Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 3 of 29 FirstFirst 12345671323 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 718

Thread: Ben Barba?

  1. #51
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,358
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Barba should be free to play as its an NRL ban only.

    If he had stayed in RU for longer lets say a season or two with Toulon then joined Saints would he be banned from RL then? I very much doubt it. Part of the trouble I think is that the ban was only issued in the Autumn last year and the RFL are all too easy to fall into line with the NRL.

    Ironically, the RFL's own sanction for cocaine use outside of the season is in fact much softer and less tough then the NRL. It is actually an internal disciplinary matter for the club. http://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/Socia...inal%20PDF.pdf

  2. #52
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,849
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Think he should incur the ban really as its a violation against sport in general. If it was just an nrl ban then Barba, which may have already occurred to him, can make a living elsewhere and stick two fingers up to the nrl. Cocaine use, in general, is used more prolifically in the UK, since 2014, and it is a dangerous drug. Tests have shown that although athletes believe it to be performance enhancing it actually has the opposite affect. Ive read on an addiction site that the drug can stay in the system for 3-4 days after sporadic use or for 12 days following a binge. So, whos to say if Barba has used it or not during the season if he didn't get tested then? Maybe not if no evidence of poor form...but?

  3. #53
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk The Yellow Giraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11,763
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Houghwood Saint View Post
    Think he should incur the ban really as its a violation against sport in general. If it was just an nrl ban then Barba, which may have already occurred to him, can make a living elsewhere and stick two fingers up to the nrl. Cocaine use, in general, is used more prolifically in the UK, since 2014, and it is a dangerous drug. Tests have shown that although athletes believe it to be performance enhancing it actually has the opposite affect. Ive read on an addiction site that the drug can stay in the system for 3-4 days after sporadic use or for 12 days following a binge. So, whos to say if Barba has used it or not during the season if he didn't get tested then? Maybe not if no evidence of poor form...but?
    I don't believe for one second that any athletes would believe it to be performance enhancing or take it for that reason.
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

  4. #54
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Leigh
    Posts
    1,209
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Houghwood Saint View Post
    Think he should incur the ban really as its a violation against sport in general. If it was just an nrl ban then Barba, which may have already occurred to him, can make a living elsewhere and stick two fingers up to the nrl. Cocaine use, in general, is used more prolifically in the UK, since 2014, and it is a dangerous drug. Tests have shown that although athletes believe it to be performance enhancing it actually has the opposite affect. Ive read on an addiction site that the drug can stay in the system for 3-4 days after sporadic use or for 12 days following a binge. So, whos to say if Barba has used it or not during the season if he didn't get tested then? Maybe not if no evidence of poor form...but?
    That is utter bolllocks mate.

  5. #55
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    I hope that the club or the RFL have sought a legal confirmation that the NRL will not stick the 12 game ban back on Barba when he goes back there. If they do, and Barba ends up with a 24 game ban we would have every right to seek financial compensation from the NRL and RFL for not being able to have Barba on the field.

    If the NRL have given such confirmation then we should just take the ban and lump it. He will be ripping it up in training close to his return, and if we get him back for the last 3 Super 8 games he could potentially be so committed that those 3 games could be the difference between sneaking 4th or missing out. Knowing that we have him coming back for the final 3 games may also make a difference to how the team approaches the Super 8 games as well.

    It's not all bad IMO. We will get him back really determined to rip it up, and if he does wish to go back to the NRL in 2019 we will have a superstar ripping the league apart selling himself to NRL sides. We could potentially have a marquee season from him next season, and if he goes early we get a fee. For a player like him it will come down to commitment and desire, so this ban may work in our favour in terms of his attitude and desire to play well.

  6. #56
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,849
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drake920 View Post
    That is utter bolllocks mate.
    Its only from what ive just read. http://www.michaelshouse.com/blog/at...n-their-sport/

  7. #57
    Learning All The Songs St Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Haydock
    Posts
    1,273
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    I don't get it personally. He has been handed a 12 game ban from NRL competition. He's hasn't been banned from playing rugby league. As far as I have it, the NRL want him to serve a 12 game ban in their competition regardless of whatever ban he serves here. So effectively he could be punished twice for the same incident.

