NRL Players and family members in hot water

[Huge]

Your argument here is really poor, you're comparing abuse of an official to assault of a woman. Here's the big difference, the official is directly involved in the game they're playing, and the punishment is to ban them from playing in a game for abusing its officials, not to put them in jail. That's very different to a domestic violence incident in private, or even just physical assault outside of rugby league, where the public judicial system will deal with him. If he/they actually physically assaulted a woman at a game, especially one they were involved in, absolutely 5 years, even a life ban.

They verbally assaulted and intimated an official who makes the game they're playing possible, if they can't respect the officials in a competition they're contracted to be part of, including them being representatives of their clubs (it's a rugby league game, they're rugby league players), then they don't deserve the privilege of being part of the game.

It's as simple as that.

And since you're certain of the outcome, please be my guest and tell me what you believe it to be, so we can come back to it once the decision has been made. Also, those wise and mature grown ups who don't knee jerk, handed David Fifita a year ban for a similar incident, so it seems the grown ups agree with those calling for the longer bans, at least on precedent.

So they've been found guilty, proven as fact that they did some wrong ? Really ? I thought they'd been stood down pending an investigation but you have them investigated, charged,tried and convicted ! What is amazing that you cannot see how that perfectly fits the description of 'knee jerk' !!!! I already wrote what I think will happen, a private apology, maybe a quiet sling to the official who will say it's all sweet and he understands the frustration but really, he wasn't that scared and it was a bit over reported and we can all move on, a few matches suspension, and a big fat fine and a public shaming with a few mea culpas and a bit of public relations work and possibly attend a counselling course to completion. Naturally a warning. Of course I could be wrong and both will be banned for a year or more...mmmmmm

 

[abashii]

Reported on the Matty Johns show tonight that the video didn't work for some reason, that the Fifis were given their one year junior ban based on the unanimous accounts of four separate match officials, and that one of those four officials has quit because of the incident.

That's why they should cop a lengthy NRL ban. Officials give up their time to make the sport possible at all and then get abused and physically threatened by halfwits who should bloody well know better. It's already a marginal proposition to give up your weekend for less money than it actually costs for gear and travel and courses and this sort of thing just pushes more and more people away from officiating. Threatening referees is quite literally undermining the future of the game and as NRL players they should be setting an example we'd like the general public to follow instead.

 

[Kimlo]

So they've been found guilty, proven as fact that they did some wrong ? Really ? I thought they'd been stood down pending an investigation but you have them investigated, charged,tried and convicted ! What is amazing that you cannot see how that perfectly fits the description of 'knee jerk' !!!! I already wrote what I think will happen, a private apology, maybe a quiet sling to the official who will say it's all sweet and he understands the frustration but really, he wasn't that scared and it was a bit over reported and we can all move on, a few matches suspension, and a big fat fine and a public shaming with a few mea culpas and a bit of public relations work and possibly attend a counselling course to completion. Naturally a warning. Of course I could be wrong and both will be banned for a year or more...mmmmmm

Where did I say they were found guilty? You were the one who said probably a few games suspension and a fine, so it looks like you were the one who assumed guilt immediately without investigation, or trial.

Probably a few games suspension and a heavy fine

See you're the one who predicted a punishment, so you assumed they were guilty, I was responding to what you wrote, with my view on why a ban should be heavy handed.

Yes you could be wrong, just like anyone of us immature knee jerkers.

 

[Kaz]

The Fifita brothers should get a life ban.

Not for abusing the refs, officials etc, but for thinking they are so funny & laughing at their own antics on the footy show.

 

[Kaz]

So they've been found guilty, proven as fact that they did some wrong ? Really ? I thought they'd been stood down pending an investigation but you have them investigated, charged,tried and convicted !

They must have been found guilty by the Penrith junior rugby league, as they were banned by them for 12 months.

 

[Huge]

Where did I say they were found guilty? You were the one who said probably a few games suspension and a fine, so it looks like you were the one who assumed guilt immediately without investigation, or trial.
See you're the one who predicted a punishment, so you assumed they were guilty, I was responding to what you wrote, with my view on why a ban should be heavy handed.

Yes you could be wrong, just like anyone of us immature knee jerkers.

You wrote they did this and they did that. First line, second paragraph of your preceding post. You stated that it was fact, no equivocation . Predicting a punishment is just that, it says nothing about guilt or innocence . I didn't assume they were guilty, I assumed they would be punished. Try thinking prior to writing.

 

[gordjw]

They've already admitted to it. That came out on Sunday morning.

And what Andrew 'is alleged' to have done is quite literally assault.

If it were me in the refs shoes, I'd want him charged by the police.

I don't really understand what your point is Huge. I know you like Cronulla, but the Fifitas' actions are inexcusable.

I also don't understand why people seeking to defend them bring up other unrelated offences, like sexual assault, wife-beating, etc.
Defend what they did (if you can), don't try to play it down just because there are worse players out there.

(FTR, Bird, Inglis, Lui, Terry Hill, etc would have life bans if convicted and I was Benevolent Dictator For Life)

 

[Rally Towel]

The Fifita brothers should get a life ban.

Not for abusing the refs, officials etc, but for thinking they are so funny & laughing at their own antics on the footy show.

I endorse this post.

