PLAYER Ezra Mam

[Redux]

Were you there were you?

I find it slightly amusing you go on about focusing on facts when you throw out a few hypotheticals of your own.

Also the decision "might" be stupid? Try again, it is/was stupid.

No? what a dumb question. By the account of all others involved, he wasn't doing those thing, or does that not count when it doesn't suit your agender?
"I said simply that he had an accident which is true, unless you know more then Mam, the victims, the police, the forensic crew and the cameras, my statement is true."

What hypotheticals?? please explain. If he wasn't charged you cant assume he was doing it right?
Please read fully before replying as I answered this and about the facts known, unless you know more.

 

[BroncsFan]

Kotoni Staggs got a Zero game ban and a fine for his part in a homophobic assault of a fan who just wanted a picture. Then a while later he followed it up with making unwanted advances on a woman and got a 2 game ban. We got a better outcome as far as the Broncos were concerned over a repeat offender. NRL have never been consistent.

As i said previously, Mam has absolutely zero defence in any of this no matter with what they threw at him. He was breaking the law on at least 3 accounts in his incident. He took illegal drugs. He was driving with illegal drugs in his system and he didn't have a license to drive a car. We dont even know what else he had in his system judging by the court statement. So while he wasnt actively looking to crash into somebody, he knew what he was doing was illegal, he knew the consequences of what could happen so its no excuse to say he didnt go out looking for it.

For the potential damage this absolute tool could have caused to the lives of 3 other people and their families, 6 months driving ban, $850 fine and a 9 game ban from playing football is incredibly lenient. I know i'll get the people who will say "well, none of that happened " ( which is true ) but its happened plenty of times in other situations because idiots think they dont have to follow the rules.

All he can do now is hope he learns from this and pulls his head in and goes on to have a great career as a Bronco.

Trindall got that covered and added an extra with mass amounts of alcohol in the system as well:

- He took illegal drugs. ️
- He was driving with illegal drugs in his system and ️
- he didn't have a license to drive a car ️

+ almost 3 times over the alocohol limit ️

 

[Redux]

... without a license. There is no excuse for him to have been behind the wheel at all.

As I said I could make 1000 plausible excuses for mam, how many can you make for brown. You would agree that brown's is a more appalling incident, that deserves a greater punishment then Mam's, right?

Kotoni Staggs got a Zero game ban and a fine for his part in a homophobic assault of a fan who just wanted a picture. Then a while later he followed it up with making unwanted advances on a woman and got a 2 game ban. We got a better outcome as far as the Broncos were concerned over a repeat offender. NRL have never been consistent.

As i said previously, Mam has absolutely zero defence in any of this no matter with what they threw at him. He was breaking the law on at least 3 accounts in his incident. He took illegal drugs. He was driving with illegal drugs in his system and he didn't have a license to drive a car. We dont even know what else he had in his system judging by the court statement. So while he wasnt actively looking to crash into somebody, he knew what he was doing was illegal, he knew the consequences of what could happen so its no excuse to say he didnt go out looking for it.

For the potential damage this absolute tool could have caused to the lives of 3 other people and their families, 6 months driving ban, $850 fine and a 9 game ban from playing football is incredibly lenient. I know i'll get the people who will say "well, none of that happened " ( which is true ) but its happened plenty of times in other situations because idiots think they dont have to follow the rules.

All he can do now is hope he learns from this and pulls his head in and goes on to have a great career as a Bronco.

The whole point was that if brown only got 7 weeks, we can agree that Ezra should have got less. What if's are stupid, what if brown raped that women on that floor in that pub, should 've he been drawn and quartered because he could of done it.

 

[Wolfie]

As I said I could make 1000 plausible excuses for mam, how many can you make for brown. You would agree that brown's is a more appalling incident, that deserves a greater punishment then Mam's, right?

The whole point was that if brown only got 7 weeks, we can agree that Ezra should have got less. What if's are stupid, what if brown raped that women on that floor in that pub, should 've he been drawn and quartered because he could of done it.