    Saints should just have the balls to put him in the team when fit and deal with the RFL whenever they actually have something to say.



    Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
    RFL Championship / Super League (17) - 1931–32, 1952–53, 1958–59, 1965–66, 1969–70, 1970–71, 1974–75, 1996, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2006, 2014, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022

    Challenge Cup (13) - 1955–56, 1960–61, 1965–66, 1971–72, 1975–76, 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2021

    World Club Challenge (3) - 2001, 2007, 2023

    League Leader's Shield (9) - 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2022

  8. #58
    In The West Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    5,572
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    There's a good deal of assumption going on in this thread.

    Firstly, has anyone actually seen the written terms of the ban? We have an announcement that was made to the press at the time of the incident which stated that his ban would commence 'when his overseas sporting commitments are completed'. But that may not be the precise wording of the official ban itself.

    Secondly, there is an assumption that the RFL either a) isn't doing anything, or b) will just do whatever the NRL tells it to. If anything I think the prolonged silence is an indication that things are being done. If the RFL was going to do whatever the NRL told it to, and if, as has been suggested, the NRL want him to serve his ban here, then the matter would have been resolved as soon as we signed him. It seems that whatever is happening is taking some negotiation.

    Thirdly, there's the suggestion that Barba will have to serve his ban twice if he sits out twelve games here. Is there any evidence at all to support this?

  9. #59
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    There's a good deal of assumption going on in this thread.

    Firstly, has anyone actually seen the written terms of the ban? We have an announcement that was made to the press at the time of the incident which stated that his ban would commence 'when his overseas sporting commitments are completed'. But that may not be the precise wording of the official ban itself.

    Secondly, there is an assumption that the RFL either a) isn't doing anything, or b) will just do whatever the NRL tells it to. If anything I think the prolonged silence is an indication that things are being done. If the RFL was going to do whatever the NRL told it to, and if, as has been suggested, the NRL want him to serve his ban here, then the matter would have been resolved as soon as we signed him. It seems that whatever is happening is taking some negotiation.

    Thirdly, there's the suggestion that Barba will have to serve his ban twice if he sits out twelve games here. Is there any evidence at all to support this?
    Good post, agreed, and I don't think I've seen anything added that wasn't already said on the previously locked thread

  10. #60
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    873
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Just would be good to get clarification wherever that comes from. We've had one long thread already before and this one now about Ben Barba and most of the talk has been about the ban.

    Would be great if we could start to look forward to talking about this talented player coming into our competition and our team - whenever that may be. It's one of the most exciting signings in recent times - certainly for Saints, if not the whole league. Shame we can't get excited about that with the lack of clarity from the NRL/RFL.

  11. #61
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    There's a good deal of assumption going on in this thread.

    Firstly, has anyone actually seen the written terms of the ban? We have an announcement that was made to the press at the time of the incident which stated that his ban would commence 'when his overseas sporting commitments are completed'. But that may not be the precise wording of the official ban itself.

    Secondly, there is an assumption that the RFL either a) isn't doing anything, or b) will just do whatever the NRL tells it to. If anything I think the prolonged silence is an indication that things are being done. If the RFL was going to do whatever the NRL told it to, and if, as has been suggested, the NRL want him to serve his ban here, then the matter would have been resolved as soon as we signed him. It seems that whatever is happening is taking some negotiation.

    Thirdly, there's the suggestion that Barba will have to serve his ban twice if he sits out twelve games here. Is there any evidence at all to support this?
    All true and valid points.

  12. #62
    In The South Stand Sean Day's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,672
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    The longer this goes on makes me think the RFL may adopt a neutral stance and say that he has already missed x number of games and they are happy for him to play, or perhaps add a couple more on. The longer they leave it the less furore their their decision causes, The RFL guy at magic more or less said they were open to dialogue/appeal from Saints

  13. #63
    In The West Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    5,572
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by St. Christopher View Post
    Just would be good to get clarification wherever that comes from. We've had one long thread already before and this one now about Ben Barba and most of the talk has been about the ban.
    I totally understand the desire to know what's going on ... I want to know too. But if negotiations between the club and the two governing bodies are ongoing then nobody will be in any position to issue any clarifications.

