NRL to consider bad-boy bond of $250,00
- Thread starter Dan
- Start date
-
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.
HappilyManly
Journey Man
League "bad boys" face having to agree to good-behaviour bonds of up to $250,000 if they want to stay in the NRL.
The game's bosses, including NRL Integrity Unit head Jim Doyle, are sick of scandals
involving a few wayward players tarnishing the image of the sport.
Over the years the NRL has been rocked by headline-grabbing cases of first-graders being accused of off-field offences including alcohol abuse and physical and sexual assaults.
Last Monday, former Warriors prop Russell Packer was jailed for two years for assaulting a 22-year-old Aucklander, Enoka Lester Time, in the Sydney CBD in November. Packer is appealing the sentence.
Doyle refused to register Packer's four-year contract with the Newcastle Knights in December after reviewing the case. That signalled a hard-line stance from the NRL against players who are deemed to have damaged league's image.
Doyle, speaking exclusively with Fairfax Media, revealed the NRL may go even further.
In the past, players have been sacked by clubs for off-field incidents and contract breaches, only to then be signed by rival clubs. Doyle acknowledges one mistake shouldn't end a player's NRL career.
But under a new proposal, he wants to see repeat offenders put up a good-behaviour bond – potentially up to $250,000 – that would be forfeited for a repeat offence.
"The players themselves . . . are the ones who choose their actions," Doyle said.
"If they go out and beat someone up or they get drunk and do something they shouldn't be doing, well, that is them who has chosen that action. That's not us. We aren't stopping them from having a career – they themselves are.
"But at the same time, people make mistakes. Hopefully, people learn from their mistakes.
"So, if you've got a player who has done something they shouldn't have done and got himself in trouble, first and foremost what we want to do is use our player welfare and education department and put them through some sort of program. And if they come out of the program and everything is fine, we'd certainly consider re-registering them.
"But as part of that re-registration, we might say that given they've tarnished the brand of rugby league in the past, yes it's great you are rehabilitated and we are going to give you a second chance.
"But of course we can't afford to have them tarnish the brand again, so we might ask for them to put up a significant amount of money as a bond that may sit there for the next year or two.
"And if they again go back off the rails and get into trouble again, there will be a significant penalty to pay. That's an idea rather than having them just say sorry again for the second time."
Doyle, also the NRL's chief operating officer, says bad behaviour by players can have an adverse effect on club finances.
"It's only ever the minority and if it's, say, 3 or 4 per cent [of first-graders who misbehave], we would like to get it down to 1 per cent or half a per cent," Doyle said.
"If you look at the 16 NRL clubs, and I've talked to all the CEOs and the chairmen . . . their biggest challenge is continuously being financially stable. So what I keep saying to them is that what will bring them more corporate sponsors and more membership and things like that is their own individual club brand.
"And if the brand of your club is bad and negative because you've got a few idiots that play for your team and you're not willing to penalise them in any way, that has a reflection on your own brand and therefore certain corporates aren't going to want to get involved with your organisation.
"It would be better for us all to eliminate that from the game so that we can bring more families to matches, bring more corporate sponsors to rugby league and get more membership. That would make the whole thing better and that right there is a big part of what I do."
Read more:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/nrl-to-consider-badboy-bond-20140111-30o1b.html
The game's bosses, including NRL Integrity Unit head Jim Doyle, are sick of scandals
Over the years the NRL has been rocked by headline-grabbing cases of first-graders being accused of off-field offences including alcohol abuse and physical and sexual assaults.
Last Monday, former Warriors prop Russell Packer was jailed for two years for assaulting a 22-year-old Aucklander, Enoka Lester Time, in the Sydney CBD in November. Packer is appealing the sentence.
Doyle refused to register Packer's four-year contract with the Newcastle Knights in December after reviewing the case. That signalled a hard-line stance from the NRL against players who are deemed to have damaged league's image.
Doyle, speaking exclusively with Fairfax Media, revealed the NRL may go even further.
In the past, players have been sacked by clubs for off-field incidents and contract breaches, only to then be signed by rival clubs. Doyle acknowledges one mistake shouldn't end a player's NRL career.
