I sincerely hope that Jack de Belin is innocent. There should be no satisfaction for any decent person in seeing a young, successful athlete found guilty of such an alleged, disgusting and offensive act.
The police have referred to the ‘strong case’ against him and it is hard to find even a single ray of light on which to pin hopes that this entire saga ends as some sort of misunderstanding.
From the outside and considering the specifics of the allegation, it does not look good.
However, both the alleged victim and de Belin are human beings with the right to be heard and their viewpoints considered by an authority for which our society has the utmost respect.
The determination will be made by those with all matter of evidence and knowledge at their disposal. The media will play a role and the public will shape and reshape its opinions as the trial unfolds.
The NRL will be watching closely, knowing that 2019 will long be remembered as the year that, after a litany of love tap punishments, it was ‘forced’ to take a firmer stand against the boofheads that bring the game of rugby league into disrepute.
Jack de Belin. (AAP Image/Darren Pateman)
I use the word ‘forced’ with full intent, believing that the cultures of drinking, entitlement and misogyny have never been taken seriously enough by the powers at be.
The bubble within which players have lived for so long has finally been pricked and the fallout is considerable.
Sadly for the game, the ever shifting line in the sand only took permanent root when the public had reached a point of finality.
Hence the NRL’s new ‘tough’ stance. That stance now demands a higher standard and potentially lays out far sterner repercussions for players who fail to act like that increasingly difficult creature to locate; a decent man.
I’m disappointed that it took so long and angry that it was an outraged public that proved the catalyst, however, at least the governing body got to the right place in the end. De Belin’s case plays an important role in the new line taken by the NRL.
With criminal charges pending, the body has expressed its intent to stand players down from their duties at its discretion. Whilst not having taken this step in de Belin’s case due to the pending enactment of their ‘no fault – stand down’ policy, it appears likely the NRL will when given the chance.
De Belin has responded in kind and the question over the legality of standing down a still innocent man will be decided in the Federal Court in Sydney when the case resumes on March 12.
As de Belin fights for his right to take to the field with his mates while he faces aggravated sexual assault charges later in the year, it strikes me that his dispute with the NRL should not even exist.
The NRL, its fans and de Belin himself all want the Blues representative on the field. However, it the St George Illawarra Dragons’ desire for that to happen that has led us to this point.
What the club seems willing to overlook is the modern reality of their existence as a brand. It is a cringe worthy term yet everything is a brand these days. Businesses are brands, sports are brands even personalities speak of their image as a brand.
NRL CEO Todd Greenberg. (Photo: MAtt King/Getty Images)
Constant customer feedback is sought to protect the brand; to ensure that the feelings associated with the brand are positive and connote ideas of success, credibility and status.
The Dragons appear content for their brand to play second fiddle to the potential success of the team.
Every NRL club has a salary cap of $9.6 million to pay the players on their list. Each member of the top thirty is entitled to a minimum wage of $105,000, not to mention endorsements and third party deals accepted by top end players.
An average of 16,909 fans attended Dragons matches in 2018 and at the time of writing 12,226 people had invested in club memberships for the upcoming season. Those numbers are staggering and merely a 16th of the overall revenue and turnover within the game.
The sad reality for de Belin is that the Dragons brand is trashed by perception at the minute.
Is it somewhat unfair? Potentially, yet the prudent call is for the club to stand de Belin down; offer support where required and monitor his mental health carefully as he grapples with an uncertain future.
It is an unfortunate by-product of professional sport, yet a position of integrity in fairness to all parties would be for the Dragons to relieve de Belin of his duties and allow justice to take its natural course. With the key role the Dragons have played in the birth of WNRL, this position is even more compelling.
It is not uncommon for business to stand down employees pending litigation. In many years of teaching I saw several colleagues removed from institutions after rather wild and fanciful allegations were made against them.
No doubt de Belin feels the new rule will be unfair. However, it is the correct course of action in these matters.
It is a shame the Dragons have failed to take the prudent path and subsequently forced the NRL’s hand. However, I wonder how many clubs would protect their brand and stand down a player in similar circumstances?