  14. #64
    In The West Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    5,572
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean Day View Post
    The longer this goes on makes me think the RFL may adopt a neutral stance and say that he has already missed x number of games and they are happy for him to play, or perhaps add a couple more on. The longer they leave it the less furore their their decision causes, The RFL guy at magic more or less said they were open to dialogue/appeal from Saints
    FWIW, and for the sake of pure speculation, I predict the outcome will be a deal according to which he serves 6 games here and 6 games if/when he returns to the NRL.

  15. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    and if he does wish to go back to the NRL in 2019 we will have a superstar ripping the league apart selling himself to NRL sides. We could potentially have a marquee season from him next season
    If you think that Barba, having served his NRL ban in SL, will still be at TTWS in 2018, you need to give your head a wobble.

    Keeping him at Saints for any reasonable time will need the NRL to insist he needs to serve a 12 match ban in the NRL after registering with an NRL club.

    As a club, we should be forcing the hand of the RFL to let him play for us and NOT allowing him to serve his ban in SL. Otherwise, he'll play 4 games us, bugger off back to Oz, and our club will be a laughing stock, with all the six-fingered freaks from that shithole over the hill where they talk funny* ripping the p*ss out of us.


    * applies to both wi*an and Yaaarksher equally

  16. #66
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Macclesfield
    Age
    46
    Posts
    8,428
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Webbo Again View Post
    If you think that Barba, having served his NRL ban in SL, will still be at TTWS in 2018, you need to give your head a wobble.
    I would assume the club and the coach would not have made an attempt to snare Barba under the impression he may play 3 or 4 games for us before selling him. Yes, you could argue it was clever to sign him if that were the case because we would get a decent fee and make a decent amount of money from nothing, but I would think the plan would be for that to happen in 12 months and not now, hence the 2 1/2 year deal instead of 1 1/2.

    NRL clubs make deals for the following season pretty early in the year, and Barba would demand a big wage which would rule most clubs out at even this early stage because their playing squad for 2018 will be sorted close to the cap limit. Also, most clubs down there will be hesitant about making a move for the player without him proving that he isn't a potential risk on a big wage. That will involve him playing games for us and keeping his nose clean in 2018.

    I would be amazed if he is still here for 2019, but equally amazed if he is not here for 2018.

  17. #67
    In The West Stand Dux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Liverpool
    Posts
    5,572
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gray77 View Post
    I would assume the club and the coach would not have made an attempt to snare Barba under the impression he may play 3 or 4 games for us before selling him. Yes, you could argue it was clever to sign him if that were the case because we would get a decent fee and make a decent amount of money from nothing, but I would think the plan would be for that to happen in 12 months and not now, hence the 2 1/2 year deal instead of 1 1/2.

    NRL clubs make deals for the following season pretty early in the year, and Barba would demand a big wage which would rule most clubs out at even this early stage because their playing squad for 2018 will be sorted close to the cap limit. Also, most clubs down there will be hesitant about making a move for the player without him proving that he isn't a potential risk on a big wage. That will involve him playing games for us and keeping his nose clean in 2018.

    I would be amazed if he is still here for 2019, but equally amazed if he is not here for 2018.
    I agree. I think NRL clubs will want him to prove that he's got his act together before taking a risk on him.

  18. #68
    Starting A Programme Collection
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Newton le willows
    Posts
    700
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    I agree. I think NRL clubs will want him to prove that he's got his act together before taking a risk on him.
    Also I think uprooting his kids and putting them in schools over here knowing he's going to go back after a couple of months isn't a move he would surely put his family through

  19. #69
    Got A Replica Shirt
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Newton le willows
    Posts
    60
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Hopefully we have got a coach who will get the best out of him.