I dont agree Ezra should have got less. He's got off very lightly. He's lucky the law and the NRL are inept on this occasion.

What Brown got isnt of any relevance anyway. There is a long list of inconsistent bans by the NRL. He should have got a bigger ban. Ezra should have got a bigger ban.

 

[Wolfie]

Trindall got that covered and added an extra with mass amounts of alcohol in the system as well:

- He took illegal drugs. ️
- He was driving with illegal drugs in his system and ️
- he didn't have a license to drive a car ️

+ almost 3 times over the alocohol limit ️

The law is too weak on these dumb *****, and so is the NRL really. I find it astounding that people want to find excuses for these fucking idiots.

The best thing the NRL can probably to mitigate fan anger and their inconsistency is to just have a set bans. Take illegal drugs and get caught. 5 games. Drive unlicensed. 5 games etc. If you do 3 or 4 of those, stack up the bans. Trindall should have got way, way more than he did imo. I think Ezra should get way more as well.

 

[Redux]

I dont agree Ezra should have got less. He's got off very lightly. He's lucky the law and the NRL are inept on this occasion.

What Brown got isnt of any relevance anyway. There is a long list of inconsistent bans by the NRL. He should have got a bigger ban. Ezra should have got a bigger ban.

So we are one the same page, you are saying that sexually assaulting someone 5 times is the same as a car accident while unlicensed. That is what you are saying right, Ezra should get the same or more then brown. Which one should of got the bigger ban?

How is it not relevant, both did bad things, both got charged, both was and still are in the NRL, both punished by the courts, both punished by the NRL. I think it is recent enough less then 2 years, both action deplorable but to me one is far far worst.

What about to you, would you rather that little girl get into that accident with minor injuries or be Sexually Assaulted. In both cases I think the woman and little girl would choose the accident, now you pick one for them.

 

[BroncosFever]

No? what a dumb question. By the account of all others involved, he wasn't doing those thing, or does that not count when it doesn't suit your agender?
"I said simply that he had an accident which is true, unless you know more then Mam, the victims, the police, the forensic crew and the cameras, my statement is true."

What hypotheticals?? please explain. If he wasn't charged you cant assume he was doing it right?
Please read fully before replying as I answered this and about the facts known, unless you know more.

The bit where you heavily insinuated he wasnt reckless or driving in a dangerous or speeding manner. You couldn't possibly know this unless you were there. It was a rhetorical question, we all know you weren't there but you seem to have knowledge like you were there. So no, it's not a fact. It's a hypothetical.

By the account of others involved? So the people he hit have come out and said he wasn't driving recklessly, despite colliding with them on the other side of the road? Fair dinkum mate.

 

[Redux]

I'm not saying that Ezra should not get a punishment or doesn't deserve one. Just that if you compare recent incidents, how did they come to this conclusion.

 

[Redux]

The bit where you heavily insinuated he wasnt reckless or driving in a dangerous or speeding manner. You couldn't possibly know this unless you were there. It was a rhetorical question, we all know you weren't there but you seem to have knowledge like you were there. So no, it's not a fact. It's a hypothetical.

By the account of others involved? So the people he hit have come out and said he wasn't driving recklessly, despite colliding with them on the other side of the road? Fair dinkum mate.

Please read what I wrote. I could say that your a mass murder and because you have no evidence that you are not, this must be true. How can you say somethings true with no evidence/witnesses. So if no one saw it happen and no one claims it did, it defiantly happened, that is your assumption?
Unless you know otherwise you cant claim it did, if no-one else does and there is no evidence how can you say he was.
Have they claimed otherwise.
Where was my hypothetical?

 

[Redux]

The bit where you heavily insinuated he wasnt reckless or driving in a dangerous or speeding manner. You couldn't possibly know this unless you were there. It was a rhetorical question, we all know you weren't there but you seem to have knowledge like you were there. So no, it's not a fact. It's a hypothetical.

By the account of others involved? So the people he hit have come out and said he wasn't driving recklessly, despite colliding with them on the other side of the road? Fair dinkum mate.

