So if they’re ‘coloured or homosexual’ as you put it, it’s OK to run around bashing people?simo wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 11:45 amUm, maybe because we will get a clear view of what wighton actually did? The blokes he towelled up may have been up to no good, coloured or even homosexual.Pigman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 8:19 amWhy is it prudent to see the footage?
The footage is not going to be good, how bad it is, remains to be seen, but as far as defend vs condemn goes, he's plead guilty and will be sentenced shortly for his crime. There is nothing to defend. He did what the police accused him of. He is guilty, there is nothing to defend him for here, and people are right to condemn him and his actions.
What the **** is wrong with you?
Do people really think the video that wighton has tried to have suppressed is going to make anything better? I know jacks far from the smartest bloke but as a rule of thumb, id say most lawyers would advise him against trying to suppress something that would benefit him.
NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Moderator: GH Moderators
-
- Brett Mullins
- Posts: 1473
- Joined: July 11, 2015, 5:57 pm
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Canberra
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
- Roger Kenworthy
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 11580
- Joined: January 7, 2005, 10:18 pm
- Favourite Player: Ruben Wiki, J-Lo, Jordan Rapana
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
There were 5 spontaneous deaths in Civic that evening. The footage will show Jack went around belting life back into them.
- hrundi89
- Brett Mullins
- Posts: 1817
- Joined: January 25, 2007, 10:33 pm
- Favourite Player: Jarrod Croker
- Location: Sydney
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
How could you possibly have interpreted the statement in that way?sprintman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 12:16 pmSo if they’re ‘coloured or homosexual’ as you put it, it’s OK to run around bashing people?simo wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 11:45 amUm, maybe because we will get a clear view of what wighton actually did? The blokes he towelled up may have been up to no good, coloured or even homosexual.Pigman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 8:19 amWhy is it prudent to see the footage?
The footage is not going to be good, how bad it is, remains to be seen, but as far as defend vs condemn goes, he's plead guilty and will be sentenced shortly for his crime. There is nothing to defend. He did what the police accused him of. He is guilty, there is nothing to defend him for here, and people are right to condemn him and his actions.
What the **** is wrong with you?
Do people really think the video that wighton has tried to have suppressed is going to make anything better? I know jacks far from the smartest bloke but as a rule of thumb, id say most lawyers would advise him against trying to suppress something that would benefit him.
You may remember me from such forum usernames as hrundi99 and... hrundi99.
-
- Brett Mullins
- Posts: 1473
- Joined: July 11, 2015, 5:57 pm
- Favourite Player: Laurie Daley
- Location: Canberra
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
You’d better read it carefullyhrundi89 wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 3:07 pmHow could you possibly have interpreted the statement in that way?sprintman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 12:16 pmSo if they’re ‘coloured or homosexual’ as you put it, it’s OK to run around bashing people?simo wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 11:45 amUm, maybe because we will get a clear view of what wighton actually did? The blokes he towelled up may have been up to no good, coloured or even homosexual.Pigman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 8:19 amWhy is it prudent to see the footage?
The footage is not going to be good, how bad it is, remains to be seen, but as far as defend vs condemn goes, he's plead guilty and will be sentenced shortly for his crime. There is nothing to defend. He did what the police accused him of. He is guilty, there is nothing to defend him for here, and people are right to condemn him and his actions.
What the **** is wrong with you?
Do people really think the video that wighton has tried to have suppressed is going to make anything better? I know jacks far from the smartest bloke but as a rule of thumb, id say most lawyers would advise him against trying to suppress something that would benefit him.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16705
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Better read it again with sarcasm turned on sprintman!
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
The fact the courts don't want it suppressed only further reinforces they want it to justify their decision. I think they will throw the book at him. If they were going to let him off, why want it in the public sphere? It would contradict their verdict. And Jack wanting it gone, only further proves that it isn't good.
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3764
- Joined: January 6, 2005, 9:42 pm
- Favourite Player: Hudson Young
- Location: Here
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
I’ve heard in a few places the Dragons have shopped Dufty and we’re an interested party - contingency in case this goes south?
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is just the train that's about to hit you.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
I doubt it, i'd say it's the Wighton to the halves thing...feels to me like Stuart is wanting to get Wighton in the halves, but doesnt want Rapana or Cotric playing fullback... so i think there is a good chance the club feels if they can get a good fullback and move Wighton to the halves, it will solve the problems
-
- Ricky Stuart
- Posts: 9622
- Joined: January 18, 2005, 6:35 pm
- Location: Lismore NSW
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
The NRL has already seen this footage have they not?
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 13407
- Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
- Location: Canberra :(
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
The NRL have seen the footage and made their decision. If he avoids prison, the story will be dead in a week.
