2019 NIB Knights

I didn't say he had been punished, i said he's been given his punishment, which will be hanging over his head for a long as he hasn't paid it.

You claim you're more intelligent, yet you're dumb enough to believe anything Phil Rothfield reports as absolute fact... I repeat, there is absolutely no way known they threw that much money at him, how quickly would that put the other 29 players offside, especially the majority of clean-skins who would be earning far less than him? i'm convinced the germ was told 500 OVER 3 years, but didn't want to hear properly because he wants any excuses to bring rugby league (and and especially Wayne Bennett) into disrepute.

i don't think the word 'hypocritical' means what you think it means, Lodge playing rugby league again has absolutely zero to do with the kids welfare, the damage has already been done, it's not like the kid will be switching on the TV to see him playing rugby league and be reminded of what he went through from his house in America... infact, as sick as it is to think about, Lodge playing football and being able to pay the family he did those awful things to is probably better for the kids welfare than Lodge filing bankruptcy and the family not receiving the money they're due...

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

It's a sad day when Norman is the moral benchmark you are after...

On Lodge and I'm not in any way condoning his NY rampage but why is he considered such a shitbag?

Don't really know a lot about the bloke but has he had any other indiscretions, other than that?

Haha, I wasn't making a moral assessment about Norman, but pretty sure he hasn't tried to kill people or threatened to kill kids.

If that isn't enough to be considered a total shitbag not worthy of a club I'm not sure what is.

If they were club CEO’s, would anybody pay $500,000 per year, around 5.6% of the salary cap, and about 67% more than the average NRL player for Matthew Lodge?

If the answer is a comprehensive no, why on earth would anybody believe Phil Rothfield when he says this is what he was offered? Would anybody here realistically offer Matthew lodge more than say $100,000 per year plus incentives?

Dip wrote:If they were club CEO’s,  would anybody pay $500,000 per year, around 5.6% of the salary cap, and about 67% more than the average NRL player for Matthew Lodge?

If the answer is a comprehensive no, why on earth would anybody believe Phil Rothfield when he says this is what he was offered? Would anybody here realistically offer Matthew lodge more than say $100,000 per year plus incentives?

It's certainly a fair point, I wouldn't consider him for a cleaners role, so it baffles me to think there are people that would offer him that kind of cash.

I totally agree, that an offer like that is baffling. I dont know if its true. Has anyone involved disputed it? Until they do, we have every right to question it but can really only go off what Slothfield said. I am sure that if it wasnt true, newcastle would have come out and said that it wasnt true, or they would have corrected him of he was off with the years or something.

Just like when Brisbane had a go at cronulla a few weeks ago and they came out and disputed it.

surmo13 wrote:I didn't say he had been punished, i said he's been given his punishment, which will be hanging over his head for a long as he hasn't paid it.

You claim you're more intelligent, yet you're dumb enough to believe anything Phil Rothfield reports as absolute fact... I repeat, there is absolutely no way known they threw that much money at him, how quickly would that put the other 29 players offside, especially the majority of clean-skins who would be earning far less than him? i'm convinced the germ was told 500 OVER 3 years, but didn't want to hear properly because he wants any excuses to bring rugby league (and and especially Wayne Bennett) into disrepute.

i don't think the word 'hypocritical' means what you think it means, Lodge playing rugby league again has absolutely zero to do with the kids welfare, the damage has already been done, it's not like the kid will be switching on the TV to see him playing rugby league and be reminded of what he went through from his house in America... infact, as sick as it is to think about, Lodge playing football and being able to pay the family he did those awful things to is probably better for the kids welfare than Lodge filing bankruptcy and the family not receiving the money they're due...

I dont believe everything he says, I really cant stand the guy. I do believe there is some aspect of truth to just about everything he says, even if its not 100% accurate. To just say, "nah hes wrong", is a bit silly though. All we can go off is what has been reported, and we can make our arguments based off that so until he or the club come out and say its not true, I guess we have no choice but to believe he is there or thereabouts. You are prob the person that believes everything in the C Mail but rubbishes everything in the Telegraph hey.. lol

And it means exactly what I know it means and I have used it appropriately.

