None of us are happy about the performance of the team without de Belin. I wouldn't tell anyone what's what but in my opinion, everyone should move on from it. Let's look forward to what is coming, not focus on what has come to pass.
Nah, it's just you don't know how much fun holding a grudge is.
Nothing less than De Belin back to his best will make them STFU. So the ball is in his court.
Maybe after such a long layoff, he won't be able to get back like he was. Baldy McGregor warning about that. I hope I'm wrong. The teams needs me to be wrong.
Lets see what happens in trials. I also think Jack Bird could really do some damage coming on the the middle after 20~30 min but we have an abundance of backrowers but prop could be a problem. De Belin at prop would go a long way to solving that. But I think it'd be better for 2 of Woods, Burgess, Kerr to justify selection with Lawrie and Molo so JDB can play lock.
Possible but the opposite is more likely to be true than anything Baldy says.
The guy was found not guilty. It would be nice if the media cut him some slack but I guess it's a popular topic. I don't think it's anything personal.
He wasn't always wrong. Don't ask me on what point. Over the last 2 or 3 years or his tenure, I stopped paying attention to anything he said.
When you think about it in a cool manner, you may find they are right. I wasn't disappointed but was surprised about the length and size of his contract given how long he had been out.
As everyone has seen the wheels of justice move very slowly. Unfortunately the issue here is in reality the sponsors. No sponsor would want their brand tarnished even though the allegations against an individual or a group of players have not yet been proven. Therefore the NRL and club are caught between a rock and a hard place when it comes to this type of criminal allegation. So you can't really have the innocent until proven guilty stance even though you should.
Precisely! It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. No easy solution as far as I can see it. And these days the cops take any accusations of violence toward females very seriously.
It is damned if you do, damned if you don't so the NRL should come out and say they obey and aren't above the law. So, innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. If sponsors don't like it, the NRL could publicly call them out.
We could literally go around and around forever on this. I'm angry about how it handicapped the team but as for JDB himself as an individual, I really don't know or don't have an opinion. Just too difficult. He isn't guilty but he was guilty of putting himself in a position where such charges could be laid against him. I just hope it happens to a key Melbourne player soon.
Obviously it's out of the hands of the NRL but one solution might be that in the case where one can't do one's profession while the case is ongoing, would be for an interim verdict to be handed down by a judge before a full jury trial. In cases where it takes literally years, as was the case for De Belin.
Makes sense but to radically transform the criminal justice system is probably a little beyond the scope of this forum, St George Illawarra or the NRL
.
The law is most definitely not going to change. The law is innocent until proven guilty however for the purposes of brand and sponsorship protection the NRL has determined that this is the way to go which is actually visa versa to the actual law.Makes sense but to radically transform the criminal justice system is probably a little beyond the scope of this forum, St George Illawarra or the NRL
I think that you find that all contracts have the clause that ensures the club can't be sued if a player brings the club or the game into disrepute as a result of alleged criminal acts.If you give it cool thought,Chris M 's idea would probably create more problems than it solves. Who is going to accept "an interim verdict" if it doesn't go his or her way. I just don't think there is any way around it until the NRL is sued and forced to stop it.