10 weeks was the sentence because there were 10 games left in the season. If plead guilty two weeks earlier or later with the same sentencing date I suspect he would have received 8 or 12 weeks
10 weeks was the sentence because there were 10 games left in the season. If plead guilty two weeks earlier or later with the same sentencing date I suspect he would have received 8 or 12 weeks
Last edited by Green eyed Mick on October 10, 2018, 6:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Ricky Stuart
- Posts: 9622
- Joined: January 18, 2005, 6:35 pm
- Location: Lismore NSW
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
The NRL won't shoot themselves in the foot by adding more, or so you'd thinkGreen eyed Mick wrote:The NRL have seen the footage and made their decision. If he avoids prison, the story will be dead in a week.
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
The NRL copped a lot of flack, and rightly so, after the 'Lodge' footage was released and he had already sat out for an extended period.VictorTheViking wrote:The NRL won't shoot themselves in the foot by adding more, or so you'd thinkGreen eyed Mick wrote:The NRL have seen the footage and made their decision. If he avoids prison, the story will be dead in a week.
Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Shoving it in your face since 2017
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Can we keep the discussion civil please? I've edited some posts in this thread, given the invective. People can make their points without it.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Claims that aren't substantiated by a reputable media report or the court records aren't going to be permitted here. That's a basic forum guideline. It is possible there are things the public does not know yet. But we need to stick to the facts as publicly reported so far. Seriously, if people have evidence that is important to the case... they should report it to the authorities, not make claims on the forum.
The invective needs to stop as well. Jack Wighton's sentencing hearing is still to happen... so please keep your comments within forum guidelines.
If people can't follow both requests, we'll have to lock the thread.
The invective needs to stop as well. Jack Wighton's sentencing hearing is still to happen... so please keep your comments within forum guidelines.
If people can't follow both requests, we'll have to lock the thread.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
You take the good with the bad. Jack can be unhappy that the footage won't be suppressed, or grateful that he didn't bump into BigCheese that night.
It's up to him whether the glass if half full or empty.
It's up to him whether the glass if half full or empty.
We continue to **** about with blokes that are part of some fraternity. It's infuriating.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Can’t let too much get in the way of running down our own
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Can't let too much get in the way of fact.Keghead wrote:Can’t let too much get in the way of running down our own
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
-
- David Furner
- Posts: 3764
- Joined: January 6, 2005, 9:42 pm
- Favourite Player: Hudson Young
- Location: Here
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Could this be why we keep hearing stories that we’re talking to players who’d command a bit of coin - TPJ and Moses for example - despite the fact we’re told we’re on the cap? Could the club be preparing for Wighton to get gaol time and be deregistered?
Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is just the train that's about to hit you.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
What happened is not in actually in dispute.Keghead wrote: ↑October 11, 2018, 12:23 pm Can’t let too much get in the way of running down our own
Sent from my iPhone using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
The police collected the evidence, including CCTV footage and multiple witness statements. They presented that evidence to the DPP, they collectively felt the evidence warranted pressing charges.
Jack Wighton was charged. Jack Wighton was unable to recall the events of the night due to his level of intoxication, and was unable to offer up a credible defense of his actions. Jack Wighton and his legal team were presented with the evidence against him, and he elected to enter a guilty plea.
He ran himself down with his actions. He's accepted as much via the guilty plea, probably time you accept it too.
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32584
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Biggest question is why has it taken the Daily Telecrap so long to publish the footage? Thought they would be on this like a fly on ****. Must be waiting for the right time i.e. 1 week before next season's opener.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
-
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 13407
- Joined: February 26, 2010, 6:01 pm
- Favourite Player: Brett Mullins
- Location: Canberra :(
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
The footage won't be released until after sentencing.Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:01 am Biggest question is why has it taken the Daily Telecrap so long to publish the footage? Thought they would be on this like a fly on ****. Must be waiting for the right time i.e. 1 week before next season's opener.
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32584
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
OK. Explains it then. Didn't expect so much restraint from that rag.Green eyed Mick wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:05 amThe footage won't be released until after sentencing.Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:01 am Biggest question is why has it taken the Daily Telecrap so long to publish the footage? Thought they would be on this like a fly on ****. Must be waiting for the right time i.e. 1 week before next season's opener.
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
There are to be NO posts permitted here that are not sourced by reputable media sources. Thinking out about it? Don’t worry. We will delete them.
- Raider Azz
- Jason Croker
- Posts: 4726
- Joined: January 7, 2005, 10:22 pm
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Please. Everyone major news outlet in Australia will be publishing the footage the moment it is released. I hate the DT as much as you, but don't pretend they're the only publication that will be willing to post the video.Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:07 amOK. Explains it then. Didn't expect so much restraint from that rag.Green eyed Mick wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:05 amThe footage won't be released until after sentencing.Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:01 am Biggest question is why has it taken the Daily Telecrap so long to publish the footage? Thought they would be on this like a fly on ****. Must be waiting for the right time i.e. 1 week before next season's opener.
