Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 4 of 29 FirstFirst 123456781424 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 718

Thread: Ben Barba?

  1. #76
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,876
    Rep Power
    22

    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.
    There is no official written statement from the NRL or RL though to clear the ambiguity, as it stands at the moment it's a 24 match ban kindly topped up by the RL.
    I,m suprised Barba,s agent has not asked for clarification, wouldn't,t surprise me if the NRL want to keep the situation "hanging" in a vindictive manner.

  2. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    446
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by St Willy View Post
    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
    I think they were referring to the RU. I don't think they ever expected him to end up in SL.

  3. #78
    Starting A Programme Collection Oldham_Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Oldham
    Posts
    969
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I don't think it's been mentioned anywhere yet, but surely this would fall under the auspices of the RLIF?

    As it's become an International matter, they've been remarkably silent on the issue when they could have pulled the two Leagues together and got it sorted within a week of the issue arising.

    Surely as the arbiters of the game Worldwide, they would have the ultimate say that would have to be upheld by both the RFL and NRL?

    It also highlights the need for standardisation across all Leagues regardless of Country with one set of rules.
    RHINO balls are like Bon Jovi albums - Slippery When Wet

    ST HELENS RFC - Back in business, Thank you Justin Holbrook.

    "I turn the TV volume down because these comedians on SKY are speaking a load of rubbish. They're making a simple game complicated with their long-winded, pointless jargon". Kevin Ashcroft

    ...I think it's a fair slogan for the World Cup. If you come to England and you don't like the weather, TOUGH TITTIES!!! Andrew Voss, PNG vs Samoa, 4:Nov:13

  4. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ferester123 View Post
    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
    That was when everyone believed he'd have to serve a 12 game ban whenever he went back to the NRL

  5. #80
    Upside
    Non Members

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dux View Post
    There's a good deal of assumption going on in this thread.
    And there's more....... the thread is largely speculative, I'll hold my judgement until we learn more

  6. #81
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,339
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Upside View Post
    And there's more....... the thread is largely speculative, I'll hold my judgement until we learn more
    That's what the internet was created for. If you are only allowed to speak about facts, the world would be a whole lot more boring.

  7. #82
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    344
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by STIDDY View Post
    There is no official written statement from the NRL or RL though to clear the ambiguity, as it stands at the moment it's a 24 match ban kindly topped up by the RL.
    I,m suprised Barba,s agent has not asked for clarification, wouldn't,t surprise me if the NRL want to keep the situation "hanging" in a vindictive manner.
    No idea where this '24 match ban' comes from.

    The RFL have confirmed that the ban will apply in Super League. Roger Draper, Super League's executive director, stated so live on TV. Can you get more official than that? It is also backed up by the fact that we are appealing.

    Also, the NRL's position has been widely reported down under. It has been made clear that 'the governing body has said it will recognise Barba being sidelined in Super League as punishment enough, though any reduction by the RFL could affect that stance'.

    These are the positions taken by the RFL and the NRL. People can agree or disagree. I fundamentally disagree because of the wording that the NRL used when they first imposed the ban. I firmly believe that this is what Saints are arguing over. The fact that this is taking so long must mean that the whole issue is not as cut and dried as the two governing bodies first envisaged.

    Saints have a clear case to make in my view. The NRL's incompetence has been exposed.

  8. #83
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,876
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by saint87 View Post
    No idea where this '24 match ban' comes from.

    The RFL have confirmed that the ban will apply in Super League. Roger Draper, Super League's executive director, stated so live on TV. Can you get more official than that? It is also backed up by the fact that we are appealing.

    Also, the NRL's position has been widely reported down under. It has been made clear that 'the governing body has said it will recognise Barba being sidelined in Super League as punishment enough, though any reduction by the RFL could affect that stance'.

    These are the positions taken by the RFL and the NRL. People can agree or disagree. I fundamentally disagree because of the wording that the NRL used when they first imposed the ban. I firmly believe that this is what Saints are arguing over. The fact that this is taking so long must mean that the whole issue is not as cut and dried as the two governing bodies first envisaged.