Also just so you know, for newer cars the police can access the vehicle computers for forensics. This stores all the vehicle telemetry, telling them how fast, how many G's you pulled, your steering imputes, your steering in the lead up, where you were heading, where you came from, if you applied brakes etc etc etc.

 

[Mustafur]

I'm not happy about people here excusing his actions, I think he is very lucky to get away with how he did at the end of the day, even if the victims milked it he still made victims from his negligent behaviour and has to face the consequences for it, now yes I get Sydney media will ride this and try make a mountain of a molehill but he still did something very fucked up and earned the punishment for it.

 

[Brocko]

I think until we get to something like @Wolfie suggestion above, about set bans, that stack, for certain types of offences, this circus will happen with every ban handed down.

The frustration, at least for me, comes from comparing it to 'similar' bans in recent years handed down by the NRL. That is where I think people get aggrieved, and 'Broncos tax' etc. As it is so consistently, inconsistent. Club to club, player to player. This isn't helped by media outrage created in some cases, or lack there of in instances like Sandon Smith where you don't hear a peep.

If Ezra got the same ban as Trindall, (just an example) but the Broncos decided to bump it up to 9 weeks (or more), if they can do that, I think there'd be a lot less of this discussion because it doesn't feel like we are being hard done by. That's our club punishing an idiot for being an idiot, not the NRL deciding that due to more media driven fan outrage, it deserves a lengthier ban than others.

For the record, I don't think 9 weeks is hard done by at all, and is probably less than I expected.. I just think what this has highlighted, is a few of the other recent bans have been grossly unders compared to what they could/should have been when you compare it to this incident.

My biggest thing out of this isn't even the ban, it's how he comes back. He seems to have a softer edge than others, and after this media slaughter, fans and opposition players are going to absolutely lay it on him. He needs to be prepared for that and know how to deal with it. That's the main concern for me.

 

[Mustafur]

I think the fact the NRL doesn't allow the all stars game to be counted for the ban is proof of Broncos Tax, because it has for literally every ban before.

But I still can't be too mad because the punishment was less than what I first expected anyway and since we got Hunt we cover it well too.

If Hunt makes the Origin team which is likely Mam will be off his suspension then which works good for us.

 

[john1420]

I'm not saying that Ezra should not get a punishment or doesn't deserve one. Just that if you compare recent incidents, how did they come to this conclusion.

That's our problem @Redux we are comparing to other incidents and expecting equity / consistency.

It's the NRL, we should know better

 

[john1420]

I'm not happy about people here excusing his actions, I think he is very lucky to get away with how he did at the end of the day, even if the victims milked it he still made victims from his negligent behaviour and has to face the consequences for it, now yes I get Sydney media will ride this and try make a mountain of a molehill but he still did something very fucked up and earned the punishment for it.

But is anyone actually doing that?

 

[john1420]

He got more because they were different incidents. He crashed into somebody lol I mean that is why there is a difference in suspension.

And that crash was not related to the drugs in his system.

Even so, a crash where nobody was injured more than minor, shouldn't double the penalty.

Finally, my point (very clearly) was this incident will not bring an end to the belief that Broncos players are treated more harshly, and it hasn't.

 

[john1420]

I don't get this, people keep saying prior incidents.

How many players have lost control of their vehicle, unlicensed, while having cocaine in their system and probably using a mobile phone?

5 weeks? you're having a giggle.

It's about prior similar incidents, not identical

 

[Super Freak]

I think the fact the NRL doesn't allow the all stars game to be counted for the ban is proof of Broncos Tax, because it has for literally every ban before.

There's no Broncos tax.

He's never been considered for the All-Stars game, that's why. You have to prove you're going to be selected for a game to use that game towards your suspension. They ask the coaches themselves if the player would be selected if they were available.

Latrell and JAC are allowed to use it towards theirs because those two are always automatic selections when available.

Walsh was allowed to use the Origin game towards his suspension in '23.