Sexual assault allegation

[Professor47]

Coxy, I have to say, I don't think Broncos will have MUCH trouble with sponsors, at this current stage anyway. Certainly not crisis-like as the Sharks did.
But I have no doubt, if the business decision had to be made to sack them, they will.
Furthermore, if they decide to sack them for bringing the club a bad name, I'm sure they wont hesitate to do that if they think it is the best option.

I'm not worried about what the club will do, I have faith the club will make the right decision.

 

[broncos85]

If the act was consenual they have done nothing wrong, Its just sex and its not a crime

I dont know any of the details but if they simply had consenual sex with this girl how in the world can you ask for them to be sacked??

If a sexual assualt has occured then I agree they should be sacked and prosecuted to the full extent of the law but if the sex was consenual and people are calling for them to be sacked, then thats quite absurd.

 

[gUt]

If as seems probable, Hunt, Thaiday and Boyd play on Saturday night I will find it impossible to give them my support. I'll still be at the game but I'll probably still be in a state of shock and just sit there quietly. No cries of "Go Darius". Imagine the crowd reaction when they ran onto the field and every time they touched the ball if it were three Storm players under investigation. Lucky we have the home ground advantage.

ffs :roll: Glad we reopened this thread.

By the way can someone explain why if the sex was concensual, it's 'immoral'? Immoral by what standard?

 

[schmix]

He really wasn't doing anything A LOT of other guys would and DO get up to at any chance they can get.

But Hunt is NOT your everyday guy. People know who he is, and he represents the Broncos brand 100% of the time he is out in public. If he wanted to have sex in public toilets, then he should have become a plumber or something equally anonymous.

I wish the NRL made it easier for clubs to do the right thing. Who wants to sack these guys, only to see them playing for another club next year? I know they can deregister contracts (although this rarely happens), but it would be nice if the Broncos had first dibs on the players after the suspension is over (whether that be 2, 3 years down the track). More like a 'suspension without pay' rather than an all out sacking.

 

[michael22]

He really wasn't doing anything A LOT of other guys would and DO get up to at any chance they can get.

Michael22, you are only one demographic of Broncos' supporters, the more conservative supporters will not be so sympathetic.

This is true, and I appreciate this.

But there is so much at stake here, and without criminal charges that result in a conviction I just can't see them being sacked. Regardless of sponsorship. Regardless of what some supporters think.

They will be punished harshly through fines, reprimands and counselling, and rightly so.

They're also going to have to deal with taunts whenever they go out, sledging in games etc. They will be referred to as rapists. People will have a go at them when they see them in the Valley to try and get a rise out of them. This will be a mistake they pay for for as long as they're in the public eye.

 

[Professor47]

If the act was consenual they have done nothing wrong, Its just sex and its not a crime

I dont know any of the details but if they simply had consenual sex with this girl how in the world can you ask for them to be sacked??

If a sexual assualt has occured then I agree they should be sacked and prosecuted to the full extent of the law but if the sex was consenual and people are calling for them to be sacked, then thats quite absurd.

I see your point, and in a perfect world that may be the case, but there are so many factors, as has been mentioned sponsors etc etc.
Then there is the whole "but what about the kids" argument, The club's high moral standards, etc etc.
They are all valid points that need to be considered.
As much as I hate the whole role model theory, there is no argument, Rugby League is a family product, and with the technology these days, it's just too hard. We all know Broncos have high integrity standards, and that is just the way it is.

 

[Jeanette]

I've been thinking about this a bit and maybe if the Broncos put on a good publicity front about how the players will be counselled, and do hard core community work, as well as monetary fines, perhaps they will be able to publicly retain these players and still keep supporters and sponsors on board.... But it is a fine line...

 

[Coxy]

For sure. And I think the Broncos will be careful about it. The guys involved with this also attract sponsors with the way they play the game, and if they can somehow spin this in a way that doesn't look SO bad for them they might think long term it's more viable to retain them.

That's for the club to decide.

For my own personal beliefs, if things are exactly as they're being reported, I'd tear up their contracts right now. But that's a personal, emotive response. I have lost a hell of a lot of respect for the guys involved, and with Sam in particular it guts me. He is far and away my favourite of the young breed of players. I'm good mates with his brother and girlfriend. So it hurts.

