: Sun Mar 29, 2009 12:48 am  

IMO (and i'll probably get shot down for saying so) the RFL and the club involved (in this case is Stains) should take the same action as the NRL do when a top flight player has a brush with the law and is plastered all over the media, fine the club and the club should suspend the player until the outcome of the investigation/case has been resvolved for bringing a black cloud over our beautiful game.

: Sun Mar 29, 2009 2:02 am  

pokerface wrote:

IMO (and i'll probably get shot down for saying so) the RFL and the club involved (in this case is Stains) should take the same action as the NRL do when a top flight player has a brush with the law and is plastered all over the media, fine the club and the club should suspend the player until the outcome of the investigation/case has been resvolved for bringing a black cloud over our beautiful game.

I presume you referring to the Brett Stewart case. Although I do think the RFL and the NRL need to have a far more similar disciplinary system than we have at the moment. You should not be allowed to punish someone before he has been found guilty of a crime. No matter how much evidence their seems to be and no matter how much of a bad light it puts the sport in. It's innocent until proven guilty after all.

: Sun Mar 29, 2009 8:38 am  

expatrhino wrote:

I presume you referring to the Brett Stewart case. Although I do think the RFL and the NRL need to have a far more similar disciplinary system than we have at the moment. You should not be allowed to punish someone before he has been found guilty of a crime. No matter how much evidence their seems to be and no matter how much of a bad light it puts the sport in. It's innocent until proven guilty after all.

I never said he was guilty but Leon said he was in court. Yes I was referring to the Brett Stewart case but there are other examples in the NRL where they take the same action, this procedure is also adopted in football, so don't brush this off as a one off incident...

Re: the Leon Pryce SONG! : Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:12 am  

EmmaMur01 wrote:

Yet they have both been told to expect gaol sentences????

No they haven't. Read the quote from the judge again. You'll find it on the Sky website or Chris Irvine's blog. The judge just said he was thinking of jail time. That could be a threat or it could be true, it could relate to both or just to one of them. S/He will ultimately be constrained by the law and what s/he is or is not able to offer as a sentence. For example, a judge could not sentence either man to life imprisonment for common assault. So there will be some guidelines that all sides will know about and if the sentence given is deemed too harsh for the crime committed, no doubt Pryce's legal team will appeal.

Re: the Leon Pryce SONG! : Sun Mar 29, 2009 9:34 am  

SaintsFan wrote:

No they haven't. Read the quote from the judge again. You'll find it on the Sky website or Chris Irvine's blog. The judge just said he was thinking of jail time. That could be a threat or it could be true, it could relate to both or just to one of them. S/He will ultimately be constrained by the law and what s/he is or is not able to offer as a sentence. For example, a judge could not sentence either man to life imprisonment for common assault. So there will be some guidelines that all sides will know about and if the sentence given is deemed too harsh for the crime committed, no doubt Pryce's legal team will appeal.

Adjourning for pre-sentence reports, Deputy District Judge Nick Watson told Pryce and Reardon: "You need to understand that a prison sentence is what I have in mind at the moment for this offence."

Unfortunately I am unable to post my thoughts on the sentence Judge Watson is likely to impose until after the 23rd April.

Rob Burrow’s representative career is looking rosy don’t you think?

: Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:08 am  

hate leon, but he will hopefully get what he deserves at end of april...but think we should rise above his level and if you like take a moral high ground and not sing songs of this nature....

: Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:19 am  

pokerface wrote:

I never said he was guilty but Leon said he was in court. Yes I was referring to the Brett Stewart case but there are other examples in the NRL where they take the same action, this procedure is also adopted in football, so don't brush this off as a one off incident...

I never said you did. What I was trying to do was point out my opinion that we should not ban a player just because he has had a brush with the law and not been convicted yet.

Can you please tell me what other times the NRL or RFl have done this. I'm not saying the haven't just can't recall. I can't remember the FA doing this either apart from not picking Bowyer and Woodgate for England during their trial. Gerrard has had a court case pending and the FA didn't ban him.

Also why should the RFL fine the club, how is it their fault Leon and Reardon did what they did. Manly were fined for failing to put in place sufficient measures to stop excessive drinking. You can't fine Stains or Wire for something they had no control over.

: Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:17 pm  

MattyB put this one up!

: Sun Mar 29, 2009 5:46 pm  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

MattyB put this one up!

Looks like he's been caught from behind in the showers by "Mr Big"..

: Sun Mar 29, 2009 6:01 pm  

Damo-Leeds wrote:

MattyB put this one up!

He looks like that tortoise from creature comfort's!