I would guess, none!
Roost 66
Roar Rookie
The Dragons could have 'nipped all this in the bud', had they had the brains, to "put JDeb on the shelf" till this was sorted in the courts.... No , they chose the total embarrassment route. A good club management goes a long way ... unlike St.Merge.
Forty Twenty
Roar Rookie
All the talk about civil law and the NRL being able to do whatever they like has dried up a bit from the rabble. All very well to appease the sponsors and the pitchforkers but if you aren’t acting fairly then maybe someone drags the NRL before the highest courts and gives them a good touch up. I’ve got a feeling that they’ve already said and done things which are going to cause them a bit of grief in the courts. Repeatedly using terms like no fault and presumption of innocence doesn’t let you off the hook when you treat someone as if they are already a bit on the guilty side. The angry words and retrospective introduction of rules might come back to haunt this mob.
Stuart Thomas
Expert
Nick
Roar Guru
People have opinions and after looking at the information around the case that has already been presented in court, public perception would undoubtedly be formed. The common man, and especially the common journalist (read anyone in the major papers) have refrained from expressing such a profound opinion until both sides were heard. I agree entirely on brand protection, because that is based on "ifs".
Forty Twenty
Roar Rookie
If anyone wants to read what some top legal people think of the JDB case, google ''Footballers Have Rights too'' The Spectator .
RbbAnonymous
Roar Rookie
I don't agree with the premise of the article. Every single person in our society has certain freedoms and rights that for me at least are untenable. One of these is the presumption of innocence. That means Jack de Belin should be allowed to play unless he is found guilty before a court of law. To do so otherwise would be skirting on dangerous territory, not just for de Belin but for everyone. If everyone feels that the NRL should view themselves as judge, jury and executioner then who else should we allow this power. Should we allow it for your place of work, how about your doctor or perhaps the police, see what I am getting at here. Lastly there is already a process in place for what de Belin may or may not have done wrong and the police and the courts are going through that process. As difficult as it for the NRL and their image this should be secondary to going through the normal process of finding out if a man is guilty or not. The same process that saw Brett Stewart proven innocent when he was going through the same situation. So let's just take a deep breath and allow de Belin to play and throw the book at him if and when he is found guilty.
Stuart Thomas
Expert
I am also the common man, not sure why you would think I felt otherwise. People have opinions and after looking at the information around the case that has already been presented in court, public perception would undoubtedly be formed. That doesn't mean guilt, that is the role of the courts to determine, however I think the 'no-fault stand-down policy' soon to be implemented by the NRL is specifically designed to stand players down when incidents arise that don't 'look good'. Hence the discussion on brand protection. I disagree with your premise that saying something doesn't look good is akin to a judgement of guilt. If the allegation is accurate it certainly doesn't look good. If it is false, then the truth will come to light and an innocent man freed. Pretty sure I expressed a hope that that was to be the case in the opening line. Apologies if you find that line of thinking condescending, certainly not intended to be.
Nick
Roar Guru
And don't use this common man argument. It's insulting to us. You are not above us, you are the common man as well. And the common man knows enough about the legal system to reserve opinions until both sides present arguments. An incredibly condescending post.
Nick
Roar Guru
Yes, But you made a judgement before hearing his side. Read any other article on this. No one - and I mean no one - wrote "this doesn't look good"... they are not in a position to say it. Nor are you.
Papi Smurf
Roar Rookie
Sadly, I would guess it would depend on which player is involved and their importance to the team. Certainly the Broncos didn't stand James Roberts down after 3 successive separate accusations of common assault in a 3 month period. Hey Nat? Like you said, just a bit of Saturday fun and games but I won't go into that here and now. ;-) Anyway, THAT is the kind of hypocrisy and double standard that needs to be kept out of the game (i.e. deciding on whether a player should be stood down or not depending on their celebrity status within the game and how important they are to the team). Does anyone really believe that Cam Smith, Cooper Cronk or Johnathan Thurston (while he was playing) would have been stood down ahead of a court appearance based solely on an accusation? You are kidding yourself if you think they would. Even the Rabbitohs failed to stand Sam Burgess down over allegations which were later disproved. There needs to be consistency but also in how any rule is applied and it should not take personalities into account but neither should it be a system that can be manipulated by the public into forcing the NRL to make a knee-jerk reaction that deprives players of their basic rights.
