The Roar
The Roar

Advertisement

Why Friend and Seymour should be allowed to play

benicio new author
Roar Rookie
18th March, 2009
16

In the media today there will be much debate about the presence of Jake Friend and Brett Seymour on their respective team sheets for this weekend’s game.

For those who have been living under a stone, the issue here is the absence of Brett Stewart’s name on the Manly team sheet, ostensibly for drunk and disorderly behaviour.

The sole reason why Friend and Seymour should be allowed to play is the fact they were not the face of the NRL marketing campaign.

Without having a seat at the NRL board table, it is difficult to know the full reasons behind their decision to suspend Stewart. However, my belief is that the marketing campaign was central to their decision.

Whilst I am not condoning the behaviour of Friend and Seymour, it must be viewed in perspective to the position of responsibility that Stewart found himself in.

You will hear cries of double standards from the Manly hierachy and certain media commentators, but the right decision has been made in regard to Stewart.

And the right decision in regard to Friend and Seymour would be to let the clubs deal with it and let the players play.

If the clubs decide that the players shouldn’t play, I don’t have an issue with that. My concern is from an NRL point of view.

Advertisement

We have not heard from Stewart, and nor will we until the outcome of the alleged assualt is decided by a court.

However, being put in such a lofty position by the league and then to abuse that position is the single reason for his ban by the NRL.

For the NRL to become over-bearing on the decision made by clubs and their boards would not be healthy for the game.

For Friend, a $10,000 fine has been slated by the Roosters. That penalty is definitely harsh enough for a 19 year-old first offender.

However, Seymour has a track record with a bottle in his hand, and the ball is in the Sharks court to handle that one first.

close