Russel Packer. Did we dodge a bullet?

[Old Timer]

It's also not hard to image that the club stood him down for his safety and state of mind, for the reputation of the club and to make sure there were no repercussions on either side. As I said, it could also have been at the recommendation of the integrity unit. As for the counselling, I'm not sure that's relevant - it's been reported that JDB has been getting counselling from the get go and he's claimed innocence.

You also seem to be ignoring the potential influence of the integrity unit. For all we know, the club may have had the intentions of keeping AFB. Once the case was heard and he was found guilty (irrespective of whether it was known or not) the integrity unit stepped in and forced the clubs hand. As I've pointed out, every DV case that I'm aware of since around 2015 has resulted in exactly the same outcome - contract termination. It's not like the club stands out in this decision. There was a marked change in direction from the NRL at this time - there was significant outcry in the media for the way the NRL handled DV cases (following the Kenny-Dowall case).

I get the feeling you want to find some element of blame with the club. And that's fine, that's your prerogative. I personally can't, no matter which way I look at it.

Irrespective of the details, in my opinion, the right outcome was achieved.

Interestingly muzby (probably trawling every post I ever made) seems to think I'm grinding an axe for the club when in fact that is not the case.
I am merley questioning why the club went so far and not all the way and I suspect I know the answer and I don't think its necessarily about morals etc as some believe it to be.
I think the "right outcome" as people legitimately are entitled to believe (namely AFB being sacked) actually didn't come from the club making a moral stand as that is the very reason why I keep asking why didn't they sack him immediately if that was their position re DV.
If you have a moral standard and somebody clearly breaches it, you do not need 6 moths to arrive at that decision.
IMO all the theories re waiting for the court to say "guilty" and then sack him by taking the moral high ground is drawing a very long bow for all the previous reasons I have outlined.
AFB had just signed a 2 year senior contract to play NRL and IMO the club most likely made a commercial decision (entirely their prerogative) as they are running a business.
To have AFB taking up cap space for anywhere from 1 month - 2 years while the NRL sorted out how long he would be out, I suggest was not a palatable scenario for the club and no doubt the NRL wanted to see what the fall out was like and were possibly giving advice or instructions in the back ground.
If AFB had of offended at another club and been stood down by them and was all of a sudden available I have no doubt we would have sort his signature as they tried to do with Hayne who was also embroiled in trouble with women. It took another round of scandals for Hayne for us to finally exit from that fiasco.
For me I would have like to see us help AFB and his family as that is in my nature to try and let people make it back into society.
I can understand if the club had sacked him immediately even whilst not agreeing with that action.
I can in fact understand the club making a commercial decision providing it outlined its case for doing so even though I don't agree with that action either.
What I can't understand is how they were willing to wait 6 months to dump him for something they already knew he was guilty of and I can't comprehend how people can possibly think the club didn't know.
My contention has always been if we spent 6 months doing stuff with him why would you not keep going after the sentencing?
We will do what we have to do for 6 months but then you can get stuffed and your out on your ear because the judge said your guilty just doesn't cut it with me I'm afraid whereas I can understand commercial reality whilst not agreeing with it.
So in the end the club has not actually said why they did what they did and I do get annoyed when people suggest they did it on moral grounds when there is no clear evidence that is the case.

 

[Old Timer]

Interesting..

So if you don’t want him sacked, why are you pushing so hard to say the club should have acted before the conviction?

Comprehension is not a strong skill for you is it?
Stick to pedantry you're better at that.

 

[muzby]

Comprehension is not a strong skill for you is it?
Stick to pedantry you're better at that.

My best skill is knitting.

I’ll send you some booties.

 

[Como Connection]

I vote 1 1/2 season for Packer subject to medical report with Wests paying a large amount.
Hello from Kent.
CC

 

[possm]

Shouting now?

Yes, AFB said he was guilty - to the judge.

It was only then that action should be taken.

I’ve shown you SKD as to why the club needs to wait until the court makes its decision..

As I’ve reiterated to you over the past 300 pages of this thread, it’s all about allowing the correct legal process to happen.

But things have changed since SKD. The NRL are now intervening and standing down players charged BEFORE the courts have spoken. At this time, JDB is charged but not convicted and he has pleaded NOT GUILTY.

By the NRL standing down JDB, decisions have been taken out of the hands of the club. The club is obliged to accept the stand down decision and apply for salary cap relief. For the length of time the club does not accept the NRL's decision, they are financially disadvantaged because they have a suspended player on their salary cap.

