South Sydney coach Michael Maguire says forward Ben Te’o is very focused on doing right by the Rabbitohs against Cronulla after a tumultuous week in which he was alleged to have punched a Brisbane woman in the face.
Te’o denies the allegations from the women, who suffered a fractured eye socket last month, and defended himself through several hours of questioning by the NRL’s integrity unit on Thursday.
The 26-year-old back-rower has been named in the Rabbitohs side to face Cronulla at Sharks Stadium on Monday.
“He is very focused about making sure that he’s doing the right thing for the team,” Maguire said on Saturday, when questioned about Te’o’s mindset this week.
Asked if it was hard for Souths not to be distracted by the situation Maguire said “We’re aware of it, without a doubt.
“We understand the situation, and we’ve been very, very thorough with the way we’re going about things and the integrity unit is going through their process at the moment.
“But our focus is what we need to do on the field.”
Maguire said he hoped his NSW Origin candidates Nathan Merritt and John Sutton would be part of the Blues squad for the first game, though the team will be known by the time they play Cronulla.
On Monday, Sutton will directly oppose Sharks playmaker Todd Carney, one of the other primary candidates for the Blues No.6 jersey.
“Sutto is pretty focused about just doing what he can control,” Maguire said.
“He’s a different style of player, he’s a big body too, so I think he would probably suit that (Origin) arena.”
Maguire revealed the Rabbitohs weren’t shying away from discussing their red-hot start to the season, with nine wins from ten games rocketing them to the top of the ladder.
“We talk about it,” Maguire said.
“Its very exciting to be a part of the team at the moment, the young kids pushing really, really hard for their opportunity.
“A young kid like Dylan Morgan coming into the team and performing the way he did is creating a lot of good pressures within, which allows us to train the way we are.
“It’s just about making sure your focus is on each week.
“It’s nice to be where we are, but I also understand there’s a long way to go.”
Maguire said the return of representative forwards Paul Gallen and Luke Lewis would add a lot of experience to the Sharks.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
I again state ,this is Australia not the USA.Relevance zero.Stating 9:1 ,then stated it might be less and applying it to Oz is ludicrous.. I can refer you to many a case in the US involving a high profile lawyer by the name of Mark Garalgos(spelling may be awry),who has lost cases.But the relevance to oz,is chalk and cheese. My example in Sydney with a high profile well paid player and a person with little funding at their disposal.The situation re this tab involves a NSW/Qld situation,so whether other states give a rats or not is irrelevant.I had a cousin who worked in legal aid as a lawyer,and I can assure you it depends on the ability of the lawyer,the evidence produced. Alan Bond with all his resources lost.A Jones has lost in defamation cases,all in this country not the bleeding USA. The sporting bodies are not going to fund a legal case ,for an individual player.
clipper
Guest
I have not plucked the figure from the air - it is Blackstone's formulation who was very influential and ties to the presumption of innocence in trials. OJ is just the extreme end of huge spending resulting in rightly or wrongly getting off the charge - I think every person in Australia would be familiar with it, not like the Stewart case, which most outside NSW and QLD would have only had a cursory glance. I don't think legal aid has the resources to get the best barristers in the land - anyone that had a choice of using them or a well funded sporting body wouldn't think twice.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Yet you happy enough to bring in the OJ case ,an American legal situation,which relevance in Oz is beyond me.The Stewart example is a darn side more relevant,as it involves this country. Oh and now it's not 9:1 .Pluck any old figure out of the air for expediency's sake.I made no such claim as to percentages or ratios,so I insinuated no figures. And getting the best and having the most legal backing is no iron clad of getting off,ask Alan Bond.Or South Sydney getting reinstated. There is also such a thing as Legal Aid. I have no idea of the current financials pertaining to the current matter,and I suggest neither do you.
clipper
Guest
I made no mention of the Stewart case and you have then gone on to say that innocents have executed and then cleared, which is exactly my point of why the system has to err on the side of guilty people going free rather than innocent people being sentenced, which may not be 9-1, but is certainly greater than what you are trying to insinuate. Of course everyone is entitled to representation - it's just that some can manage to get more representation than others.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
I would be very careful as the Stewart case was a classic example ,of making any assertions. I think you are being very generous with your ": 9: 1 ratio for guilty/innocent. Your suggestion,the basis for our justice system , is nonsense. I also suggest as you used OJ as an example,the contrary situation has occured,innocents have either been executed or spent half their life in jail,then been cleared. The law is not perfect,but it is the best system we have got in this country,and certainly better than trial by media.Everyone is entitiled to representation,regardless of their circumstances.Unlimited funds (how can you substantiate )when no one is aware of the accused's circumstances. One can earn $300,000 and has to service substantial debts.One can earn $90,000 and have zero debt. Trial by media has fallen on its head in the past.
