News: Brett Seymour fined $20k for booze binge, Jake Friend suspended

  • We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
I can understand what you're saying CW but public people are still allowed to have private lives. The problem only arises because their are cameras everywhere and the media are dragging the game through the mud for as long as the ratings are good. It wouldn't even be a story if there wasn't video of it, could you imagine the back page headline "NRL player seen drunk at pub"? No-one would care and a 20 grand fine with 2 week suspension is way out of proportion to what Seymour did.
 
Dan link said:
[quote author=niccipops link=topic=179737.msg214032#msg214032 date=1237454982]
The whole media circus is ridiculous. The stock market's crashing, businesses are shutting down, people are losing jobs and with all this going on, journos are running stories about intoxicated footy players.
It also generates negative tribal fueds between hypocritical fans - \"Your fella was pissed\", \"Well your fella was pisseder!\", and the clubs who aren't in hot water at the moment are polishing their halos.

On the one hand you say that the media spin shouldnt be believed yet you believe their spin on the financial "crisis"
[/quote]I'm in a finacial crisis - but it's okay, Kevvy's going to give me some drinking money.
 
niccipops link said:
[quote author=Dan link=topic=179737.msg214034#msg214034 date=1237455169]
[quote author=niccipops link=topic=179737.msg214032#msg214032 date=1237454982]
The whole media circus is ridiculous. The stock market's crashing, businesses are shutting down, people are losing jobs and with all this going on, journos are running stories about intoxicated footy players.
It also generates negative tribal fueds between hypocritical fans - \"Your fella was pissed\", \"Well your fella was pisseder!\", and the clubs who aren't in hot water at the moment are polishing their halos.

On the one hand you say that the media spin shouldnt be believed yet you believe their spin on the financial "crisis"
[/quote]I'm in a finacial crisis - but it's okay, Kevvy's going to give me some drinking money.
[/quote]

not all at once

just 2 cases of alcopops
ok
 
Seymour dodges NRL shark net
By Jane Aubrey, WWOS
18:00 AEST Thu Mar 19 2009








Brett Seymour's NRL career will continue after a two-match ban despite new mobile phone footage which has emerged of the "heavily intoxicated" halfback.

The footage, obtained exclusively by Nine’s Danny Weidler, shows the halfback "staggering down Cronulla Mall" on Sunday night.



Seymour was this afternoon handed a two-match suspension by the Sharks and hit with a $20,000 fine following a report by a private investigator into the actions of the 24 year-old, who has admitted to being "heavily intoxicated" following his ejection from the 2230 Lounge Bar.



"The decision came as a result of this most recent evidence, which formed part of the independent investigations conducted on behalf of the club by a representative of Barringtons Corporate Risk," the club announced via press release.



It was a decision endorsed by the NRL Board who chose not to add to the penalty, with the halfback missing Cronulla's clash with Newcastle on Monday and St George Illawarra next week.



Sharks chief executive Tony Zappia viewed the footage along with NRL chief operating officer Graeme Annesley at Channel Nine today.



"Disappointment. (I) Find it hard to comprehend. Stupidity is a word that comes to mind," Zappia said in reaction to the mobile phone footage.



Speaking exclusively to Nine News, the female in the mobile phone vision told of her shock over Seymour's behaviour when she tried to offer assistance.

Not wishing to be identified, the young woman explained that at one point she was concerned that Seymour was so drunk that he was going to throw up in her car.

"He (Seymour) said 'I'm not going to vomit', and he spat on my shoe," she told Nine News.


Seymour was sacked by the Broncos in 2006 after he allegedly head-butted a woman on the dance floor of Brisbane's Regatta Hotel but no criminal charges were laid.


At the time of his dismissal, Broncos chief executive Bruno Cullen said that Seymour was "getting into the serial offenders category."
 
brookiegreg link said:
[quote author=brookiegreg link=topic=179737.msg214005#msg214005 date=1237450444]
Yeah should be interesting to see what is said on the footy show tonite and what gallop's official stance is. Yes agree nicci he knew he'd be the biggest hippo in town if he didn't exercise pressure on chooks and sharkies behind the scenes in last coupla days - bet his phone bill is astronomical....

