Australian Squad

What I find most annoying about the Fifita situation, is the same people who are crucifying him for wearing an armband are the same people who would say that a true Aussie would always support his mates.

You might think it obvious that there is an unwritten big asterisk next to the 'always' there, but the league community has lots of experience supporting guys who have (allegedly) done wrong.
League players can seemingly do whatever they want and still retain tonnes of support from the league community. Andrew Johns, Matthew Johns, Todd Carney, Josh Dugan, Kirisome Auva'a, Greg Bird, Mitchell Pearce, Paul Carter, Karmichael Hunt, Darius Boyd, Sam Thaiday, James Roberts, Darren Lockyer, Robert Lui, Greg Inglis, Shaun Kenny-Dowall, Brett Stewart etc.

They've all done things that attract condemnation from a large part of community yet have always received a tonne of support from fans/clubs. Many of these people have later been acquitted of what they were accused of but even in the lead up to that they are rarely abandoned to the wolves - although the NRL is very inconsistent in its approach in this regard.
But even those that face punishment are almost always forgiven fairly quickly.


Its rare to find someone like Steve Irwin or Sandor Earl who actually has to pay a price for an indiscretion

Honeysett wrote:

Standard has an Issue wrote:
An innocent bloke died and Fifita is publically supporting the "man" who was found guilty of the dog act that killed him.  Well done to the NRL for "over reacting" in my book.

He's not saying "Good on you mate" or "Fuck the police" or anything. He's supporting the man himself.

I have no problem with it, Fifita is standing by his mate. I think it's a little silly to post it on social media when the guy himself probably won't even be able to see it.

Fifita's biggest mistake is thinking he needs to make a public statement of support as it's only drawn more negative attention to his mate. He visit him in prison, let him know you're there for him - don't make it public but to rob him on an Australian jersey on that is drawing a loooong bow.

The man himself killed someone?

Standard has an Issue wrote:
The man himself killed someone?

I get it, it's fucked up but Fifita didn't do it. He had nothing to do with it.

We're banning a guy from playing because he's friends with someone who did something wrong and he supported him. When it comes to Andrew Fifita, that's not illegal.

I believe we're dragging Fifita through the dirt when there's guys who have done far worse and are allowed to continue playing or coaching. For example, Paul McGregor was charged for drink driving and there's been no punishment from the NRL.

Where is the line drawn on who you can and can't support? Nuclear family? Extended family?
What about if they didn't kill anyone, just turned them into a paraplegic?
What about once they've done their time and are reformed? Can you associate with them then?

Russell Packer effectively did the same thing as Loveridge but got lucky that he didn't kill the poor bastard he attacked yet the NRL employ him. Apparently a club is meeting with Mathew Lodge, if the coach has spoken to him should they be stood down?

Krump wrote:Russell Packer effectively did the same thing as Loveridge but got lucky that he didn't kill the poor bastard he attacked yet the NRL employ him. Apparently a club is meeting with Mathew Lodge, if the coach has spoken to him should they be stood down?

That right there is what it comes down to I guess.  If it was me that was the Coach/part of the Board etc I would never in a million years even contemplate bringing Lodge to my club.

Krump wrote:Where is the line drawn on who you can and can't support? Nuclear family? Extended family?
What about if they didn't kill anyone, just turned them into a paraplegic?
What about once they've done their time and are reformed? Can you associate with them then?

In the instance of my previous best mate-he is not a relative in any way.
He injured them physically but they are 100% fine physically now.
I never want to see him again after what he chose to do to another human being.

Honeysett wrote:

Standard has an Issue wrote:
The man himself killed someone?

I get it, it's fucked up but Fifita didn't do it. He had nothing to do with it.

We're banning a guy from playing because he's friends with someone who did something wrong and he supported him. When it comes to Andrew Fifita, that's not illegal.

I believe we're dragging Fifita through the dirt when there's guys who have done far worse and are allowed to continue playing or coaching. For example, Paul McGregor was charged for drink driving and there's been no punishment from the NRL.

Agreed, the issue is with consistency and not sure how to make that objective.  But I wouldn't mind seeing the NRL actually make a hard call and put something in writing for all players and clubs so that they can't have a hissy fit when they bring the game down.  I don't know how they do that, but there is no doubt someone who can within the organisation if they really wanted to; or at the least an external advisor with the qualifications to do so.

Standard has an Issue wrote:
In the instance of my previous best mate-he is not a relative in any way.
He injured them physically but they are 100% fine physically now.
I never want to see him again after what he chose to do to another human being.

The post wasn't aimed at you mate, it was more rhetorical. There is absolutely no way that the NRL can be anywhere near fair and consistent after this.

