Chapel House Motor Company Limited Advertising Banner
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 60 of 60

Thread: Breaking news.....Barba gets life ban

  1. #51
    In The West Stand Ralph Fridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Around
    Posts
    5,517
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JonNgog View Post
    Shocked by some of the comments here. The NRL has been riddled with off field issues in recent years which have seriously tainted their efforts to market the sport to women and young people particularly. Greenberg has been clear recently that he has had enough and will be clamping down on it to save the reputation of the sport. Barba is a repeat offender already on his 10th life. Any sympathy and help should go to his partner and family.
    Financial help? Because he's gone from a probably good contract to no income at all with 4 kids.

    Life might not be all about money but it is certainly a big factor

  2. #52
    WARNING! PIE EATER! BoldMiners's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    4,527
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buddy View Post
    Todd Carney didn't get another chance IIRC. The only difference was the RFL didn't ban him.

    He could always follow Kevin Whitfield's lead (I think it was him anyway) who got banned sine die but became a referee

    Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
    That was Robin Whitfield. Word at the time was Wigan only signed Colin so that his brother wouldn’t be able to ref our games again!

  3. #53
    Learning All The Songs bewareshadows's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    1,921
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    People seem to mistake the requirements for criminal convictions and civil penalties.

    For Barba to be charged by the police requires a level of evidence beyond reasonable doubt. To sack and deregister a player is a civil action. If the player tried to take his employer or registering body to court over breach of contract etc, they would only need to prove on the balance of probabilities that his behaviour was a breach of their rules.

    I doubt the best lawyer in the world could prove on the balance of probabilities that with cctv footage he has not breached his contract and has not breach NRL standards.

  4. #54
    In The North Stand With All The Old Folk Buddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    11,407
    Rep Power
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Belgian Saint View Post
    I think it was Robin Whitfield. Got banned for breaking Derek Noonan's jaw in a late tackle, then turned to reffing.
    Quote Originally Posted by BoldMiners View Post
    That was Robin Whitfield. Word at the time was Wigan only signed Colin so that his brother wouldn’t be able to ref our games again!
    Of course you are both correct

    Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

  5. #55
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Refugee from the fascist state of RLFans
    Posts
    5,853
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Weetabix View Post
    I could be wrong Webbo but I think it's the NRL's Integrity Unit that has viewed the video and independently given it quite a damning verdict so looks like Greenberg isn't alone in stating the severity of it. I am not exactly sure what his level of authority is but he does talk about it being 'within his jurisdiction' to impose such a sanction - presumably conferring with the IU in the process.

    I don't know whether he has a personal agenda with Barba and I can see why people would think that. My feeling is though, with it being such a high profile issue, he'd be taking steps to ensure he was on safe ground before meting out that kind of sanction and you would hope that it's representative of what he saw rather than his personal opinion of the player. We don't actually know what happened but there are unsubstantiated suggestions that it was a physical altercation inside folowed by throwing rocks at her outside. I can understand why viewing that would elicit quite a severe response from someone expected to be a role model.

    I think the professional response from the IU and Greenberg would have been to make a short statement stating the NRL abhors violence against women and takes this matter extremely seriously, and that Barba has been de-registered indefinitely until a full disciplinary hearing takes place.

    Instead, we've had Greenberg making a succession of media appearances spewing soundbites like "Barba needs to find a new vocation", "Barba will never return under my watch" and "There's no place for him"

    It may be that a disciplinary hearing would ultimately ban him for life. But if it does so, it will be because a panel of independent and unbiased experts have carefully considered all the facts of the case and deem it the right decision, and are aware that this level of punishment sets a precedent. It wouldn't be an individual with an apparent grudge making a hasty and emotion-led sweeping decision.

    To add, I've no doubt the NQC have every right - legal and moral - to sack him, and have acted soundly throughout this.

  6. #56
    Got A Season Ticket
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    336
    Rep Power
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Infamous Grouse View Post
    https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/my-...05-p50vu7.html

    A good article from an Aussie journalist.
    I think that’s a pointless article to be honest.

    In the real world (outside of fame and celebrities) employers manage there employee not there families as well. Especially not when the employee has brought shame on the organisation.

    I feel for his partner and kids, I really do, but as to why the NRL should financially support them after sacking there dad/partner I really don’t understand. Do that and your basically removing huge responsibility from the player, the same responsibility every decent family man has.

    For me again this is something Ben should have considered before acting like a total tool.

    It might sound harsh but the Barba’s Family issues are her and his problem, just like they was when he was playing. Ainslie begging for him not to be sacked for the same reasons is also equally weak.

    Bad behaviours have consequences, unfortunately for Ben his impact on 5 other people.

  7. #57
    Learning All The Songs RJM25R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Royton, Oldham
    Posts
    2,098
    Rep Power
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Infamous Grouse View Post
    https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/my-...05-p50vu7.html

    A good article from an Aussie journalist.
    Just read this after the requote above. I think it’s typical liberal hogwash.

    When anyone gets sacked from a job, it’s not the employers responsibility what happens to his family. A Valeter at my showroom got sacked for stealing gear and selling it on EBay to fund a drug habit (recreational use of cocaine, a habit not an addiction) and that doubtlessly had an effect on his family situation (married with 2 young kids)

    He made his bed etc.

    He never got a second chance to steal, but he’d been in trouble for coming in drunk/drugged up in one instance. I dint know where/what he’s doing now but the motor trade is pretty close, so I’d doubt he’s in the motor trade anymore. Some staff wanted the police involved at the time (grudges maybe, or had stuff stolen themselves (not necessarily by him)) but the decision was made to just sack him.

    Just so you know, I don’t feel bad about it.

  8. #58
    In The West Stand saintgeorge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    eccleston
    Posts
    5,258
    Rep Power
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Infamous Grouse View Post
    https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/my-...05-p50vu7.html

    A good article from an Aussie journalist.
    Isn’t that an oxymoron?

  9. #59
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,705
    Rep Power
    19

    Default

    I can just imagine the uproar if Rimmer suddenly decided he was judge, jury and executioner on disciplinary matters. Regardless of the facts of the case or the eventual punishment, Greenberg is setting a dangerous precedent and embarrassing himself really.

    All it needed was registration suspended pending a formal investigation. If it's sine die eventually then that's fine but there's a process for a reason.

  10. #60
    Learning All The Songs
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,388
    Rep Power
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bewareshadows View Post
    People seem to mistake the requirements for criminal convictions and civil penalties.

    For Barba to be charged by the police requires a level of evidence beyond reasonable doubt. To sack and deregister a player is a civil action. If the player tried to take his employer or registering body to court over breach of contract etc, they would only need to prove on the balance of probabilities that his behaviour was a breach of their rules.

    I doubt the best lawyer in the world could prove on the balance of probabilities that with cctv footage he has not breached his contract and has not breach NRL standards.
    In that case, Josh Perry and a few others we have signed would need the best lawyer in the world to prove they were not in breach of contract, for impersonating rugby players!

Posting Permissions

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