How about the bloody \"home movies\" that have popped up [EDIT - THERE IS NO FOOTAGE OF STEWART] and Seymour - {EDIT} you can't do anything these days without someone videoing it

Is that right mata that the media reports were wrong that nth manly neighbours gave the police video of Brett's alleged assault on the 17 yr old girl?? This gets curiouser and curiouser  ;)

[/quote]  Correct.  There is no footage.  It was alleged, but lots of things have been alleged about Stewart that haven't been factual.
 
Canteen, I've heard all that stuff about being role models and thinking of the sponsorship dollar.  Putting it into contracts and then putting on sessions where drinking is encouraged just doesn't do it for me.  And the NRL are guilty of staging these events, plus clubs, plus coaches, plus sponsors.  The temptation to drink must be extremely strong for these youngsters and inserting a clause in their contracts seems to me to be purile really.  Funnily enough one of the biggest sponsors is the alcohol industry, ciggies used to be.  The hierarchy of the game, if they were serious about their image, would work overtime on not providing this issue with air.  Gallop has been the one to give this issue air time with his hypocritical stand for all to see.  The issue of public opinion polls being the arbitrator of behaviour and taste is also questionable.  When one relies on pollsters to set your parameters of behaviour you really should look at the questions in the poll and the bias of the questioners and surely the people who participate.  Were they representative of the population? What were the questions asked? Who commissioned the poll and what were the outcomes they wanted?  To say the 75% of people wanted Brett suspended could be based on a survey of four members of Family First.  I for one don't think anyone should just lie down and get run over by the media and cop anything that comes their way.  I'm pleased that Brett is hopefully challenging his suspension.  That is his right and polls/Gallop/sponsors should not have any input into his decision.  League is a working man's game and will survive this and any other so called 'scandals' that the press want to dig up.  I think, perhaps wrongly, that everyone has a right to privacy.  It's a shame that this right is being eroded.          
 
It was reported that the Police had seized video footage of the confrontation between Stewart and the girl's father.
 
DSM5 link said:
Canteen, I've heard all that stuff about being role models and thinking of the sponsorship dollar.  Putting it into contracts and then putting on sessions where drinking is encouraged just doesn't do it for me.  And the NRL are guilty of staging these events, plus clubs, plus coaches, plus sponsors.  The temptation to drink must be extremely strong for these youngsters and inserting a clause in their contracts seems to me to be purile really.  Funnily enough one of the biggest sponsors is the alcohol industry, ciggies used to be.  The hierarchy of the game, if they were serious about their image, would work overtime on not providing this issue with air.  Gallop has been the one to give this issue air time with his hypocritical stand for all to see.  The issue of public opinion polls being the arbitrator of behaviour and taste is also questionable.  When one relies on pollsters to set your parameters of behaviour you really should look at the questions in the poll and the bias of the questioners and surely the people who participate.  Were they representative of the population? What were the questions asked? Who commissioned the poll and what were the outcomes they wanted?  To say the 75% of people wanted Brett suspended could be based on a survey of four members of Family First.  I for one don't think anyone should just lie down and get run over by the media and cop anything that comes their way.  I'm pleased that Brett is hopefully challenging his suspension.  That is his right and polls/Gallop/sponsors should not have any input into his decision.  League is a working man's game and will survive this and any other so called 'scandals' that the press want to dig up.  I think, perhaps wrongly, that everyone has a right to privacy.  It's a shame that this right is being eroded.          
I agree with you - just stating the reality in my post above. Except the 75% - see any independent surveys and they all strongly supported the NRL stance, though without really looking at the precedent, past form or other issues that have been raised on her ad infinitum.
 
Team P W L PD Pts
3 3 0 48 6
4 3 1 28 6
3 2 1 10 6
4 2 2 39 4
3 2 1 28 4
3 2 1 15 4
3 2 1 14 4
2 1 1 13 4
2 1 1 6 4
3 2 1 -3 4
3 1 2 0 2
3 1 2 -5 2
3 1 2 -15 2
3 1 2 -22 2
3 1 2 -36 2
2 0 2 -56 2
3 0 3 -64 0
Back
Top Bottom