But under a new proposal, he wants to see repeat offenders put up a good-behaviour bond – potentially up to $250,000 – that would be forfeited for a repeat offence.
"The players themselves . . . are the ones who choose their actions," Doyle said.
"If they go out and beat someone up or they get drunk and do something they shouldn't be doing, well, that is them who has chosen that action. That's not us. We aren't stopping them from having a career – they themselves are.
"But at the same time, people make mistakes. Hopefully, people learn from their mistakes.
"So, if you've got a player who has done something they shouldn't have done and got himself in trouble, first and foremost what we want to do is use our player welfare and education department and put them through some sort of program. And if they come out of the program and everything is fine, we'd certainly consider re-registering them.
"But as part of that re-registration, we might say that given they've tarnished the brand of rugby league in the past, yes it's great you are rehabilitated and we are going to give you a second chance.
"But of course we can't afford to have them tarnish the brand again, so we might ask for them to put up a significant amount of money as a bond that may sit there for the next year or two.
"And if they again go back off the rails and get into trouble again, there will be a significant penalty to pay. That's an idea rather than having them just say sorry again for the second time."
Doyle, also the NRL's chief operating officer, says bad behaviour by players can have an adverse effect on club finances.
"It's only ever the minority and if it's, say, 3 or 4 per cent [of first-graders who misbehave], we would like to get it down to 1 per cent or half a per cent," Doyle said.
"If you look at the 16 NRL clubs, and I've talked to all the CEOs and the chairmen . . . their biggest challenge is continuously being financially stable. So what I keep saying to them is that what will bring them more corporate sponsors and more membership and things like that is their own individual club brand.
"And if the brand of your club is bad and negative because you've got a few idiots that play for your team and you're not willing to penalise them in any way, that has a reflection on your own brand and therefore certain corporates aren't going to want to get involved with your organisation.
"It would be better for us all to eliminate that from the game so that we can bring more families to matches, bring more corporate sponsors to rugby league and get more membership. That would make the whole thing better and that right there is a big part of what I do."
Read more:
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/nrl-to-consider-badboy-bond-20140111-30o1b.html
Daddycool08
Reserve Grader
I agree in principle.
Maybe the logistics of it would be to withhold a percentage of the player's payments until the bond has been paid in full. (Similar to HECS.)
I would suggest it be held in trust if the player then becomes a "cleanskin" he gets the money back if he breaks the law he loses it.
Slightly like the old 'bonded servant' days with say teachers. They had to work in a country area for five years to pay off the "debt." If they quit after the five years there is no cost to them.
I also suggest that any interest earned on the funds would be paid to a charity of the player's choice? Hence it would probably be tax deductible.
Maybe the logistics of it would be to withhold a percentage of the player's payments until the bond has been paid in full. (Similar to HECS.)
I would suggest it be held in trust if the player then becomes a "cleanskin" he gets the money back if he breaks the law he loses it.
Slightly like the old 'bonded servant' days with say teachers. They had to work in a country area for five years to pay off the "debt." If they quit after the five years there is no cost to them.
I also suggest that any interest earned on the funds would be paid to a charity of the player's choice? Hence it would probably be tax deductible.
Lord Eagleton
Bencher
If this goes ahead there is sure to be a few tears in the future, as its not going to stop footballers (who are a couple of slices short of a loaf) going out and being...themselves. The nature of the sport - tough, brutal and confrontational - will always attract a lot of low quality human beings.
Wayward players are as much a part of the sport as bias referring and Manly hating.
Wayward players are as much a part of the sport as bias referring and Manly hating.
HappilyManly
Journey Man
Its a crazy amount as most Players don't earn that in a year :dodgy:
Better to de-register any Player who gets a criminal conviction for 12 months - after their sentence is served.
Also make them ineligible for all representative matches in the future.
Those who are just plain dickheads - see Raiders mob - need to be made ineligible for all representative matches for 12 months, and be prevented from registering with another Club for 12 months.
Along with sitting out their current season for however long the Integrity Unit deems fit.
Monetary sanctions to these young guys is not a deterrent, as they lack the acumen to appreciate the damage to their 'brand' :-/
Hopefully, 2013 will be the watershed moment for the Players in realizing that Sponsors and Fans are not amused
Better to de-register any Player who gets a criminal conviction for 12 months - after their sentence is served.