- Northern Raider
- Mal Meninga
- Posts: 32584
- Joined: June 19, 2007, 8:17 am
- Favourite Player: Dean Lance
- Location: Greener pastures
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
They won't be the only one but they will run with it longer and harder than any other publication. This is the same job that staked out the Dog's private function on Mad Monday and found their front page story.Raider Azz wrote:Please. Everyone major news outlet in Australia will be publishing the footage the moment it is released. I hate the DT as much as you, but don't pretend they're the only publication that will be willing to post the video.Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:07 amOK. Explains it then. Didn't expect so much restraint from that rag.Green eyed Mick wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:05 amThe footage won't be released until after sentencing.Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:01 am Biggest question is why has it taken the Daily Telecrap so long to publish the footage? Thought they would be on this like a fly on ****. Must be waiting for the right time i.e. 1 week before next season's opener.
Sent from my SM-G955F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk
* The author assumes no responsibility for the topicality, correctness, completeness or quality of information provided.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
I don't understand why people are upset that the DT ran a story on poor behaviour at the Bulldogs "Mad Monday". That club has form in terms of poor behaviour at such events. Modern clubs are giving them the flick. What they were doing was offering the media a gold plated opportunity to give their club and the game a black eye. Brought it entirely on themselves. I have no sympathy for the Bulldogs whatsoever, and the NRL correctly gave them a big penalty.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Because they put photo's on the front page that could only have been taken by a drone, or from an elevated position with a telescopic lense.
They passed it off as though the Bulldogs were in full view of the public, yet they were on a 3rd storey function room.
They passed it off as though the Bulldogs were in full view of the public, yet they were on a 3rd storey function room.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
If you’re going to get blind drink, get nude etc that’s fine, but don’t do it where the media can observe it. But preferably, if you’re a professional football club, you don’t have work functions where that happens. Never happened at any work function I attended. It is 2018. "Mad Mondays" should have been left behind as an acceptable thing for a club to run many, many years ago.
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
GE, you're talking about guys in their 20's here. They should be able to get drunk at some point in the year. They are pretty restricted for most of the year. I've got no problem with what they did.
The incidents like Wightons are the ones we need to stamp out.
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
The incidents like Wightons are the ones we need to stamp out.
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
Shoving it in your face since 2017
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
I agree entirely that players should be allowed to get drunk. But they have the reputation of their club and code uphold, so it should never be happening at a club endorsed "work function". I can't imagine any other working environment where this sort of behaviour would be considered acceptable at a "work function" in the country. If what happened at the Bulldogs Mad Monday went on at your workplace's Christmas party... what would happen? Rugby league is almost in the stone ages when it comes to this. The NRL should put every club on notice it is just not on.gergreg wrote: ↑October 18, 2018, 4:41 pm GE, you're talking about guys in their 20's here. They should be able to get drunk at some point in the year. They are pretty restricted for most of the year. I've got no problem with what they did.
The incidents like Wightons are the ones we need to stamp out.
Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk
I'm not trying to be a wowser. People get drunk and people get nude. But if public figures get drunk... it makes a lot of sense to do it genuinely in private.
- gangrenous
- Laurie Daley
- Posts: 16705
- Joined: May 12, 2007, 10:42 pm
NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
Go do it on your own time and dime.
Not at a work function when you know the media are watching. I’m with GE, idiots got all they deserved.
Edit - and he’s beaten me to the punch too
Not at a work function when you know the media are watching. I’m with GE, idiots got all they deserved.
Edit - and he’s beaten me to the punch too
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
That's a fair point, can we get some sort of MOU with the media that if they are not at an official work function, that they'll be left alone then?
Come on now... why die in a ditch over the work function v personal time as if that makes one iota of difference in how the media treats or covers them?
Personally re: the bulldogs, they were in a private function room three stories up, the only people offended by the nudity where the people looking at the footage on the drone. I couldnt have given LESS of a **** about that. If you get out of a mad monday drinking session with private nudity, id consider it a pretty solid result
Come on now... why die in a ditch over the work function v personal time as if that makes one iota of difference in how the media treats or covers them?
Personally re: the bulldogs, they were in a private function room three stories up, the only people offended by the nudity where the people looking at the footage on the drone. I couldnt have given LESS of a **** about that. If you get out of a mad monday drinking session with private nudity, id consider it a pretty solid result
Re: NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine
The media in Australia is restrained compared to the UK. I feel for people who do things that everyone else does... but if they do it, it is of media interest, simply because they are public figures. Nobody is perfect, but footy players are public figures on big money... it sort of comes with the job that you don't get nude in a function room at a work party. I agree that if it is people's private business... the media should leave it alone. (Maybe not if you're a politician, presenting yourself as something else.) But it's not going to happen if you're a public figure, as Mitchell Pearce found out.