If they stay around next year I'll applaud what they do on the field, but I won't give a stuff about them off it. That's my attitude with most players. Sam was one of the last ones I had genuine respect for as a person.

I guess like Hammo I'll be a cynic...they're just dumb as dogshit uneducated neanderthals good at throwing a football and hitting people. And I'll judge them wholly and solely on that.

It's very disillusioning though.

 

[Black Philip]

If as seems probable, Hunt, Thaiday and Boyd play on Saturday night I will find it impossible to give them my support. I'll still be at the game but I'll probably still be in a state of shock and just sit there quietly. No cries of "Go Darius". Imagine the crowd reaction when they ran onto the field and every time they touched the ball if it were three Storm players under investigation. Lucky we have the home ground advantage.

ffs :roll: Glad we reopened this thread.

By the way can someone explain why if the sex was concensual, it's 'immoral'? Immoral by what standard?

I'd say it would be seen as "immoral" or perhaps unethical from a religious point of view, I know that's what you want to hear gut. But religion aside it's still uncouth behavior.

 

[Professor47]

He really wasn't doing anything A LOT of other guys would and DO get up to at any chance they can get.

But Hunt is NOT your everyday guy. People know who he is, and he represents the Broncos brand 100% of the time he is out in public. If he wanted to have sex in public toilets, then he should have become a plumber or something equally anonymous.

I wish the NRL made it easier for clubs to do the right thing. Who wants to sack these guys, only to see them playing for another club next year? I know they can deregister contracts (although this rarely happens), but it would be nice if the Broncos had first dibs on the players after the suspension is over (whether that be 2, 3 years down the track). More like a 'suspension without pay' rather than an all out sacking.

No I disagree, IF the broncos are to sack Hunt (assuming alleged facts) and he is NOT the filmer, then I believe he has every right to play at any other NRL club and Broncos would have to accept that. I believe this because sacking him would be a CLUB decision, by breaching the club's code of conduct. In essence he had consensual sex with a woman in the toilet of a night club. IF any other NRL club was still happy to have them on their roster, so be it.
It would be rubbish to say he should be banned from all NRL clubs.

 

[Argus]

If as seems probable, Hunt, Thaiday and Boyd play on Saturday night I will find it impossible to give them my support. I'll still be at the game but I'll probably still be in a state of shock and just sit there quietly. No cries of "Go Darius". Imagine the crowd reaction when they ran onto the field and every time they touched the ball if it were three Storm players under investigation. Lucky we have the home ground advantage.

ffs :roll: Glad we reopened this thread.

By the way can someone explain why if the sex was concensual, it's 'immoral'? Immoral by what standard?

Maybe it's because I'm an old fart but to me it's immoral to engage in any form of sexual act in a public toilet. That it was three on one makes it worse. I guess some of us just have higher standards and expectations than others.

 

[Coxy]

If as seems probable, Hunt, Thaiday and Boyd play on Saturday night I will find it impossible to give them my support. I'll still be at the game but I'll probably still be in a state of shock and just sit there quietly. No cries of "Go Darius". Imagine the crowd reaction when they ran onto the field and every time they touched the ball if it were three Storm players under investigation. Lucky we have the home ground advantage.

ffs :roll: Glad we reopened this thread.

By the way can someone explain why if the sex was concensual, it's 'immoral'? Immoral by what standard?

I'd say it would be seen as "immoral" or perhaps unethical from a religious point of view, I know that's what you want to hear gut. But religion aside it's still uncouth behavior.

Morals are a personal thing. For some, having group sex is fine. Having group sex in a public toilet is probably OK, hell, we all want to get our rocks off right?

But for the vast majority people are brought up more conservatively. I'm not religious in any way shape or form, and I'm not against group sex if that's what people like. But drunken romps in a public toilet to me is absolutely filthy, disgusting, gutter behaviour (especially MMMF, ewww). I would be ashamed of myself and any of my friends or family for doing shit like that. You might as well do it on the street.

You can say that's my personal hang up, fine.

But there are lots of people who feel the same way, and lots of those people are the ones who buy season tickets, buy the merchandise, watch the games on TV etc...all the shit that makes the Broncos attractive to the sponsors.