Standard has an Issue wrote:
In the instance of my previous best mate-he is not a relative in any way.
He injured them physically but they are 100% fine physically now.
I never want to see him again after what he chose to do to another human being.

I think what Krump was saying is more towards the players and not your situation.

Can Fifita support his brother if this happened?
What laws do they need to break before you have to cut them off?
Is he alright to talk to them when they've served their time?

To me we should let the players do what they want and as adults we should say "That's not how you should act, he is a poor role model I will not raise my kids like this" instead of "you're not allowed to talk to your friends"

Standard has an Issue wrote:
Agreed, the issue is with consistency and not sure how to make that objective.  But I wouldn't mind seeing the NRL actually make a hard call and put something in writing for all players and clubs so that they can't have a hissy fit when they bring the game down.  I don't know how they do that, but there is no doubt someone who can within the organisation if they really wanted to; or at the least an external advisor with the qualifications to do so.

You couldn't have that without having journalist have proper media accreditation. At the moment the media are allowed to write anything about anyone with no remorse and their own agendas.

Krump wrote:

Standard has an Issue wrote:
In the instance of my previous best mate-he is not a relative in any way.
He injured them physically but they are 100% fine physically now.
I never want to see him again after what he chose to do to another human being.

The post wasn't aimed at you mate, it was more rhetorical. There is absolutely no way that the NRL can be anywhere near fair and consistent after this.

Haha, no I didn't take it that way, it was the easiest way for me to answer the questions.  I guess it's decisions you make on your personal morals-which in itself is too subjective and open I know.

Honeysett wrote:

Standard has an Issue wrote:
In the instance of my previous best mate-he is not a relative in any way.
He injured them physically but they are 100% fine physically now.
I never want to see him again after what he chose to do to another human being.

I think what Krump was saying is more towards the players and not your situation.

Can Fifita support his brother if this happened?
What laws do they need to break before you have to cut them off?
Is he alright to talk to them when they've served their time?

To me we should let the players do what they want and as adults we should say "That's not how you should act, he is a poor role model I will not raise my kids like this" instead of "you're not allowed to talk to your friends"

I know what you are saying, but you and me and no doubt the majority of fans want this shit gone because it does hurt the game.  The vast majority of employers have a strict code of conduct that needs to be followed to maintain employment.  God knows my company has hundreds of pages of Corporate SOP's.

It is in black and white.

There is no margin for misinterpretation.  

From my point of view, I would like to see this in the NRL.  No fucking grey areas.  In the Russell Packer example, he was convicted of doing something that was abhorrent and that 99% of human beings would not consider carrying out.  You would struggle to find many companies that would employ someone like that, let alone re-employ them!

The difficult thing is that even financially, there is such a high value on winning that for a player who is good enough, there is always going to be a club trying to make players available. In Brad Fittler's book a few years ago, he asked a number of CEO's what a win was worth financially. Across the average of all the CEO's it was believed that every win was worth about $200K. That is, a team that won 14 games per year would be $400K better off than a team that one 12 games. The CEO's took into account things like ticket and ground sales, sponsorship etc when determining this amount.

Fittler did that to justify (his example), that Justin Hodges was a bargain at $400K/Year because he personally would be responsible for the team winning 2 extra games. That might be a bit simplistic in Hodges case, but you can see why clubs would keep signing guys like Carney for close to $1M/Year given the number of games he has won by himself over the years.

It's why clubs aren't willing to enforce a code of conduct too severely.If I breach my work's code of conduct, I get fired and they hire another accountant who bills X times their salary. They can't really do that with the top echelon of NRL players.

Dip wrote:The difficult thing is that even financially, there is such a high value on winning that for a player who is good enough, there is always going to be a club trying to make players available. In Brad Fittler's book a few years ago, he asked a number of CEO's what a win was worth financially. Across the average of all the CEO's it was believed that every win was worth about $200K. That is, a team that won 14 games per year would be $400K better off than a team that one 12 games. The CEO's took into account things like ticket and ground sales, sponsorship etc when determining this amount.

Fittler did that to justify (his example), that Justin Hodges was a bargain at $400K/Year because he personally would be responsible for the team winning 2 extra games. That might be a bit simplistic in Hodges case, but you can see why clubs would keep signing guys like Carney for close to $1M/Year given the number of games he has won by himself over the years.

It's why clubs aren't willing to enforce a code of conduct too severely.If I breach my work's code of conduct, I get fired and they hire another accountant who bills X times their salary. They can't really do that with the top echelon of NRL players.

Both you AND the whole of Gympie lose in that scenario Dip!

