks of last season was absolute bullshit.
I dont think there is a massive difference at all .... at the end of the day it is the exact same look for the nrl. Players taking drugsYes but Bromwich wasn't convicted of anything so you can't compare the punishments. His stance is basically "I was so drunk I have no idea what I took". Norman was convicted of possessing an illegal substance.
There's a massive difference.
I think they just said they will review itIf I'm not mistaken, the NRL has said that he has one strike on the three strike policy now anyway. So what would the NRL or ASADA testing him change?