 

[possm]

I vote 1 1/2 season for Packer subject to medical report with Wests paying a large amount.
Hello from Kent.
CC

I'd say we can do better than Packer however, the longer Millward sits on his hands the more likely we will just take the apple that has fallen on the ground - not even low hanging fruit.

Millward should have been negotiating with a potential JDB replacement just in case things turned out the way they have. Instead nothing has been done and now we are likely to be saddled with a decision that is not in the best interest of the club.

 

[JohnnoMcJohnno]

I vote 1 1/2 season for Packer subject to medical report with Wests paying a large amount.
Hello from Kent.
CC

That sounds fair.

How is Kent? Any D-day commemmorations going on?

 

[Como Connection]

That sounds fair.

How is Kent? Any D-day commemmorations going on?

Our pub, the Goudhurst Inn.
Narrow road thru town, which is very normal over here and the drivers are crazy, one nearly ran my wife over on the footpath.
Bloody poms.
CC

 

[Como Connection]

That sounds fair.

How is Kent? Any D-day commemmorations going on?

Drove five hours up from East Devon today, just setting in.
Donald thinks D Day is named after him anyway.
CC

 

[Old Timer]

Talking about D Day all quiet on the western front re the AFB debate.
muzby must have run out of bullets or maybe he has to give credence to the possibility of a "commercial" decision by the club and not a "moral" one.
Re Packer even though I was sad to see him go, he like Graham has lost his ability to dominate a game and so therefore we would only be getting another Lats if we picked him up.
Once upon time according to some in the place you could never have to much "Lats" how things have changed.

 

[Old Timer]

Drove five hours up from East Devon today, just setting in.
Donald thinks D Day is named after him anyway.
CC

Have you spent any time in the Cotswold's which is one of my favourite places.
I remember going to The Royal George in Birdlip and having fresh Bantry Bay muscles (to die for) and at least 6 or 7 different pints and and also remember the bar maid asking if I wanted to try the local hand pulled variety.
Mrs OT said I couldn't have said yes any quicker if I tried.

 

[muzby]

maybe he has to give credence to the possibility of a "commercial" decision by the club and not a "moral" one.

Wow..

Just wow..

 

[Old Timer]

Wow..

Just wow..

Thank you I thought so myself.

 

[muzby]

Thank you I thought so myself.

Yeah, nah..

That’s a new low in terms of train of thought.. Even for you.

How anyone even thinks he was sacked for money over integrity is beyond me.

If it’s done on the basis of commerciality you keep your good players.

We’re done here, ain’t bringing myself down to your level.

Enjoy.

 

[Old Timer]

Yeah, nah..

That’s a new low in terms of train of thought.. Even for you.

How anyone even thinks he was sacked for money over integrity is beyond me.

If it’s done on the basis of commerciality you keep your good players.

We’re done here, ain’t bringing myself down to your level.

Enjoy.

Down to my level lol
You just can’t stand the heat in the kitchen

 

[Dennis Papaioannou]

It's also not hard to image that the club stood him down for his safety and state of mind, for the reputation of the club and to make sure there were no repercussions on either side. As I said, it could also have been at the recommendation of the integrity unit. As for the counselling, I'm not sure that's relevant - it's been reported that JDB has been getting counselling from the get go and he's claimed innocence.

You also seem to be ignoring the potential influence of the integrity unit. For all we know, the club may have had the intentions of keeping AFB. Once the case was heard and he was found guilty (irrespective of whether it was known or not) the integrity unit stepped in and forced the clubs hand. As I've pointed out, every DV case that I'm aware of since around 2015 has resulted in exactly the same outcome - contract termination. It's not like the club stands out in this decision. There was a marked change in direction from the NRL at this time - there was significant outcry in the media for the way the NRL handled DV cases (following the Kenny-Dowall case).

I get the feeling you want to find some element of blame with the club. And that's fine, that's your prerogative. I personally can't, no matter which way I look at it.

Irrespective of the details, in my opinion, the right outcome was achieved.

The outcome is what baffles me and comes back to the question - are all players dealt with in the same way and is the NRL supporting and advocating integrity and morality or are they just hypocrites?
AFB is now playing FG for Manly on a nice contract.
Manly also re-instated Walker who was found guilty of DV. He is playing FG once again.
Barba got a few chances before being banished to the UK and so on.
Who makes those judgement calls? The club, the NRL or a combination of both?
So while this debate has focused on DV, it is not really the issue.
If the NRL want to have a squeaky clean image, do not allow re-instatement at all. Especially at another club which is just a sidestep.
If you want to rehabilitate then treat all players equally. Have an iron clad system e.g. one offence rehabilitate, 2nd offence out of the game altogether.
At least everyone knows where they stand.
In my opinion, AFB was not given a chance to stay with the club and get his life and playing career back on track.
Every time we play Manly, he will remind us of that.