clipper
Guest
That's all well and good, but the basis, rightly so, for our justice system is that 9 guilty people go free so that 1 innocent person is not jailed. Even if the person is 100% sure and has family support, it is still a daunting task knowing this and that there will be unlimited funds to create doubt - the longer the case goes for the more doubt can be created - OJ was a typical example, although I would not like to make any claim as to innocence or guilt.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Intimidation can take many forms publicity,press intrusion,cash availability at the disposal of the parties. Any involvement with the law such as being booked for speeding ,can be intimidatory.I know that is a different scenario. As the person involved wants to pursue the matter with the police,I doubt finances come into it.They did not in the Stewart case.The M Johns incident another example.So not every situation is absolute,provided family support is to hand,and the person is 100% sure of their postion in the matter. .
clipper
Guest
The lawyers must lick their lips when any sports star gets into trouble, knowing hundreds of thousands are there for the taking. Does this make the person any more guilty or innocent? - absolutely not. Does this make the victim far more intimidated and reluctant to pursue the case knowing that they can never come close to matching the financial clout behind the accused? - absolutely.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Already made the point about the delay in notifying the CEO.That is nnot a good look. The final washout will decide who is right or wrong. Agree you last point.I just don't garee with your point if the NRL don't act soon,they are.
Boatman of River Styx
Guest
Yes, but what about Souths knowing about the incident and not telling the NRL for 5 weeks. That is what has already been established. By any definition that is a cover-up. Yet not a word of condemnation from the NRL. Fully investigate Te'o by all means, fair enough, but at the very least the NRL should be taking immediate action on the cover-up. Had Souths acted at the time the incident happened (ie 6 weeks ago) we would not be talking about it now. It would be done and dusted.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
Boatman.The NRL are acting promptly ,Smith has been on the front foot.The Integrity Unit recently installed under Jim Doyle is doing just that, checking with all involved,and the league will act on their findings.Unless you want a rope thrown over a nearby tree to get things done in an instant,what else can they do at this very moment !
Boatman of River Styx
Guest
Why didn't Ben just run away? The girl was in the room with her back to the wall and Ben walked in through the door. Instead of punching her in the face, just run away. That would have been the appropriate response. All we know for certain is this: the girl has a broken eye socket; and the girl had the courage and integrity to make her allegation publicly and be questioned on television about it. On the other hand, Ben has gone to ground and so has Souths. So there's certainly enough for the NRL to have demanded that Souths stand Te'o down until the truth emerges. That Souths didn't report it to the NRL for 5 weeks means that the incident was covered-up. If the NRL don't act soon, they can also be accused of a cover-up. So much for women in league!
Rod
Guest
As a south supporter Teo better be innocent of any crime here, If there is any doubt he did or the other did wrong here. If so, I don't want him anywhere near the club. I think I heard/read initially that it was suggested that South let the NRL know straight away. I think it's a case of someone within the NRL , did not pass that onto the CEO. But like all of it's pure speculation.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
I have no idea what really happened and I suggest no one here does,it is not a good look(looking at the lady's eye) ,that is all I am prepared to comment on,until all facts known.Let justice take its course legally and not by the court of public opinion. I do query Souths on their delay in advising the CEO of the NRL. I remember distinctly some on these boards when the Brett Stewart incident and allegations were made public,quite a few here who should have known better and indeed FitzSimons made their views well known ,to a level considered to a pointing of the finger. I remember when Ms Harmer who was prepared to back Stewart with a reference was bagged,yet when all the facts came to the fore ,he was proven innocent.Not one person who did the finger pointing,showed any intestinal fortitude to admit they made a mistake.
Pot Stirrer
Guest
3 Prof 100 kg NRL players and 1 girl who ends up with a fractured eye socket and the Gerat South Syd Rabbits Accept thier player acted appropriatley. Great Club as long as your not a woman.
Boatman of River Styx
Guest
Madge needs to get the team a new wrestling coach. If the 108 kilogram Te'o couldn't tackle a 50 kilogram girl to the ground without punching her to the face so hard that he broke her eye socket, then he needs some work on his technique. Bring in Pepper Gomez or Skull Murphy to help Ben with his technique.