Yeh nah, him not being on tv over there will erase the memory of it. For all we know, lodge has already filed bankrupt and will never pay them. Yeah, haha its awesome. "That piece of shit needs to be rich so that we can get money that wont erase what he did to ruin us and our child's lives". Its well and truely about those people's welfare. Lodge being back in australia playing top grade football is embarrassing for us as a country let alone as a sporting code, IMO. But sure, is it good that these people might get some financial support from it? Yep. I am sure they would just rather it didnt happen though. And also, they wont be getting anything for at least a another year if lodge is on 85k.

He is only 2 years removed from the incident, yet is going to be back. And someone like carney who only hurt himself has been exiled for 3 years. Its crazy.

Anyway mate, all good, we have differing opinions on some aspects of this whole scenario.

jesus, you must've been super passionate about the NRL denying employment to a man who ACTUALLY tried to murder some-one, if you're this against a guy who made empty threats about it...
oh wait, this forum only has 11 pages, shouldn't be too hard to do a little digging.....
okay goes back to September 2015... that's a good start...
Packer signs in October 2015... about the same time you join up so you're here to raise your objections...
well, you didn't start a Russell Packer thread... but okay, maybe there's a Dragons thread that's been added to since then.....
huh, no Dragons thread at all... i'll look through some threads that might be relevant.... noooope, not seeing you strongly voice an opinion at all.......
huh..... it's almost like you were hardly bothered by an attempted murderer gaining re-entry into the NRL.....
well, that's pretty bizarre, i wonder what the difference is between Packer and Lodge that has your knickers in a kn-ooooooooooooooh......NOW we're starting to approach an appropriate time to use the word 'hypocrite'

surmo13 wrote:jesus, you must've been super passionate about the NRL denying employment to a man who ACTUALLY tried to murder some-one, if you're this against a guy who made empty threats about it...
oh wait, this forum only has 11 pages, shouldn't be too hard to do a little digging.....
okay goes back to September 2015... that's a good start...
Packer signs in October 2015... about the same time you join up so you're here to raise your objections...
well, you didn't start a Russell Packer thread... but okay, maybe there's a Dragons thread that's been added to since then.....
huh, no Dragons thread at all... i'll look through some threads that might be relevant.... noooope, not seeing you strongly voice an opinion at all.......
huh..... it's almost like you were hardly bothered by an attempted murderer gaining re-entry into the NRL.....
well, that's pretty bizarre, i wonder what the difference is between Packer and Lodge that has your knickers in a kn-ooooooooooooooh......NOW we're starting to approach an appropriate time to use the word 'hypocrite'

Do a quick google search and see the chatter about what the general consensus was with packer. Also, the bloke actually went to jail for a year for what he did, and - through a small miracle, has now got a uni degree. As I said before, this lodge business might end up with a good ending. Is someone not allowed to form or change an opinion on something over time? cool

Assault is a bit different to, stalking, assault, criminal mischief, destruction of property, potentially FUCKING UP A 9 YEAR OLD KID'S LIFE, THREATENING TO KILL TWO CHICKS, ASSAULTING THEM, BASHING SOMEONE WHO WAS HELPING THEM, THROWING A WINE BOTTLE AT A COP, HAVING PREVIOUS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CHARGES, and another incident bad enough to be fined 10k by the tigers. Awesome stuff there. Not even taking into consideration the drugs he was on when he did it. And not even talking into consideration the fact he hasnt paid any of the debt.

Good to see you just defending the bronco's mate. Keep going on about that player welfare you are so passionate about. Or do you still enjoy adam blairs work off the ball? lol Also, why dont you carry on about any player just getting a head knock/knocked out. I havent heard boo from you on the topic since your Oates soapbox. Only bronco's players getting knocks both physically or figuratively gets you going, thats right.

I didnt start a matt lodge thread either. I might start one now tho, good idea hey.

You are fun to argue with

This underspending thing is odd.

If clubs have to spend 95% of their cap every season, any team who has like 400k free to sign a player come June 30 is therefore under the limit and gets fined?

Surely most clubs in the league have roughly that much or more free all the time.

It makes no sense.

Pieman wrote:

Do a quick google search and see the chatter about what the general consensus was with packer. Also, the bloke actually went to jail for a year for what he did, and - through a small miracle, has now got a uni degree. As I said before, this lodge business might end up with a good ending. Is someone not allowed to form or change an opinion on something over time? cool

Assault is a bit different to, stalking, assault, criminal mischief, destruction of property, potentially FUCKING UP A 9 YEAR OLD KID'S LIFE, THREATENING TO KILL TWO CHICKS, ASSAULTING THEM, BASHING SOMEONE WHO WAS HELPING THEM, THROWING A WINE BOTTLE AT A COP, HAVING PREVIOUS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CHARGES, and another incident bad enough to be fined 10k by the tigers. Awesome stuff there. Not even taking into consideration the drugs he was on when he did it. And not even talking into consideration the fact he hasnt paid any of the debt.

