Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Big Pete, post: 3003186, member: 1899"] Now what would give you that idea? If you want an expert opinion, you're better off asking [USER=8275]@Jason Simmons[/USER] or [USER=2004]@Browny[/USER]. However since you did ask for my two cents... From an ethical stand-point, I believe Jack de Belin and Dylan Walker are entitled to their presumption of innocence. While the pending charge could be an unwelcome distraction, I don't believe the NRL are in the best position to judge whether they're fit enough to perform their duties as football players. That is up to the club and the players themselves. From a business perspective, the NRL have a right to protect their brand. At least, I would like to think so, it would be incredibly incompetent of the NRL that they didn't have the right terms in place to stand down players in these exact situations. However, the NRL is trying to promote a certain image of itself and that's impossible when you've got two players with pending court cases. I agree with [USER=8867]@FGfrom50[/USER] when he says that the punishments aren't designed merely to be deterrents. They're also denunciations which makes it clear to the populace where the NRL stands on these issues. Bottom line, the NRL was damned if they did, damned if they didn't. My 2c, as just a fan in the stands, I wouldn't have had any issue with Jack de Belin and Dylan Walker playing on. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)