    Saints have a clear case to make in my view. The NRL's incompetence has been exposed.
    I've not seen anything in writing yet, we know the RFL are applying the 12 week ban but there is nothing from the NRL to say the 12 week ban in OZ has been removed and transferred. Its still all a bit ambiguous, if you have confirmed detail can you send the link to it.

  9. #84
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Scouse Don's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Blatherings on That Saints podcast.Back home in St.Helens and in the South stand for service
    Posts
    8,685
    Rep Power
    30

    Default

    My only issue is how come it takes so long to sort this.Surely someone at the RFL just has to pick up the phone? FFS.
    Learned comment from The Don

  10. #85
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,876
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scouse Don View Post
    My only issue is how come it takes so long to sort this.Surely someone at the RFL just has to pick up the phone? FFS.
    Maybe, Nige is on his annual KFC tour of Yorkshire and is unavailable.

  11. #86
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk paulscnthorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    St Helens
    Age
    40
    Posts
    8,592
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    It's quite possible the RFL want the agreement in writing prior to any ban, so they aren't liable of the NRL ban him anyway

  12. #87
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,876
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paulscnthorpe View Post
    It's quite possible the RFL want the agreement in writing prior to any ban, so they aren't liable of the NRL ban him anyway
    I think the RL are "backed into a corner" with the NRL wording confining the ban to the one single competition.

    Reading the Operational Rules on anti doping the RFL are WADA code compliant via NGB the national governing body, the athlete (Barba) would have to be associated with the National Governing Body and hence controlled by the WADA compliance. If this was so then Barba would receive a 2 year ban for each drug offence.
    To have Barba serving a 12 week only ban they would have to amend and create a supplement in the operational rules against the WADA compliance and the RL could become liable for breaking its own regulation in servitude to WADA.

    I get the impression the RFL with the NRL want to implement the ban behind closed doors without Barba being integrated into WADA and avoiding a dispensation of rules and regulations in legality.

  13. #88
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default


    Reading the Operational Rules on anti doping the RFL are WADA code compliant via NGB the national governing body, the athlete (Barba) would have to be associated with the National Governing Body and hence controlled by the WADA compliance. If this was so then Barba would receive a 2 year ban for each drug offence.
    If the drug concerned is 'recreational' and taken 'out of competition' the WADA do not impose a ban. There's countless precedents on this.

  14. #89
    Starting A Programme Collection Oldham_Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Oldham
    Posts
    969
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Just a thought, but does anyone else think that the RFL's inaction is maybe in someway linked to the Solomona issue?

    While different, you can draw certain similar parallels between the two cases, and as such, the RFL may not want to cede the high/moral ground and nullify any possible case by allowing Barba to play while 'banned by the NRL?
    RHINO balls are like Bon Jovi albums - Slippery When Wet

    ST HELENS RFC - Back in business, Thank you Justin Holbrook.

    "I turn the TV volume down because these comedians on SKY are speaking a load of rubbish. They're making a simple game complicated with their long-winded, pointless jargon". Kevin Ashcroft

    ...I think it's a fair slogan for the World Cup. If you come to England and you don't like the weather, TOUGH TITTIES!!! Andrew Voss, PNG vs Samoa, 4:Nov:13

  15. #90
    In The South Stand 49er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    4,224
    Rep Power
    15

    Default

    According to Rugby League Weekly Saints have yet to submit any appeal re the ban to thr RFL.
    If that's true I am not sure what is going on.
    Humans are more concerned with having than being.

  16. #91
    In The South Stand
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,339
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 49er View Post
    According to Rugby League Weekly Saints have yet to submit any appeal re the ban to thr RFL.
    If that's true I am not sure what is going on.
    Strange. They said a couple of times on social media that they hope to have an update on that soon, yet appear to have done nothing. If it's the case that they aren't contesting it, why not just say so, say a sentence at the bottom of a squad announcement or a tweet? I know legal types take a while to respond, but surely they've got the relevant information to have made a decision by now.