Good to see you just defending the bronco's mate. Keep going on about that player welfare you are so passionate about. Or do you still enjoy adam blairs work off the ball? lol Also, why dont you carry on about any player just getting a head knock/knocked out. I havent heard boo from you on the topic since your Oates soapbox. Only bronco's players getting knocks both physically or figuratively gets you going, thats right.

I didnt start a matt lodge thread either. I might start one now tho, good idea hey.

You are fun to argue with

Just keep in mind, i replied to a question that had nothing to do with you and you decided to start this, if you don't think he should be allowed back in the league, i get that and i understand that's a completely legimately opinion to hold, but your the one in here brow-beating me because my opinion is 'wrong', so that's why i'm arguing my side.

So a person must serve jail-time for their crimes before you're okay with them coming back, even if a judge has deemed jail not necessary? odd way to qualify, but alright.

You seem to think the only punishment incurred was monetary, but in a plea deal to avoid jail-time Lodge was ordered to complete 200 hours of community service in Australia, receive alcohol abuse and anger treatment, abstain from alcohol and illegal drugs, submit to testing and avoid another arrest, all of which must have been complied with condering it's 2 years later and he hasn't been jailed.

i'm not defending anyone or anything but my opinion - that a man should not be judged for the rest of his life by mistakes made, especially in the developing stages of adulthood, if he's legitimately remorseful for his actions and some-one decides he has a lesson to teach and something to offer to see his debt to society repayed. If hes betrays that lifeline, then we know he hasn't and will learn nothing and that's when ex-communicating him from the NRL becomes the only option, but until then i'd rather hear 'Broncos player Matt Lodge is using his platform to spend time in the community warning young men of the dangers of alcohol and drug abuse' than 'disgraced former NRL player Matt Lodge relapses and is sentenced to jail time'. You will not get a differing opinion from me no matter the player or club involved.

I'm sorry, has there been a situation since Oates where some-one was knocked unconscious and play was continued? i must have missed it...

And yeh, i was a fan of Blair's work in defence, back when it wasn't illegal and just ruffled feathers because your precious halfback couldn't test the line without having a finger laid on him, but i soured on it this year as the hits became later and later to the point where it was actually dirty, the only reason you bring that up is because i've said all this already, but you being you, just decided to focus on the bit that was convenient...

as an aside: i'm finding it a bit bizarre that's twice i've challenged your opinion of Packer, and twice you've deflected to 'just google the public opinion'

Pieman wrote: I dont know if its true. Has anyone involved disputed it? Until they do, we have every right to question it but can really only go off what Slothfield said.

This is asinine levels of logic.

Pieman likes pineapple on pizza. I don't know if its true. People are saying it.

Of course, because I am australian. And its the australian way. Unaustralian Ryno, should have known. Try pineapple on a pie, will change your life.

And what I said, is 100% correct. Until someone comes out and says - "no thats not right", we can still question it can only really go off what has been reported. Whats wrong with that?

I mean, yeah the guy is rotton to look at and listen to and read - that doesnt mean he isnt correct (or at least somewhat correct) a fair chunk of the time.

Pieman wrote:Of course, because I am australian. And its the australian way. Unaustralian Ryno, should have known. Try pineapple on a pie, will change your life.

And what I said, is 100% correct. Until someone comes out and says - "no thats not right", we can still question it can only really go off what has been reported. Whats wrong with that?

I mean, yeah the guy is rotton to look at and listen to and read - that doesnt mean he isnt correct (or at least somewhat correct) a fair chunk of the time.

Rothfield's like that crazy guy in the corner who reckons the moon landing was staged, or that Elysse Perry should bat No 6 in the first test at the Gabba. Everyone knows they're speaking shit but it's not worth the effort in correcting him because he believes his own lies, so you're better off just shaking your head and laughing at him instead.

But if we're going to believe every unsubstantiated claim, particularly those by Rothfield, then it's probably fair to assume the guy who has a condition of a drug and alcohol test 3 times a week probably decided Newcastle Knights wasn't the best environment for him no matter what was paid, given past history would suggest there's a fair chance he'd be paid a good salary for about a month before he did what Newcastle players have a history of doing, and ended up breaching his court conditions.