 

[Dennis Papaioannou]

Yeah, nah..

That’s a new low in terms of train of thought.. Even for you.

How anyone even thinks he was sacked for money over integrity is beyond me.

If it’s done on the basis of commerciality you keep your good players.

We’re done here, ain’t bringing myself down to your level.

Enjoy.

Why is the financial argument so abhorrent to you??
Professional sport is a business and money is always at the forefront.
Integrity is not always aligned with the interests of the club.
I am sure you are not so naïve and your theatrical departure from this debate just shows that you are deliberately being argumentative just for the sake of it.
You try and be clever but you fail miserably and when you are challenged with intelligent argument you pull out your convenient quotations and very often misrepresent the other side's argument.
Oh and another thing.
It is incredibly pretentious and rude to correct peoples spelling and grammar.
As a poster on this forum, you often plumb the depths.

 

[muzby]

Why is the financial argument so abhorrent to you??
Professional sport is a business and money is always at the forefront.
Integrity is not always aligned with the interests of the club.

Okay, so provided we make money, let’s turn a blind eye to people in our employ beating up women.

f**king hell... Dig up..

I am sure you are not so naïve and your theatrical departure from this debate just shows that you are deliberately being argumentative just for the sake of it.
You try and be clever but you fail miserably and when you are challenged with intelligent argument you pull out your convenient quotations and very often misrepresent the other side's argument.

Intelligent debate? OT doesn’t understand the basics of law, likes to call names and is now saying the club put money ahead of morals whilst you believe Dugan’s indiscretions are worse than AFB’s.

Nothing intelligent there, so rather than wallow in the swamp with you guys I’m happy to step away.

BTW - you still haven’t clarified why we’d be laughing now if we kept AFB. What exactly is humerous about the situation?

Oh and another thing.
It is incredibly pretentious and rude to correct peoples spelling and grammar.
As a poster on this forum, you often plumb the depths.

It’s a medium using written text to covey the message. Poorly worded posts are akin to listening to the drunk guy at the pub who is slurring his words.

Ironically, you forgot an apostrophe.

 

[Dennis Papaioannou]

Okay, so provided we make money, let’s turn a blind eye to people in our employ beating up women.

f**king hell... Dig up..


Intelligent debate? OT doesn’t understand the basics of law, likes to call names and is now saying the club put money ahead of morals whilst you believe Dugan’s indiscretions are worse than AFB’s.

Nothing intelligent there, so rather than wallow in the swamp with you guys I’m happy to step away.

BTW - you still haven’t clarified why we’d be laughing now if we kept AFB. What exactly is humerous about the situation?


It’s a medium using written text to covey the message. Poorly worded posts are akin to listening to the drunk guy at the pub who is slurring his words.

Ironically, you forgot an apostrophe.

Your whole post is a bare faced misrepresentation of what I submitted.
My point about Dugan was that he was a serial/repeat offender whereas AFB was a first timer.
That does not diminish the seriousness of AFB's offence.
You call out OT for name calling but you have no problem using profanity in your post and demeaning people who challenge your myopic point of view. I am not sure you are in a position to judge OT's debating style.
Please step away - Don't threaten it, do it - you will be doing the forum a massive favour.
Intelligent argument is, to a certain degree, subjective but you only pretend at it because you are arguing to score points, not to exchange points of view.
My views on the AFB issue have been laid bare and are transparent.
They also bear no resemblance to your interpretations.
Finally your rationalization of your behaviour with regards to precipitously correcting posters' spelling and grammar is ridiculous.
I repeat. when you do that it is pretentious, presumptuous and rude.

 

[True_Believer]

In my opinion, AFB was not given a chance to stay with the club and get his life and playing career back on track.
Every time we play Manly, he will remind us of that.

See I don't understand this comment. The fact is he HAS been given a chance to get his life and playing career back on track - and he has done exactly that. If you are for rehabilitation and second chances, does it matter where he does that? That should be the focus, not which club he does it at.

I personally don't watch him play at Manly and think "damn, he could have been playing for us and we didn't have a chance to rehab him etc". To me, he's just another player in the opposition, same as every other saints player that has changed clubs. As soon as they leave, they are the opposition.

In the end, like I said, irrespective of how the decision was reached, I believe the right result was achieved at the time of the ruling. However, as you say, I think the nrl need to take a more consistent and tougher stance on these players.