  17. #92
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,487
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 49er View Post
    According to Rugby League Weekly Saints have yet to submit any appeal re the ban to thr RFL.
    If that's true I am not sure what is going on.
    I was told by someone at the club that they never intended to launch an official 'appeal'. The club asked for a legal 'clarification'. The difference might be minor and I'm not too sure what the difference actually is, but this must be where the confusion comes from.

    I have no idea whether they have had any legal clarification yet or not.

  18. #93
    In The West Stand
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    5,242
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by forward ref View Post
    I was told by someone at the club that they never intended to launch an official 'appeal'. The club asked for a legal 'clarification'. The difference might be minor and I'm not too sure what the difference actually is, but this must be where the confusion comes from.

    I have no idea whether they have had any legal clarification yet or not.
    The legal clarification will define whether or not theres anything to appeal against. We are (still) in the process of figuring out if he is banned or not. If the conclusion of that clarification is that he IS banned, the club will then make the decision to whether they would like to appeal.

    Is Barba in the country yet?

  19. #94
    In The South Stand warringtonsaint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,046
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldham_Saint View Post
    I don't think it's been mentioned anywhere yet, but surely this would fall under the auspices of the RLIF?

    As it's become an International matter, they've been remarkably silent on the issue when they could have pulled the two Leagues together and got it sorted within a week of the issue arising.

    Surely as the arbiters of the game Worldwide, they would have the ultimate say that would have to be upheld by both the RFL and NRL?

    It also highlights the need for standardisation across all Leagues regardless of Country with one set of rules.
    Whilst I fully agree with your view, the RLIF does what the NRL tell it to do and standardisation is as likely as Big Nige missing a meal.
    "The great fallacy is that the game is first and last about winning. It is nothing of the kind. The game is about glory, it is about doing things in style and with a flourish, about going out and beating the other lot, not waiting for them to die of boredom." Danny Blanchflower.
    Might have been written by a footballer about football - but never a truer word............

  20. #95
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    115
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    This is beyond a joke now.

  21. #96
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk STIDDY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Kingdom of Wigoon
    Posts
    8,876
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magic superbeetle View Post
    The legal clarification will define whether or not theres anything to appeal against. We are (still) in the process of figuring out if he is banned or not. If the conclusion of that clarification is that he IS banned, the club will then make the decision to whether they would like to appeal.

    Is Barba in the country yet?
    If the club are sitting back ready for the RL clarification then they are going to have a long wait, just get the impression that if it was the Goons they would have been been driving down Red Hall Lane by now demanding an answer.

  22. #97
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Stood at the back of Stand B in Knowsley Road
    Posts
    1,884
    Rep Power
    13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by forward ref View Post
    I was told by someone at the club that they never intended to launch an official 'appeal'. The club asked for a legal 'clarification'. The difference might be minor and I'm not too sure what the difference actually is, but this must be where the confusion comes from.

    I have no idea whether they have had any legal clarification yet or not.
    I don't think appeal is the right term, they needed clarification whether the ban only applied to the NRL or rugby league world wide

  23. #98
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    115
    Rep Power
    10

    Default

    It's hard to decide who are the biggest bunch of amateurs, the RFL or Saints board.

  24. #99
    In The South Stand Tabasco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Rivington Road, St Helens
    Posts
    2,903
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vince St Clair View Post
    It's hard to decide who are the biggest bunch of amateurs, the RFL or Saints board.
    What inside information do you have to support this? What actions have Saints taken so far and what has been the outcome of those?

  25. #100
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Belgian Saint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    11,188
    Rep Power
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tabasco View Post
    What inside information do you have to support this? What actions have Saints taken so far and what has been the outcome of those?
    Some kind of acknowledgement that they are working on the issue would be an improvement.

Posting Permissions

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