Also, I expect that if Lodge does become a star, that in the absence of anyone refuting the statement that he is on the minimum contract, the next time you consider having a go at our Salary Sombrero, you point out that they have the advantage of having a star on a minimum contract.

I don't think anyone is disputing that on field alone, he's got good potential. He was U20 Prop of the year when he was 18, and made his first grade debut a few weeks after his 19th birthday. That's very rare for a prop. People are rightfully disputing that given his off field history, he'd be fielding any substantial offers. A 22 year old prop with extremely bad off field history and a handful of first grade games. Please. Reports were James Maloney was on about $500K/year and he's a current test half and multiple premiership winner, and you expect anyone to believe Lodge was offered the same money? Even if Lodge had no off field history he'd be looking to get the sort of contract Klemmer got when he got a contract after getting the U20 player of the year. From memory that was about $1M over 3 years.

surmo13 wrote:

Just keep in mind, i replied to a question that had nothing to do with you and you decided to start this, if you don't think he should be allowed back in the league, i get that and i understand that's a completely legimately opinion to hold, but your the one in here brow-beating me because my opinion is 'wrong', so that's why i'm arguing my side.

So a person must serve jail-time for their crimes before you're okay with them coming back, even if a judge has deemed jail not necessary? odd way to qualify, but alright.

You seem to think the only punishment incurred was monetary, but in a plea deal to avoid jail-time Lodge was ordered to complete 200 hours of community service in Australia, receive alcohol abuse and anger treatment, abstain from alcohol and illegal drugs, submit to testing and avoid another arrest, all of which must have been complied with condering it's 2 years later and he hasn't been jailed.

i'm not defending anyone or anything but my opinion - that a man should not be judged for the rest of his life by mistakes made, especially in the developing stages of adulthood, if he's legitimately remorseful for his actions and some-one decides he has a lesson to teach and something to offer to see his debt to society repayed. If hes betrays that lifeline, then we know he hasn't and will learn nothing and that's when ex-communicating him from the NRL becomes the only option, but until then i'd rather hear 'Broncos player Matt Lodge is using his platform to spend time in the community warning young men of the dangers of alcohol and drug abuse' than 'disgraced former NRL player Matt Lodge relapses and is sentenced to jail time'. You will not get a differing opinion from me no matter the player or club involved.

I'm sorry, has there been a situation since Oates where some-one was knocked unconscious and play was continued? i must have missed it...

And yeh, i was a fan of Blair's work in defence, back when it wasn't illegal and just ruffled feathers because your precious halfback couldn't test the line without having a finger laid on him, but i soured on it this year as the hits became later and later to the point where it was actually dirty, the only reason you bring that up is because i've said all this already, but you being you, just decided to focus on the bit that was convenient...

as an aside: i'm finding it a bit bizarre that's twice i've challenged your opinion of Packer, and twice you've deflected to 'just google the public opinion'

1. Its a public forum, you post something anyone can reply to it. If you want private discussions, slide in a DM. I dont think your opinion is wrong, as I said a few posts back "Anyway mate, all good, we have differing opinions on some aspects of this whole scenario." How am I "brow beating" you? Its a debate on a forum. That is what it is for. If you dont want your opinion argued, dont post mate.

2. The point of the jail comment is, he was locked up for 12 months, he did his time playing lower grades. It seems like Packer has paid more of his debt to society back than Lodge has. Thats just IMO. I dont know what crime is worse, but IMO, anything that has women and kids involved is pretty fucking heinous (que Ryno with his fairy tale). And no, I dont think that every one who does something wrong should go to jail, especially if a judge hasnt sentenced them to jail - but surely something like this deserves prison time? I mean, shitloads of people were calling for fergo to go to jail for what he did. According to the law, for a first time offender - no one in australia would go to jail for that crime (as fucked up as that is). Is what he did worse that what Packer did? Is what he did worse than what Lodge did? All are pretty fucked up, but in reality - violence is generally the thing that tips a time into jail time. If lodge did it in australia, would he have got a sentence for what he did? I think so.

3. Thats all great to see, but is barely a slap on the wrist. The real punishment is the money side of it.

4. He should be 100% judged on what he did in the past. That doesnt mean he is held at that level for the rest of his life though, but its always there and he is always associated with it. We then look at his steps forward in the future and what he achieved down the track. As I said, I hope he rehabs and becomes a moral citizen. We agree on this bit.