  20. #70
    Got A Replica Shirt
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Newton le willows
    Posts
    60
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Sorry to ask this but is this a worldwide ban or an actual NRL ban.

  21. #71
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk The Yellow Giraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11,763
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The villain View Post
    Sorry to ask this but is this a worldwide ban or an actual NRL ban.

    Please tell me this is a wind up?
    NEVER WRITE OFF THE SAINTS

  22. #72
    In The South Stand Paul Newlove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,655
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The villain View Post
    Sorry to ask this but is this a worldwide ban or an actual NRL ban.
    I don't know Mr Wood, but surely Nigel you should be telling us.....

  23. #73
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,338
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The villain View Post
    Sorry to ask this but is this a worldwide ban or an actual NRL ban.
    It was announced by the NRL's CEO as a ban that 'will being once he has completed his overseas sporting commitments'. Therefore a lot of a fans reckon we should just play him, as there appears a hole big enough to drive a legal case through. The RFL reckon it's a normal ban and are applying it, Saints are gently querying it. No one is saying anything, so we're making a load of conjectures and putting two and two together and suggesting taking the RFL on in court. Others are being all tree-huggy and suggesting we just sit there and wait 12 games for the NRL to say the ban didn't actually start. I reckon we should get the NRL and RFL on a conference call and thrash it out, but Mike Rush is probably using it as an excuse to have another holiday in Australia and go visit them for a coffee.

  24. #74
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    344
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by St Willy View Post
    I don't get it personally. He has been handed a 12 game ban from NRL competition. He's hasn't been banned from playing rugby league. As far as I have it, the NRL want him to serve a 12 game ban in their competition regardless of whatever ban he serves here. So effectively he could be punished twice for the same incident.

    Saints should just have the balls to put him in the team when fit and deal with the RFL whenever they actually have something to say.

    Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
    That isn't the case. The NRL have publicly said that they are happy for Barba to sit out 12 games over here and that would therefore mean that he has served the ban in full.

    As far as the RFL are concerned, they have said from the outset that the two competitions have an agreement which means that they both honour each others bans/sanctions. In the build up to the Wigan game on Sky, Roger Draper confirmed this and said that there is an appeal process in place and that Saints are fully entitled to follow that process if they so wish.

    Saints are not going to take the risk of being docked points by just putting him in the team.

    I personally believe that Saints are still arguing over the wording of the ban issued by the NRL. Earlier in the week, Saints said that they "are continuing to work with all parties in relation to his NRL ban". I don't think that it is a coincidence that the club chose to phrase it in that way.

  25. #75
    Learning All The Songs St Willy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Haydock
    Posts
    1,273
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saint87 View Post
    That isn't the case. The NRL have publicly said that they are happy for Barba to sit out 12 games over here and that would therefore mean that he has served the ban in full.

    As far as the RFL are concerned, they have said from the outset that the two competitions have an agreement which means that they both honour each others bans/sanctions. In the build up to the Wigan game on Sky, Roger Draper confirmed this and said that there is an appeal process in place and that Saints are fully entitled to follow that process if they so wish.

    Saints are not going to take the risk of being docked points by just putting him in the team.

    I personally believe that Saints are still arguing over the wording of the ban issued by the NRL. Earlier in the week, Saints said that they "are continuing to work with all parties in relation to his NRL ban". I don't think that it is a coincidence that the club chose to phrase it in that way.
    To quote the NRL;

    NRL CEO Todd Greenberg declared that Barba's 12-match ban for a second positive illicit drugs test would not start until he had completed any overseas playing commitments.

    Surely that means Super League right? I'm more than happy for him to serve his 12 game ban here but why has this yet to be confirmed?

    Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
    RFL Championship / Super League (17) - 1931–32, 1952–53, 1958–59, 1965–66, 1969–70, 1970–71, 1974–75, 1996, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2006, 2014, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022

    Challenge Cup (13) - 1955–56, 1960–61, 1965–66, 1971–72, 1975–76, 1996, 1997, 2001, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2021

    World Club Challenge (3) - 2001, 2007, 2023

    League Leader's Shield (9) - 2002, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2022

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •