NRL Fantasy 2020 Part 90 - Tumbleweed edition

Its really hard to get 12 people to agree on anything

mattnz wrote:Its really hard to get 12 people to agree on anything

haha absolutely.

most people wouldn't say yes to doing jury duty as it is.

my tv broke wrote:

haha absolutely.

most people wouldn't say yes to doing jury duty as it is.

I've gotten out of it twice already haha.

wolfking wrote:

I've gotten out of it twice already haha.

yeh i've gotten the letter a few times and said no.

gf just got one last week, she's doing close to nothing at the moment due to covid (events industry) so she said yes haha

my tv broke wrote:

yeh i've gotten the letter a few times and said no.

gf just got one last week, she's doing close to nothing at the moment due to covid (events industry) so she said yes haha

I've always not been able to do it because of work, but if I had time or could easily take a few weeks off, I'd definitely give it a go.

B/L wrote:Has anyone followed the trial closely like I have ?

Obviously I'm not in the court room hearing all the testimonies and seeing all the evidence but from what I have seen I was certain the verdict would come back Not Guilty.

The way the media portrayed it before the trial I thought he was gone for all money. But reading each days proceedings, inconsistency in statements and evidence, I couldn't see how he could be found anything but not guilty. Can't help but feel the jury couldn't reach a unanimous position because of his profile and preconceived opinions of footballers. If it was Old mate Joe up the road he'd be in the clear.

Free motel? How many S's in innocent?

I've read the news summary most days - I imagine that doesn't compare with sitting through the entirety of the court case. I really don't know what the right verdict should be.

What I would say is that it's pretty common for victims of a trauma event to be inconsistent with their recollection - part of that is the human survival instinct.
Often with PTSD following a trauma event people can be ashamed of their behaviour preceding, during and after the event, which can cause them to produce an inconsistent timeline & memories around the event. That doesn't in itself mean that they have something to hide or that what happened was or wasn't a crime.

FWIW I suspect the prosecutors will end up dropping the case.
It's hard to imagine the case being tried twice with a different outcome - seemingly not enough evidence to convict or to exonerate - so it comes down to who you believe.

Naden provisionally suspended for positive test (coke). Was tested on Grand Final day.

my tv broke wrote:Naden provisionally suspended for positive test (coke). Was tested on Grand Final day.

Insert racially vilified mental health excuse.

mattnz wrote:Its really hard to get 12 people to agree on anything

No it's not.

wolfking wrote:

I've gotten out of it twice already haha.

I've gotten out of it in NZ three times because I was travelling at the time or my work wrote in saying I was the vital cog they couldn't do without.

Fourth time and my job at the time said "Nup, go do it".

Got as far as walking into the court room but as soon as the lawyer saw me I was challenged and see ya later
Apparently 6'3" skinhead is not the guy they wanted on that jury

In all honestly I am really glad I didn't sit on that jury because it was for the indecent assault on a girl under the age of 12.
I've had a mate who is a pretty hardy fella sit in on a similar trial and even he said all the detail and emotion from all angles was pretty harrowing.

filthridden wrote:

No it's not.

Yes it is

filthridden wrote:

No it's not.

Thanks for proving my point

B/L wrote:Has anyone followed the trial closely like I have ?

Obviously I'm not in the court room hearing all the testimonies and seeing all the evidence but from what I have seen I was certain the verdict would come back Not Guilty.

I haven't... but while you're here can you stop being so good at Fantasy EPL this season?

After playing pretty aimlessly for over a decade I trained the house down in the offseason and am being rewarded with the season of my life - sliding into the top 10k this week, out of a mere ~7.5m entries. And I still can't lead the mini league here because of you being ranked about 2000th in the entire world. It's fucked.

Haha a long way to go yet mate. Not even a third of the way through the season.

Bit concerned the Villa Newcastle game could get canned this weekend which would not be ideal having Grealish & Wilson.

I'm in an 85 person cash league and 50 points in front atm. Happy days.

B/L wrote:Haha a long way to go yet mate. Not even a third of the way through the season.

Bit concerned the Villa Newcastle game could get canned this weekend which would not be ideal having Grealish & Wilson.

I'm in an 85 person cash league and 50 points in front atm. Happy days.

That’s awesome - you’re right though, long way to go. Hopefully we can both keep it up.

I have Grealish and Wilson too. At least they moved the deadline back to Saturday so can wait as long as possible.

So the DPP wants to waste tax payers money and go again. Re trial set for April 12 which would see De Belin back for Round 7 Vs Roosters.

The NRL is looking into players signing for more money at a rival club whilst in contract and they're going to be told they have to wear it and can't year more money in their first year.

Brilliant now do the same to clubs who tell players they'll play in reserve grade if they don't move on. Same situation in my mind. Perhaps you could tell a player to move on, however you have to pay him whatever he misses out on and it doesn't count towards the cap. Haven't thought it through but could be a good start

Would have to count towards the cap all clubs would pay overs to players on long term deals then punt them after 1-2 years and do it again. I'm not sure the current system from a club moving players on is broken as long as the player gets what they signed for in reserve grade or at another club (the difference paid by the club doing the punting)