We're to blame for NRL dramas, not the CEO

You're spot on Mushi, you are to blame. By wearing a scarf and cheering your team, you encouraged an act of violence against a woman. You may as well have hit her yourself! By respecting, even adoring, the footballing skills of professional players, you are pretty much saying 'give her a whack'. If your neighbour did something similar to his wife would you blame yourself, claiming responsibilty because you borrowed some sugar last week? How about this? Make an individual, no matter the profession, status, whatever, responsible for their own actions. At least then Mushi will be able to sleep at night.

If it can be shown that there is a direct link between the alleged (until proven) violence against a partner by footballer(s) and his(their) occupation and consequential addulation, hero worship etc then I will reconsider my support for any code. The Bird, Inglis, Bock (and any other) cases have yet to show that because someone is a well paid and admired professional footballer they are pre-disposed to domestic violence. I contrast this to the Coffs Harbour allegations of 2004. That incident revealed an unsavoury sexual culture within a game that its administration has taken dramatic steps to remove. Let us not forget that the revelations from 4 Corners earlier this year are alleged to have happened prior to 2004. I am comfortable with the move made by the NRL to adress this issue. It is for these reasons I will not institute a boycott of a code based on any individual case. I simply do not comprehend that violence towards women is accepted within the confines of a football code or club. If a professional footballer is accquitted of a domestic violence charge can an employer terminate a contract simply for that reason if no "bringing the club into disrepute" clause is written in their contract? Whether we the fans/supporters should boycott our chosen code/club until alleged/convicted offender has been dismissed depends on whether we think said club/code has a culture that condones or does not condemn such behavoir. At this point I am comfortable that situation does not exist.

Greg...I bow to the doctrine of simple logic and lets get bewildered over a beer sometime.And then I can bash the shit out of you.

Just to make myself absolutely clear: I do not at all condone the behavior of Inglis and the rest. Rather, I am simply advocating the doctrine of personal responsibility. Of course no man is an island, and we are all products of our environments. But unless there is mental illness at work, we ourselves are first and foremost responsible for our actions. So Inglis has to take responsibility for his actions. I find all debate beyond this simple logic rather bewildering.

mmmh dont trust him...

Mushi..I'll say it again..Good article and to those that both accept and deny in the same breath read your own posts.

Maybe in the future if we dont want to theses things happen again, we have to ban the "greg" name, it seems to be a name who like beat women...

I started reading this article and the ensuing comments with interest - but it then seemed to become a p#ssing comp between posters. IMO, Greg Inglis is 100% to blame. End of story. We can talk about it all you like, but the ONLY person who can change these individuals behaviour is these individuals. The latest out of Qld is schools may take RL off their sports because its creating thugs. What tripe! I grew up playing League in the days of spear tackles and when cheap shots were ignored - yet I still know whats right from wrong when it comes to treating others with respect. My parents taught me the moral code of the society I lived in, and (now a teacher) I believe I'm a good role model to students. As alluded to above, it starts with the parents! We're letting kids get away with too much these days, & trust me, they're losing respect for others. Once the player reaches their teens the horse has bolted - and no amount of posting on forums will change that! We're all individuals and we all need be responsible for our own actions.

Mushi: Have to agree with Searly on this one. Any selection of 500 or so young men drawn from Australian society will yield the good,the bad and the ugly. NRL --- and the other codes --- reflect the society that's spawned them. Reasonable observers will know there are some footballers who behave badly, just as they know the majority don't. Unfortunately the behaviour of the few will be used by people with other agendas to make vacuous generalisations about the game's "culture" etc. Any attempt to rationalise the argument provokes childish accusations. If Inglis assaulted his girlfriend he deserves to feel the full weight of the law. Whatever the outcome, it should be Inglis on the stand, not rugby league.