Also make them ineligible for all representative matches in the future.
Those who are just plain dickheads - see Raiders mob - need to be made ineligible for all representative matches for 12 months, and be prevented from registering with another Club for 12 months.
Along with sitting out their current season for however long the Integrity Unit deems fit.
Monetary sanctions to these young guys is not a deterrent, as they lack the acumen to appreciate the damage to their 'brand' :-/
Hopefully, 2013 will be the watershed moment for the Players in realizing that Sponsors and Fans are not amused
should be 500k, tosspots.
Clint said:
Just some softspots.
Well I hope that they let the player have their day in court to prove their innocence or be proven guilty before they impose these bonds on the player for tarnishing the name of the sport. Imagine if Gallop had thought of these penalties in 2009. Some would say that Brett had tarnished the sport with the allegations of sexual assault but he was rightly prove innocent.
Jatz Crackers
First Grader
Maybe a good initiative for Silvertails ?
Captain Moondog
Absolute Superstar
Have any of the other codes got a similar strategy in place?
Some might see this as over regulation on the part of the NRL.
Being kicked out of the game would seem to be punishment enough and in the case of a serious felony whatever sentence is handed down in court.
I'd imagine very few fans would suddenly decide they were'nt going to watch league any more because some player stuffs up.
I don't seem to remember too much concern about this before Gallop.
Some might see this as over regulation on the part of the NRL.
Being kicked out of the game would seem to be punishment enough and in the case of a serious felony whatever sentence is handed down in court.
I'd imagine very few fans would suddenly decide they were'nt going to watch league any more because some player stuffs up.
I don't seem to remember too much concern about this before Gallop.
Steve Matai
Member
Jeez I don't know if this is such a good idea. At the end of the day it's easy to police, stuff up, you're sacked. The nrl need to take a better approach to this. Say for instance, you get caught dui, how about a percentage of your wage goes to charity for 12 months.
I think we'd end up with players leaving the code. Soccer is getting more and more popular everday and these are the initiatives the nrl are thinking up. Are they kidding? Come on!! Ultimately what they need to do is eradicate the drinking culture in this country, especially with 20-30 year olds. No player has broken the law while being sober have they? The drinking is the real issue, 20-30 year olds are doing dumb **** all the time when drunk, the majority of the nrl are 20-30 year olds, go figure!
I think we'd end up with players leaving the code. Soccer is getting more and more popular everday and these are the initiatives the nrl are thinking up. Are they kidding? Come on!! Ultimately what they need to do is eradicate the drinking culture in this country, especially with 20-30 year olds. No player has broken the law while being sober have they? The drinking is the real issue, 20-30 year olds are doing dumb **** all the time when drunk, the majority of the nrl are 20-30 year olds, go figure!
TokyoEagle
Bencher
League players have always done stupid things when out on the grog, the difference these days is the level of scrutiny by the media. All they need to do to these guys is stop registering their contracts, if you get sacked by a club you sit out until your contract would have expired before you are allowed to sign with another club.
TokyoEagle said:
They are not just under scrutiny of the media nowadays. Every man and his dog has a mobile phone with a camera that they can record player indiscretions and sell the recordings to the highest media bidder.
Internal crap like these fines, or 'bonds', would never stand up in court. Just who is the NRL kidding? As others have said, just withhold any contract, and refuse to accept any clubs rregistration. Why complicate these issues. bring back Gallop. At least we all knew he was a tosspot.
TokyoEagle
Bencher
mozgrame said:
Too true, Jethro.
Who is number one on our oust list, am sure we can get some dirt on Ben Barba quite easily. We might have to get @Mark in Brisbane onto it to give him something to do to occupy his retirement time.
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 23 | 10 |
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 14 | 10 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 48 | 8 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 28 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 25 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 8 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 38 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 21 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 37 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -13 | 6 |
|
5 | 2 | 3 | -15 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -36 | 6 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -5 | 4 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -7 | 4 |
|
5 | 0 | 5 | -86 | 2 |
|
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 2 |