 

[Kimlo]

You wrote they did this and they did that. First line, second paragraph of your preceding post. You stated that it was fact, no equivocation . Predicting a punishment is just that, it says nothing about guilt or innocence . I didn't assume they were guilty, I assumed they would be punished. Try thinking prior to writing.

I didn't state they did something as a fact.

Abusing refs is a pretty big deal, abusing junior refs is an even bigger deal. We struggle for refs as it is, if the junior refs in our game are feeling intimated that's an awful way to attract new talent. IMO the NRL should make a big stance on this and ban then for at least 6 competition months (no backdating or count holidays as suspension rubbish), if not a year or two.

That's what I wrote, I didn't say they were definitely guilty, I did, based on reports of video evidence by a police officer, give my view on what punishment should be handed out and why.

As for my second post, that was still not me saying they committed the act as a fact, that was me responding to your argument on a year ban being too high, if we're already discussing the punishment, then I'm not going to start every sentence with an "if" and "allegedly" when they've had strong evidence against them, and the club where the incident took place has already banned them for a year, meaning they've got solid evidence to do so.

 

[Super Freak]

A stat was revealed that 497 junior refs have quit over the past 12 months because of abuse and threats..

 

[Nashy]

497!? Holy ****.

 

[Huge]

Your argument here is really poor, you're comparing abuse of an official to assault of a woman. Here's the big difference, the official is directly involved in the game they're playing, and the punishment is to ban them from playing in a game for abusing its officials, not to put them in jail. That's very different to a domestic violence incident in private, or even just physical assault outside of rugby league, where the public judicial system will deal with him. If he/they actually physically assaulted a woman at a game, especially one they were involved in, absolutely 5 years, even a life ban.

They verbally assaulted and intimated an official who makes the game they're playing possible, if they can't respect the officials in a competition they're contracted to be part of, including them being representatives of their clubs (it's a rugby league game, they're rugby league players), then they don't deserve the privilege of being part of the game.

It's as simple as that.

And since you're certain of the outcome, please be my guest and tell me what you believe it to be, so we can come back to it once the decision has been made. Also, those wise and mature grown ups who don't knee jerk, handed David Fifita a year ban for a similar incident, so it seems the grown ups agree with those calling for the longer bans, at least on precedent.

In what universe is that not stating they did something as a 'fact' ? Intimated ? What video evidence ?

 

[Huge]

A stat was revealed that 497 junior refs have quit over the past 12 months because of abuse and threats..

So it's pretty common then ? The thing is, it is not right to crucify someone for the sins of the many. Let the punishment fit the crime and only THAT crime.

 

[Kimlo]

In what universe is that not stating they did something as a 'fact' ? Intimated ? What video evidence ?

As I said, we were discussing punishments, you said a few months, at that point it's no longer worth the time to start every line with if/allegedly. Video evidence? The initial article had reports from the police officer who said he had video evidence, that's disappeared now but at the time it was the facts we knew of.

 

[Huge]

They've already admitted to it. That came out on Sunday morning.

And what Andrew 'is alleged' to have done is quite literally assault.

If it were me in the refs shoes, I'd want him charged by the police.

I don't really understand what your point is Huge. I know you like Cronulla, but the Fifitas' actions are inexcusable.

I also don't understand why people seeking to defend them bring up other unrelated offences, like sexual assault, wife-beating, etc.
Defend what they did (if you can), don't try to play it down just because there are worse players out there.

(FTR, Bird, Inglis, Lui, Terry Hill, etc would have life bans if convicted and I was Benevolent Dictator For Life)

Jesus! Ffs, how can you think I defended them at any stage ?Talk about reading some words and completely misunderstanding them. I'm saying, quite plainly I think that we need to keep things in perspective. I pointed out other offences so we have some sense of scale..try reading the words I wrote and stop turning them completely into something not written.

 

[Huge]

As I said, we were discussing punishments, you said a few months, at that point it's no longer worth the time to start every line with if/allegedly. Video evidence? The initial article had reports from the police officer who said he had video evidence, that's disappeared now but at the time it was the facts we knew of.

****, you really find it tough admitting you're wrong even when plainly and demonstrably wrong. Makes no difference what was being discussed, you said you hadn't stated anything as fact and you most definitely had. Just write ' I was wrong' . Demand the same standard of yourself as you expect the Fifita's to exhibit.

 

[Cult]

****, you really find it tough admitting you're wrong even when plainly and demonstrably wrong. Makes no difference what was being discussed, you said you hadn't stated anything as fact and you most definitely had. Just write ' I was wrong' . Demand the same standard of yourself as you expect the Fifita's to exhibit.

Your responses are ridiculous.

 

[Kimlo]

****, you really find it tough admitting you're wrong even when plainly and demonstrably wrong. Makes no difference what was being discussed, you said you hadn't stated anything as fact and you most definitely had. Just write ' I was wrong' . Demand the same standard of yourself as you expect the Fifita's to exhibit.

What part am I wrong about, about me not admitting that I judged them as guilty? Okay, I was wrong, I judged them as guilty based on reports of a police officer who said he had video evidence of them and the fact the involved club already handed out a 12 month ban, strong evidence, but certainly not fact, my bad. Now will you admit you're being self-righteous by implying anyone who is arguing for a longer ban, is an immature, knee jerking, unwise young kid? Can you accept that just because others may have a different view on a punishment, that they're not immature and knee jerking, but simply have a different view of importance of the event and have fair reasons for their argument?