And you try explaining it to kids. "What did the Broncos do?" Poor Russo and others with kids old enough to understand. Try and explain it when idiots in the crowd yell out things like people were yelling to $BW this year about Candice Falzon...

They just don't get what a big deal this is.

 

[gUt]

If as seems probable, Hunt, Thaiday and Boyd play on Saturday night I will find it impossible to give them my support. I'll still be at the game but I'll probably still be in a state of shock and just sit there quietly. No cries of "Go Darius". Imagine the crowd reaction when they ran onto the field and every time they touched the ball if it were three Storm players under investigation. Lucky we have the home ground advantage.

ffs :roll: Glad we reopened this thread.

By the way can someone explain why if the sex was concensual, it's 'immoral'? Immoral by what standard?

I'd say it would be seen as "immoral" or perhaps unethical from a religious point of view, I know that's what you want to hear gut. But religion aside it's still uncouth behavior.

Definitely agree with you, it's uncouth, stupid, uncivilized, low behaviour. I just don't know if it's immoral.

 

[Coxy]

He really wasn't doing anything A LOT of other guys would and DO get up to at any chance they can get.

But Hunt is NOT your everyday guy. People know who he is, and he represents the Broncos brand 100% of the time he is out in public. If he wanted to have sex in public toilets, then he should have become a plumber or something equally anonymous.

I wish the NRL made it easier for clubs to do the right thing. Who wants to sack these guys, only to see them playing for another club next year? I know they can deregister contracts (although this rarely happens), but it would be nice if the Broncos had first dibs on the players after the suspension is over (whether that be 2, 3 years down the track). More like a 'suspension without pay' rather than an all out sacking.

No I disagree, IF the broncos are to sack Hunt (assuming alleged facts) and he is NOT the filmer, then I believe he has every right to play at any other NRL club and Broncos would have to accept that. I believe this because sacking him would be a CLUB decision, by breaching the club's code of conduct. In essence he had consensual sex with a woman in the toilet of a night club. IF any other NRL club was still happy to have them on their roster, so be it.
It would be rubbish to say he should be banned from all NRL clubs.

The NRL could rule it's also in breach of their Behaviour Towards Women policy that they implemented post Coffs Harbour. They can deregister them on the basis of that.

 

[Blondie]

Actually, I refrain. having sex in a public toilet is not technically against the law.

But i thought George micheal was prosecuted for sexual acts in a public toilet?
I know thats in america but thought it might be the same over here???? [icon_shru

 

[Professor47]

Nevertheless, its a very black day for the Broncos I have to say.
I admit I never thought I would see the Broncos involved in something like this.

 

[Coxy]

Actually, I refrain. having sex in a public toilet is not technically against the law.

But i thought George micheal was prosecuted for sexual acts in a public toilet?

That was in the US. Their laws are far more conservative than in Australia.

 

[Professor47]

He really wasn't doing anything A LOT of other guys would and DO get up to at any chance they can get.

But Hunt is NOT your everyday guy. People know who he is, and he represents the Broncos brand 100% of the time he is out in public. If he wanted to have sex in public toilets, then he should have become a plumber or something equally anonymous.

I wish the NRL made it easier for clubs to do the right thing. Who wants to sack these guys, only to see them playing for another club next year? I know they can deregister contracts (although this rarely happens), but it would be nice if the Broncos had first dibs on the players after the suspension is over (whether that be 2, 3 years down the track). More like a 'suspension without pay' rather than an all out sacking.

No I disagree, IF the broncos are to sack Hunt (assuming alleged facts) and he is NOT the filmer, then I believe he has every right to play at any other NRL club and Broncos would have to accept that. I believe this because sacking him would be a CLUB decision, by breaching the club's code of conduct. In essence he had consensual sex with a woman in the toilet of a night club. IF any other NRL club was still happy to have them on their roster, so be it.
It would be rubbish to say he should be banned from all NRL clubs.

The NRL could rule it's also in breach of their Behaviour Towards Women policy that they implemented post Coffs Harbour. They can deregister them on the basis of that.

oh, I never heard about that?
That could change things that is for sure.
Know anything more about the policy?