Never one to miss an opportunity to criticise the Parramatta Eels, earlier this week Ray Hadley called the club a ‘zoo’ with no discipline.
(In that same interview, Hadley also called Eels CEO Jim Sarantinos ‘Jim Alphabet’ but I’ll leave that alone because casual racism is a topic for another day.)
Hadley’s comments were in response to the allegations levelled at Eels playmaker Dylan Brown, who was arrested and charged with five counts of sexual touching last Saturday night.
On Wednesday, Brown fronted court where his matter was mentioned. His lawyer stated the evidence did not support the five instances of sexual touching without consent. The matter has now been adjourned and will be mentioned again on June 28.
(Photo by Brendon Thorne/Getty Images)
Brown’s alleged behaviour is extremely disappointing, but Hadley’s view is far too narrow.
Attend any pub, club or nightclub and this sort of behaviour takes place every weekend. This type of behaviour, whilst concerning, is at the lower end of the spectrum, but it can escalate over time.
While a disrespect of women doesn’t always result in violence, all violence against women begins with disrespect so also relevant to this conversation are some of the shocking statistics about sexual and domestic violence in this country.
Just because the behaviour is not out of the ordinary, it does not make the behaviour acceptable; quite the contrary. If the Eels are a ‘zoo’, then my view is this is reflective of the broader ‘zoo’ in which all of us live in every day.
So what do we do about it and what is the NRL’s role?
I know for certain all NRL players (and players in the lower grades) receive plenty of education about a wide range of topics including respectful relationships, substance abuse and the competition’s code of conduct.
The average NRL player will receive more training on these topics than most other Australian adults. But with each club providing care to between 300-400 athletes, it is almost inevitable that some will slip through the cracks or simply, do the wrong thing.
Education is part of the solution, but it will never completely solve the problem.
We live in a world where athletes are under more scrutiny than ever. Almost every person has become a ‘newsbreaker’ courtesy of the cameras on our mobile phones.
This reality is something our players need to understand and either accept or choose another profession. It’s irrelevant to me whether it’s fair or not because that won’t change people filming athletes.
Some of those people unfortunately have ulterior motives. This is now part of the job, which they are compensated for, handsomely.
This notoriety can result in several things. It can mean players are grabbed and touched when they are in public. Potentially some of our male and female players are flooded with messages from eager fans on social media, some of which are of a sexual nature.
Some of the younger players in the NRL may not have the maturity to handle this appropriately and for some, they may have a mistaken view that they are invincible.
But they are not. Because every single person has the right to exist in public spaces without being touched without their consent.
In most cases, our players are adults and they need to be accountable for their actions.
That’s why minders are not the answer either. Because it’s not just about ‘protecting’ the players, it is about helping them develop into capable and functional human beings. Giving them minders again absolves them of responsibility and only kicks challenging conversations down the road to when the players retire and are no longer as protected by their clubs (or these minders).
Brown will also be held accountable for his actions and indeed already has.
He will have to face his teammates. Whilst there was not a ‘formal’ ban placed on the players going out during the bye weekend, there was an agreement between the group to ‘lay low’. Brown will need to explain why he made the decision not to.
Jack de Belin was previously stood down by the NRL when he faced serious charges. (Photo by Ian Hitchcock/Getty Images)
Brown will also face more formal consequences. The legal process will continue and it’s my view that he should be sanctioned by the Eels and the NRL regardless of the outcome of the court case for bringing the game into disrepute. These sanctions will no doubt include a financial penalty.
Brown will also spend time on the sidelines and has also been stood down by the NRL under its no fault stand down policy. He will be unable to play until he receives further clearance from the NRL.
When the NRL introduced the ‘No Fault Stand Down’ Policy, it was to help address situations like this. The NRL used its discretion to stand down Brown, as the charges levelled against him do not carry a maximum jail sentence of 11 years, which is when the policy kicks in.
Given this decision and the implication of a tough stance on offences involving women, perhaps the policy needs to change to cover offences with less jail time.
But it’s not just about punishment, because part of the process must be rehabilitation and giving Brown the opportunity to make some changes because at the very least he went against the wishes of his teammates and has brought unnecessary attention on the club.
There are plenty of players in the NRL over the last decade that have misbehaved in a similar way to Brown. This is a chance for him to learn, grow and make some changes; or perhaps to find another job.
Time will tell which path he chooses.
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
And JDB is innocent, or did I miss the part where a jury of his peers found him guilty ?
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
Yes, but todays guilty pleading does not justify the stand down policy. It puts undue pressure on players to enter guilty pleas that they might otherwise contest because they want to get back playing. Had he pled not guilty and it had gone to trial, he might not have seen a court room for 12 months, and therefore missed another 12 months of footy. No, the policy is prejudicial, it’s the textbook definition. PVL & Abdo have got a lot to answer for here.