5. So you only blow up when people are unconscious, not for all dangerous head knocks. Cool.

6. I bring up blair because you are a "champion for player welfare" now, and you didnt blow up about the late as fuck hits he has been doing for years. You actually supported it. Good to see ya tune changing now that he is no longer a bronco

7. I dont know what my opinion on it was back then (and opinions are allowed to evolve and change over time just as yours seems to have with Blair, now that he is no longer a bronco player lol) - I would hazard a guess to say that I didnt really have strong feelings about it back then, or if I did, I didnt post them on this forum. If you asked me now, I would say that he should have been deported when he got out of jail. Why should a bloke who committed a crime like that be allowed to live in australia when he isnt from here.

surmo13 wrote:

Just keep in mind, i replied to a question that had nothing to do with you and you decided to start this, if you don't think he should be allowed back in the league, i get that and i understand that's a completely legimately opinion to hold, but your the one in here brow-beating me because my opinion is 'wrong', so that's why i'm arguing my side.

So a person must serve jail-time for their crimes before you're okay with them coming back, even if a judge has deemed jail not necessary? odd way to qualify, but alright.

You seem to think the only punishment incurred was monetary, but in a plea deal to avoid jail-time Lodge was ordered to complete 200 hours of community service in Australia, receive alcohol abuse and anger treatment, abstain from alcohol and illegal drugs, submit to testing and avoid another arrest, all of which must have been complied with condering it's 2 years later and he hasn't been jailed.

i'm not defending anyone or anything but my opinion - that a man should not be judged for the rest of his life by mistakes made, especially in the developing stages of adulthood, if he's legitimately remorseful for his actions and some-one decides he has a lesson to teach and something to offer to see his debt to society repayed. If hes betrays that lifeline, then we know he hasn't and will learn nothing and that's when ex-communicating him from the NRL becomes the only option, but until then i'd rather hear 'Broncos player Matt Lodge is using his platform to spend time in the community warning young men of the dangers of alcohol and drug abuse' than 'disgraced former NRL player Matt Lodge relapses and is sentenced to jail time'. You will not get a differing opinion from me no matter the player or club involved.

Yeah to be honest, I personally find the Lodge hate to be somewhat strange.

When I asked the question and judging by some of the reactions, I thought he must have had a lengthy rap sheet of indiscretions.

But other than the inexcusable but seemingly over-sensationalised night in NY, all that has been mentioned is writing a swear word on his wrists....

Seems a bit harsh to throw the bloke in the never to be rehabilitated pile based on that.

Dip wrote:


Rothfield's like that crazy guy in the corner who reckons the moon landing was staged, or that Elysse Perry should bat No 6 in the first test at the Gabba. Everyone knows they're speaking shit but it's not worth the effort in correcting him because he believes his own lies, so you're better off just shaking your head and laughing at him instead.

But if we're going to believe every unsubstantiated claim, particularly those by Rothfield, then it's probably fair to assume the guy who has a condition of a drug and alcohol test 3 times a week probably decided Newcastle Knights wasn't the best environment for him no matter what was paid, given past history would suggest there's a fair chance he'd be paid a good salary for about a month before he did what Newcastle players have a history of doing, and ended up breaching his court conditions.

Also, I expect that if Lodge does become a star, that in the absence of anyone refuting the statement that he is on the minimum contract, the next time you consider having a go at our Salary Sombrero, you point out that they have the advantage of having a star on a minimum contract.

I don't think anyone is disputing that on field alone, he's got good potential. He was U20 Prop of the year when he was 18, and made his first grade debut a few weeks after his 19th birthday. That's very rare for a prop. People are rightfully disputing that given his off field history, he'd be fielding any substantial offers. A 22 year old prop with extremely bad off field history and a handful of first grade games. Please. Reports were James Maloney was on about $500K/year and he's a current test half and multiple premiership winner, and you expect anyone to believe Lodge was offered the same money? Even if Lodge had no off field history he'd be looking to get the sort of contract Klemmer got when he got a contract after getting the U20 player of the year. From memory that was about $1M over 3 years.

haha yeah coz no bronco's players ever did drugs or gangbanged chicks in toilets or had a coke culture. Fuck mate, I live in brisbane and I've literally seen players off their fucking lids out. Dont give me this horse shit about newcastle, as if its the only club that has a history of players and drugs. fucking lol.