In all seriousness though, I completely understand what you are saying and it is probably a symptom of almost all professional sports to some degree.

However, what I am saying is for our sport, if there was actually a black and white code of conduct encompassing as many scenarios as possible (which is no doubt exactly what your's and my company do have) then why can't it happen in the NRL? That would potentially has the effect of stopping certain clubs who may be run by people who are not as morally sound as the next from taking advantage of the system to start with.

Standard has an Issue wrote:My best mate of 15 years is currently in for a pretty horrendous crime which I won't go in to (seems convenient to write that I know but it's about the only thing I won't discuss on here).  I have not tried to contact him and I never will.  I have, however, sat down with the victim once and also spoken to said victim multiple times on other occasions.

What he did does not deserve support.  I personally don't think anyone else who purposely sets out to mortally wound an innocent human being deserves support either, regardless of my relationship to him or her.

I respect your choice to not see him, have no idea what the person did and if it was bad enough IMO I prob would do the same thing as you.
But as someone who now works with people who have incidents drug induced psychosis or other mental illnesses, people have done some pretty disgusting things, I know that people need support and help to live their lives. Yes they may have done a horrible thing, but they are still human and in jail or in a mental ward, and in general life they still need help and support just like or more so than other people.

If someone gets off their head on ice and goes around wanting to punch random strangers in the back of the head, its wrong, its disgusting, its fucking horrendous - they get punished for their crimes tho by going to jail (in this one punch case, the cunt should be in for much much longer than what he got, but that is a whole other story). When they are off the gear and trying to turns their lives around (which a lot of them attempt to do in jail) they need support from family and friends to do it.

I am not saying fifita did the right thing, but IMO writing For KL or Free KL what ever it is on his tape - it not something that he should lose test caps for especially after they had just let him play in a finals series and gf AND robbing him of the CC medal.

As I said, a warning and an apology should should have been enough

Does Mal Meninga still talk to his brother?

Pieman wrote:Does Mal Meninga still talk to his brother?

Fucking boom!

Standard has an Issue wrote:
I know what you are saying, but you and me and no doubt the majority of fans want this shit gone because it does hurt the game.  The vast majority of employers have a strict code of conduct that needs to be followed to maintain employment.  God knows my company has hundreds of pages of Corporate SOP's.

It is in black and white.

There is no margin for misinterpretation.  

From my point of view, I would like to see this in the NRL.  No fucking grey areas.  In the Russell Packer example, he was convicted of doing something that was abhorrent and that 99% of human beings would not consider carrying out.  You would struggle to find many companies that would employ someone like that, let alone re-employ them!

Yeah I get that mate, I want the sport to be cleaned up as well. From domestic violence mainly however I don't think we can stop people from speaking out on causes that they have close to their heart. They can't tell people how to feel. He didn't wish any ill harm to the victims family or anything and was showing support for someone that is clearly important to him.

Fifita is an easy target and that's why they're coming down hard on him, if he wasn't seen as a nutcase who abuses referees this would be a non issue.

We treat these guys like monkeys at a zoo sometimes, dance when we want them to dance but if they step out of line we treat them like shit.

Pieman wrote:Does Mal Meninga still talk to his brother?

Hardly the same thing, is it? Unless he's just been ruled out of a jersey?

Had a mate killed in Cairns when he was 20, which is, I don't know, about 18 years ago - way before the new laws. A bunch of navy boys came off a trip and wanted to blow off steam, and punched him, and he fell on the corner of a gutter.

So forgive me if I have a different take on matters - and I'm very much aware I'll be taking one side of it.

Nathan's parents actually testified at this guys trial, because they didn't want two families destroyed - that's how nice his parents are. I couldn't go to the trial.

My thoughts are simple: he didn't mean to kill him even if he did mean to get into a fight. But that's the price you pay - if shit goes wrong, you're fucked.

If *that guy* is a mate of yours - you go visit him in jail. You support his family. You DON'T fucking come out in the public eye and stir up old wounds. How much of an absolute c*nt do you have to be to to think that the decade in jail equates to the loss of two sons on the other side of the ledger? He KILLED a guy, and you're taking free media opportunities about the harshness of the sentence? Have some decency. What he's saying is "I know he killed a guy, but it's just so UNFAIR he got jailed for so long".

It's a shit situation. No one wins, people only get hurt. But I don't want the fuckhead representing my country at the moment. If he feels that strongly about it, have a chat to a journo and see if he'll write a story. The way he did it speaks volumes about his character, as far as I'm concerned. At the very minimum he's got no respect for the family that's lost two sons.

Fuck his jersey. He'll get it next year, if he doesn't bash another ref.