So Mitchell Pearce cops eight weeks and a $125k fine! Some will say that is over the top others will say it doesn’t go far enough.
Whether supporters acknowledge it or not a lot, views will be dependent on whether they like Pearce or the Roosters.
But the fine does raise a few questions.
How did the NRL come up with this punishment, and for that matter all punishments the Integrity Unit dishes out?
Was this the Roosters’ punishment or did the NRL come in over top? Why did it take well over a month to reach this conclusion? Would it have taken that long if we were in the middle of the season?
This was Pearce’s second drunken offence, but it was in a private residence. Pearce was not charged for any offences by police yet his actions caused a lot of public outcry.
Valentine Holmes was charged by the police (albeit a minor misdemeanour) and his actions were in a public place.
It was Holmes’ first offence and it caused a lot less embarrassment to the game. He is fined a few thousand dollars and is playing this weekend. I’m not saying Holmes deserves anywhere near the punishment that Pearce has received, but no one can tell us what rationality is used to dish out the penalties.
It’s a guessing game left to the clubs, but with the NRL hovering in case it doesn’t meet their standards.
It’s time the NRL shows leadership by taking the matter out of the hands of the clubs and having a clear set of guidelines made known to the clubs, players and fans so we all understand what is likely to happen.
For example, the following could be used as a few of the guidelines for minimum penalties.
These are just examples of a few of the many guidelines that could be in place for player behaviour and should include everything from public drunkenness to serious criminal offences, to gambling on games and match fixing, recreational drug use and anything that fits into player misbehaviour.
Things like being late for training would still be under the purview of the club and they could stand down players for whatever reason they like. However for player behaviour we need consistency by removing the clubs from the equation and having one common standard.
By making minimum penalties public it eliminates this back and forth between the NRL and clubs over what penalties will be and will provide transparency to the fans as to why a player is suspended. I
Players would be aware of penalties from the moment they sign an NRL contract, clubs would know exactly where they stand and the fans most importantly would not be confused by what is going on.
I hope the NRL has the leadership to move to a consistent system for player misbehaviour and stops the ad hoc and confusing system.
1. Public drunkenness
Anytime a player is drunk in public.1st offence – 3 weeks and a fine of 5 per cent of their salary
2nd offence – 6 weeks and a fine of 10 per cent of their salary
3rd offence – 12 months out of the game. Forfeit their contract.2. Player charged by police with a minor offence
1st offence – 6 weeks and a fine of 10 per cent of their salary
2nd offence – 12 weeks and a fine of 10 per cent of their salary
3rd offence – 12 months out of the game. Forfeit their contract
3. Player charged and guilty of a serious criminal offence
Guilty is when they either plead guilty or have gone through to trial and been convicted.1st offence – Minimum 12 months out of the game (for very serious offences could be automatic life ban).
2nd offence – Automatic life ban
Michael Keeffe
Roar Guru
I don't think they should be punished for drinking alcohol, that's not what I said. I do think they should be punished for public drunkenness. You can be charged by police for being drunk in public if you become enough of a nuisance. For these guys to be drunk in public they need to have had a lot of drink in a public place. Going out and have a few beers or even half a dozen beers is not nearly enough to get them in trouble. Getting blind drunk is and if they do then I have no sympathy for them. I enjoy a couple of beers as much as the next person, but haven't been blind drunk since I was 17. It's time for these men to take responsibility and stop acting like boys.
East Bound & Down
Guest
Do you think that punishing someone for drinking alcohol , (which isn't illegal , not yet anyway )is fair ? The players will have an army of scummybags following them around with mobile phones and cameras at ready . This is out of control and the do gooders need to pull their heads in a bit.
Michael Keeffe
Roar Guru
Public drunkenness. Isn't that what most of these incidents are all about? That's what Valentine Holmes was fined for and stood down from the nines.
NateD
Guest
It's always a tough one. I always think that lengthy time off can be bad for the mental welfare of the players, maybe drop them down a grade (or 2) but for some of them footy is all they know and when forced to the sidelines end up depressed or drinking more heavily. BTW not condoning their actions but NRL must also look after their staff (players) welfare as well.
Dean - Surry Hills
Guest
Banning players for being publicly drunk, may lead to some of those players becoming permanently drunk. Be careful what you wish for.
MAX
Guest
Interesting piece Michael. I like to keep things simple. I support your ideas and proffer as follows, If there is substantiated evidence that a player has committed an act of misbehaviour or found guilty of a chargeable offence and which brings the game into disrepute then that player will be penalised as follows. !st Off. 2 weeks + 10% of contract and cancellation of any TPA 2nd Off. 6 weeks + 20% of contract 3rd Off. 12 months + contract cancelled Conversely, I would introduce a 'good behaviour bonus' equal to 5% of contract , exempt from the salary cap. The NRL spends a fortune to promote the game. This incentive may have its rewards.
peeeko
Guest
you want to suspend players for being drunk?
Cugel
Roar Rookie
What worries me is there's all these other players where we don't what they're doing an any given time. Could be anything. Probably best just to fine and suspend them as well, just in case.
pjm
Roar Rookie
It took over a month because Pearce was away in rehab.
Freddy from Bondi
Guest
I get where you're trying to come from here...consistency has always come into question whenever one of these issues comes up. But unfortunately, I don't think there is a simple one-size fits all to any issue. For example: where would Todd Carney's bubbler come into this. Let's say he wasn't drunk but did it as a laugh for his mates, but the photo gets out. What is his punishment on your scale? What if the photo is seen by the club but doesn't make it to the public domain (so no damage is done to the image of the NRL)? What if an 18yo is 'drunk in public' (which in itself isn't really an issue is it??) but then as a seasoned 10 year veteran gets into a punch-up with fanboy who racially slurs him during a night on the town, it gets videod but there are no charges laid?? I don't think black and white really works when it comes to this sort of stuff unfortunately...