Grem
Roar Rookie
Yep! Typical defence from these people – “I didn’t do it.” Same story as The Hayne Plane, TC Robati, JDB, etc. And today he admits he did. So many victims are assumed guilty because of these gutless liars.
wilbas
Roar Rookie
I've always said since the Daniel Anderson debacle that something was wrong at Parramatta.Anderson lifted the Warriors into a grand final and then shifts over to Parramatta and gets them into a grand final.. The following year they started very badly and the coach puts a drinking ban on the players .So the players group erupts and next minute Mr Anderson is on his horse and booted.Blokes Like Nathan Hindmarsh in the players group had more control on the club then coach and management and we saw when Gould took over Penrith he got rid of some of their established stars and everybody spun out saying what is he doing punting the likes of Luke Lewis ect. You can not have the inmates running the institution.Sometimes these influencers have to go to build a winning culture.
wilbas
Roar Rookie
These matters have to have their day in court before anybody passes judgement and I believe that although the players have higher profile then that standard is not across the workforce with Joe nobody getting suspended from his work. On the domestic violence front I lean towards the great Saint and the creator of the first women’s refuge in the world,Erin Pizzey. She was driven out of the UK with bomb threats by marxist feminists because she had the experience and knowledge to say that domestic violence was not just men and women contribute to over a third of cases.Many children suffer the scourge of a parent whipping into them and many times that can be father or mother. These players because they take on the biggest men on the field sometimes enter the social strata believing they are fearless and added to that is a belief they are desired as icons of desire by the opposite sex. The moral of the story is today these guys have profiles and there are many who would like to either challenge them or scandalize them.At the very least in todays world these players have to be mindful of those pitfalls…We saw Josh Reynolds get played like a school boy stooge. We have seen lads breeding unsavory cultures around sex that they would not accept if it was directed at their sisters/mother’s or friends. I don’t know what is the extent of this case.I have not seen video but I do know it is not wise to be even around the fire BECAUSE the allegation is enough to burn the individual and game..
Nick
Roar Rookie
Yes it is. But I haven't the time or patience to try to explain basic legal theory. But I do agree that him suing anyone is a waste of time. It would also be a waste of time even if the jury wasn't hung.
Brendon Waldron
Roar Pro
No it isn't.
Nick
Roar Rookie
The charges have been withdrawn. That's an acquittal. End of story.
Nick
Roar Rookie
That's wrong Brett. The federal court upheld the NRL position on this
Nick
Roar Rookie
I think you should carefully re-read your employment contract, Brett. It would be most unusual if the employer didn't retain the ability to stand you down for reasons unrelated to your job. Not saying you are wrong, just saying your position is...unusual.
Nick
Roar Rookie
The presumption of innocence isn’t just a legal concept. It’s a basic standard of social conduct. Agree with all you wrote but that sentence. That's aspirational. There are dozens of areas of society where the presumption of innocence simply doesn't hold any carriage. Schools being the most obvious example. I'm sure we can all recite many examples of when we were wrongly given detention or punishment by teachers. Where was our ability to stand trial then?
Nick
Roar Rookie
what if Brown goes on to win the Dally M and lead Parra to a premiership and then gets jailed for these charges? That’s a terrible outcome for the game It is absolutely inconceivable that a first time offender would go to gaol for this. a fine, community service and some mandatory training are in order here. People need to stop thinking that we run some kind of oppressive police state. At the absolute worst, he will get a suspended sentence. Malevolent people belong in prison. Like Hayne. Brown is an idiot, and idiots don't go to prison.
Nick
Roar Rookie
Technically he's not being paid to play NRL at all. His contract his actually a retainer. He technically is being paid to not play for anyone else other than the Eels.
Brett Allen
Roar Rookie
They don’t have the authority to pass judgement on his guilt. That’s the job of legal system.
Dionysus
Roar Rookie
OK thanks for the explanation Mary. I thought that the beauty of this rule was that the decision of when to apply it was effectively made by police charging decisions. I wasn't aware that the NRL had reserved for itself a role of judge and jury. I think the rule is weaker for this inclusion.
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
In England making false accusations of crepe can put you in goal. In Australia it will get you 3 million dollars. Souths need to dump Albanese now.
Panthers
Roar Rookie
Beg to differ. Depends on what you’re supposed to have done , or what you’re charged with . Also depends a lot on the job you’re working. If you think that you would not be stood down from your job , if you were possibly involved in a crime that’s in the public eye . Before the case is heard in court . You’re fooling yourself. If it doesn’t reflect well on the company that you work for to have you there . They’ll find a way of not having you around, at least until the case is heard. Doesn’t matter what you think about it.
Panthers
Roar Rookie
Are police who are charged with an offence stood down from their workplace before their case is heard ? That is the case in many professions. It’s also not a good for the game , to have players who face possible gaol sentences running around still playing. Before their cases are heard in court. Once they stood down one player in this way , before their case was heard. The die had been cast . So all who follow face the same procedure. Like it or not.
Robbo
Roar Rookie
Yes I'd agree with that - which makes my point - rarely any legal action taken against the accuser if its not proven. Its a strange world
Gray-Hand
Roar Rookie
Potentially yes. But a court wouldn’t let something like this get in the way of a trial. Way worse instances of the poisoning of a jury pool get through without preventing a trial taking place.