Searly if the offield issues don’t worry you at all then great life merrily marches on. However if you do have a problem with the off field behaviour, then I’m saying before looking at why the hell the CEO hasn’t changed everything yet how about looking at what you can do to influence and change rather than calling for the head of a CEO. Ie if it morally offends you then act or shut up if it doesn’t then fine. As to your architect example if I kept using the same firm and they kept sending me guys who were married and had group sex with a drunk and impressionable teenager before going home to punch their wife in the face (exaggeration obviously) then I probably wouldn’t use the firm anymore. If enough of their clients did this then it should lead to a change in behaviour.

Searly I agree with you in the fact you condemn the off field offences and approve the footy, but don't you get sick of not being able to read about the game itself when there's all this b/s off the field stuff going on that the game itself is rarely discussed?

But Mushi, we're not consuming the domestic violence, we're consuming the footy!!! I very much approve of footy and very much disapprove of domestic violence. Quite why people can't grasp the subtlety of this is beyond me.....

Searly..I am not in disagreement with anything you say. In fact if you read my comments it says sport reflects society at large and as a society we expect standards of behaviour from everyone regardless of the sport they play the profession they are in. I did not write the article. I am like you. I have an opinion. And I am expressing it. That I agree with the general thrust of the article does not mean I am apportioning blame. I am suggesting we need to all be responsible for the society we ultimately end up with.

Okay Greg here’s the deintellectualised version: - Offending Player A (not greg inglis) is actually unlikely to be held “fully” responsible, for most a criminal charge would do a lot more damage to their career prospects than for Mr A. Why because so long as he can play footy we have a six figure salary waiting for him - it appears from the thousands of inches of columns that some in the public want the bad behaviour reduced - when looking for a way to reduce it we turn blindly to the administrators and wave our hands saying do something god damn it went they don't we shake our fist and demand sackings - yet at the same time the same people shaking their fists still consume the product. So from the administrator’s point of view it looks very much like it isn’t an area of concern. To me anyone with a Yorkshire puddings worth of commonsense can see that, so we either have different puddings or Holding was right.

Vinay, You say: "Whether it is a cricketer or a football player ,whether they are rich or poor, they must be expected to behave in a civilised manner." Well, exactly! But they are expected to behave in a civilised manner because they are human beings who form part of our society REGARDLESS of whether they are a cricketer or footy player, rich or poor. So why is this article (and others) trying to relate their poor behaviour with their job? I guarantee you that in the past week architects, brick layers, accountants and plumbers have all beaten their wives/girlfriends. In fact there have probably been more than one example of each meaning that, according to the logic that seems to be prevailing here, those professions have an ingrained issue with bad behaviour and we should be calling for the resignation of the President of the Australian Institute of Architects etc. Or should I be feeling bad about myself because I too have recently engaged and paid money for the services of an architect, thereby encouraging the bad behaviour of his colleagues? I mean really.....

Greg..I make no apologies for what may appear to be intellectualisation and moralising. In plain simple "having abeer with friends" and no hidden agendas this is about expecting better standards. Team sport,legue,union,NFL,basketball et al have a lcharge sheet of bad behaviour as long as the Hume Highway. Whether it is a cricketer or a football player ,whether they are rich or poor, they must be expected to behave in a civilised manner. If there are kids that worship these individuals that beat their girlfriends or whatever and society or communities just put it in the too hard basket then we may as well say it is acceptable behaviour. I can understand your call for commonsense and sanity but dismissing it as unworthy of debate is denying a problem exists.

Greg Four plates of Yorkshu pudding for you lad.

With reluctance I bring myself to posit an answer to the question of who is responsible if it turns out that Greg Inglis has belted his girlfriend. Is it David Gallop? (an article yesterday). Is it the fans of the game? (this article). Is it the Melbourne Storm? Is it his parents? Well I'm with Towser, who thankfully has tried to bring a bit of good old Yorkshire common sense to this non-debate: Greg Inglis is 99.99% to blame, simple as that. Why do we have to moralize and intellectualize and rant and rave and be PC and write thousands of column inches on what is bloody obvious? Greg Inglis may be one of the most talented rugby league players ever to lace a boot, and he may be a truly beautiful sight when he runs with the ball, but why does that mean that he should not bear 99.99% of the responsibility when he belts his girlfriend?