Of course its good having a prop on 85k, who is potentially your best prop!

Maloney has been blowing up about his pay for a while now, and literally left his premiership winning side to get paid more. 500k, when he signed with cronulla 2 years ago or whatever, was

Matte, korbin sims was on 400k at newcastle, and he's rubbish. Newcastle apparently HAVE to spend money and (if true, as I said, I find it baffling and dont 100% believe it myself) they were prob trying to pay for potential as they have been doing with a lot of other young players recently. Newcastle were apparently "crazy" to offer 550 for Ponga for 5 years, fuck knows what they spent on connor watson etc. With the sturggles newie have had signing props, do you really think that it is that impossible for an offer like that to have happened?

Lodge is obviously going to be a very good player if he keeps his head, which is why brisbane signed him.

Until the bronco's or lodge come out and say he is not on 85k, or until the knights come out and say - no it was 500k over 3 years or what ever - I will lean towards taking some truth from rothfield over you blokes who are just trying to downplay the nature of it all.

Also, can I get some examples of when rothfield has had clangers? Sure he exaggerates a bit (like most journo's) I know that he loves the sharks and defends them all the time, and I know he has digs at the bronco's TPAs and stuff a bit, but besides that, what are some example of some clangers he has had? - (genuinely curious about this)

Oz Sport Mad wrote:

Yeah to be honest, I personally find the Lodge hate to be somewhat strange.

When I asked the question and judging by some of the reactions, I thought he must have had a lengthy rap sheet of indiscretions.

But other than the inexcusable but seemingly over-sensationalised night in NY, all that has been mentioned is writing a swear word on his wrists....

Seems a bit harsh to throw the bloke in the never to be rehabilitated pile based on that.

Alleged DV claims in august 2015 in sydney - 6 counts of common assault, malicious damage, stalking, intimidation.
Then later that same year - the NY incident. Over sensationalised, fuck off. Thats fucking moronic even for your standards. Seems more like he is a repeat offender as well.
Fined 10k by the tigers for an undisclosed off field indiscretion.
Pretty well known that he was released from the storm because of his alcohol issues amongst his general loose nature

No one ever said that he shouldnt be rehabilitated. Very much the opposite actually.

He's on $85 and potentially worth $350 next year

Pieman wrote:Of course, because I am australian. And its the australian way. Unaustralian Ryno, should have known. Try pineapple on a pie, will change your life.

Fake News.

Pieman wrote:And what I said, is 100% correct. Until someone comes out and says - "no thats not right", we can still question it can only really go off what has been reported. Whats wrong with that?

I mean, yeah the guy is rotton to look at and listen to and read - that doesnt mean he isnt correct (or at least somewhat correct) a fair chunk of the time.

You don't think its stupid to act like something is gospel - or even likely - without multiple sources or being peer reviewed? Especially when the one source you do have is a known dickhead with both an agenda and lack of journalistic integrity? You're the kind of guy who reads infowars and just rolls with whatever they hear.

Pieman wrote:

Alleged DV claims in august 2015 in sydney - 6 counts of common assault, malicious damage, stalking, intimidation.
Then later that same year - the NY incident. Over sensationalised, fuck off. Thats fucking moronic even for your standards. Seems more like he is a repeat offender as well.
Fined 10k by the tigers for an undisclosed off field indiscretion.
Pretty well known that he was released from the storm because of his alcohol issues amongst his general loose nature

No one ever said that he shouldnt be rehabilitated. Very much the opposite actually.

Ahh Pieman my simple, simple friend.

I haven't really passed any judgement as yet and merely posed the question because the level of hate just doesn't seem to be align (IMO) with the blokes indiscretions.
Hence, I actually assumed I must have missed something.

I mean, I have read the accounts of his undoubted debacle in NY but given the litigious society that the US is and the fact most of the statements are from the lawyers of the claimants, of course they sound over-sensationalised.
Hardly surprised that they are claiming to be haunted by fear that he will come back to kill them...that alone probably added about $500k to the fine.
Never said what he did was right, sounds like he was deadset off the rails and deserves the punishment that was handed to him.

Everything else seems to be fairly unsubstantiated claims against an NRL player with an obvious drinking problem (shock, horror!)

And FFS, when I said 'never to be rehabilitated', I should have added 'enough to be allowed to play Rugby League again' for the more simple among us.