Nick
Roar Guru
Actually the question why socialismhad anything to do with the NRL sliding down a socialist dictatorship? Totalitarian maybe...but totalitarianism isn't exclusive to socialism. Don't threaten people with guns and bullets btw. Show a little class...
Papi Smurf
Roar Rookie
Testimony and statutory declarations often get holes punched through them under a rigorous and aggressive cross-examination duecer. Sometimes there is also forensic evidence or witnesses come forward. Sometimes perpetrators of a crime brag to friends or others overhear these unwitting confessions. You have to have faith in the system otherwise the choice is between the Salem witch trials and vigilante mob justice.
Papi Smurf
Roar Rookie
"Papi , Stve eng or whatever Rabbit you used to be" Is that a swipe at me Jimbo? Unexpected, I must say when we are both in the trenches fighting the good fight together. If so perhaps you need to remember which if us lead the charge over this issue. But common sense and common decency still has to prevail and extend the same sympathy and rights to the women who make these allegations lest we risk punishing victims twice! Fair enough?
Big Daddy
Guest
I actually did read it and have no problem with her comments. Also listened to Catherine Lumby the NRL gender advisor who had the opposite view. Also listened to Paul Conlon and Catherine Lumby who did disagree so not every one from every legal or professional background will agree on this subject. BTW there was a poll taken on 2gb of about 1000 people and 75% said he shouldn't play and 25% did so everyone is not in agreeance on this site or anywhere else.
Stuart Thomas
Expert
Fair point and despite his frustration, he did follow the wise course of action that I'm sure Adam laid out for him. As unfair as the situation may be, huffing and puffing doesn't work. He handled it well and his integrity was proven in the end. As you say the NRL and a few others were made to look bad. De Belin would be wise to take the same approach. If he is confident in his innocence, egg will fall on other faces in due course. We may disagree on that, but that's okay. Have a cracking weekend mate.
Papi Smurf
Roar Rookie
You are right FT. No one here knows. Everyone is just guessing and posturing. There are only 3 people that know the truth mate and a skillful and rigorous cross-examination of all 3 parties and a closer examination of their stories under pressure should get us much closer to the truth than this forum ever will.
peeeko
Roar Guru
Yeah akimbo you are right I’m sure his wife is fine with all of this.
Forty Twenty
Roar Rookie
Stuart , he did not realise the right thing to do was to be 'stepped' aside , he had entirely the opposite view, he said he should have been afforded the same presumption of innocence that SKD was afforded at the time. I believe he is still after an apology of sorts from the NRl and for them to fess up that they did the wrong thing. To treat a true pillar of society in Hazem like they did was a disgrace and that is his view as well. Saying they respect the presumption of innocence is pure lip service. They didn't treat him as if he was innocent at all and they are are making the same mistake with JDB . His ex wife at the time treated him with the respect that he deserved but the NRL were a disgrace. His acceptance that life can be unfair in no way excuses the NRL.
eagleJack
Roar Guru
I hope you are right soapit. I guess I remain a sceptic having watched a close mate go through it before. Despite the fact the “victim” in his case had falsely accused 2 others before, with no result. The main issue is that the majority of victims don’t ever come forward. Which is a tragedy, as many blame themselves for what happened. So when one does, a stance of believe first and have the evidence fit into the narrative, is taken. But perhaps the NRL have upped the ante on the police to be better. We aren’t talking about a 4 week suspension any longer. This will now be atleast a year out of the game, which has the potential to end a career. For those that live to deceive they won’t even care if the player is then acquitted after 18mths. They got what they wanted. A key player on the sidelines for nearly 2 seasons.
soapit
Roar Guru
is there any evidence thats happening?