Don't point the finger at the NRL over Pearce incident

I thought her comment was "if it is a slap on the wrist"

Mick GC While I strongly agree with most of what you have said that last sentence is a cynical and cunning way to view the world but the reality is the incentive for morally corrupt individuals is created by those whose profits and survival is dependant on the NRL. Why people still pay attention to FTA and news corp forms of media is beyond me. With the communication age we now live in there's no need to consume the same garbage. But hey we've always done it so it must be right. The sooner the old media monopolies die out the better. They only resort to this garbage because there fighting a losing battle to stay afloat. Anyone under 60 has no excuse for using nightly news and newspapers to stay informed. Surely were moving past accepting the old forms of media as the best news available.

Quite a variety of opinions as to whether Mitchell Pearce is the devil incarnate or just a victim of his own friendly, dog loving nature and all those nasty people with agendas trying to bring him down. The NRL spends a lot of time, effort and PR trying to educate their players not to get into these sort of scrapes. Whether it is to placate the sponsors, the mums of potential champions of the future, or just being a responsible organisation is not that clear, but having taken this tack they are then obliged to have a policy as to to how they deal with players who break the rules, and particularly those that have established themselves as serial offenders, such as Pearce, Kearney, Bird and Ferguson, or lose all credibility. The clubs first and last consideration in these matters is the effect on their chances in the competition. Their concern for the welfare of the NRL or the player involved is negligible. Given that the NRL has set themselves up as the arbiters of the off-field behaviour of the players it is an imperative that disciplinary decisions are seen to be fair. Joel Monahan, captured in the identical situation with the hound as Pearce, was banned from the NRL and deported to GB for the rest of his career. No-one in the press or the game raised a word in his defence, even though he was, unlike Pearce, a first offender. Pearce has been defended strenuously by members of the press and the game and smuggled out of the limelight for treatment, while his club "considers the evidence", which seems to be fairly obvious and in living colour. Will there be a difference in the treatment meted out to the Rooster star from the summary execution of the Canberra journeyman? Was Monaghan's behaviour disgusting while Pearce was just a bit of fun? How so?

”I’m not quite sure what you’re getting at”

Paragraph 1: a generation lives its life via mobile phone. All of them know the upside and downside, some are dills and some are opportunists. Paragraph 2: this is the group Pearce chooses to be with. Paragraph 3: Pearce has had the benefit of extraordinary education about his vulnerability. Paragraph 4: Pearce knew he had to be careful and was not.

“while we record things that we find “funny” it’s for our personal enjoyment and rarely leaves the mobile it was recorded on”

What you and I do is irrelevant because, presumably, we do not treasure “gotchas” on Lara Single, Mrs Anasta or Our Toddie Pearce. I believe we agree but I do not waste my time even considering the cameraman.

Come on League make a Motza out of top footy players,also many other sponsors ,players are replaced,been going on for too long! Gotta stop! They will keep making a motza been going on forever,yeah burn up your top players easily replaced,their careers & bad name they live with forever. Stop it right now,videos etc are nothing look deeper at real cause.

Not my monkey .... Not my circus

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at but like I said I'm not supporting Pierce just making a suggestion about another party involved. I'm a part of the culture you're pointing towards but in my experience while we record things that we find "funny" it's for our personal enjoyment and rarely leaves the mobile it was recorded on. There are a select few though, who I consider low lives, feel the need to publicise the content either through social media in order to shame an individual, or through the media in order to make a "quick buck". in the end Pearce is always at fault. He puts himself into the situation and carries on like a pork chop. He's actions do not excuse the behaviour of others though. Neither have committed a crime against humanity, but while Pearce may be a d**khead the cameraman is scum.

"lowlife who filmed and sold the video to the media"

Mobile phone videos and media houses prepared to pay a little or a lot and strangers or mates filming just everything are not new phenomena. Users, the media, strangers and mates clamour for news of real life by the millisecond. The younger generation lives minute by minute on FaceBoof and Twit-for-Brains and regard that mindset as normal - they instinctively take photos of themselves to distribute to the world and snapping someone else doing something ... anything ... is almost as interesting to them as their very own face grinning back like the village idiot. That's Pearce's milieu, that's what they do in public places and private places and he knows that. This came from the company Pearce was keeping. Author therookie recounts how the clubs have people in to coach the players about what goes on, with trained professionals running targeted programs on alcohol, women, attention from fans, breathing in and breathing out. Pearce has benefited from that system for 8 years now. Presumably someone with expertise sat with him when he was named captain, wasting their time and Easts' money alerting him to what that implied. Everything dogging Our Toddie Pearce since Australia Day is entirely of his own making. The photographer merely capitalised on the fabulous opportunity gifted to him.

Good

Just a quick correction. While I don't support Pearce and believe he will be punished heavily for being a w**ker, you should swap out "idiot who filmed and sent the video to the media" with "lowlife who filmed and sold the video to the media". I understand you allude to this later on but I just thought it should be stressed further. Something I find interesting is Copley sitting there being quiet with loud mouthed Nikorima in the background. How in the world did Pearce think it a good idea to get absolutely smashed when taking the new guys out? Obviously they may be good friends though I believe they haven't had much to do with each other. It strikes me as weird that the Co Captain would not only ignore a go home order, but also think it a good idea to take 2 new guys out in a city they don't know from a bar of soap and set such a fine example.

Catharine Lundy, pro bono adviser to the NRL, has threatened to resign if Pearce is not sacked. That being the case we may never see him on the paddock again.