NRL ban Jack Wighton for 10 matches, impose $30,000 fine

sprintman · Post by **sprintman** » October 10, 2018, 12:16 pm

simo wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 11:45 am
Pigman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 8:19 am
dubby wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 7:35 am I'm not defending Jack, nor am I going to condemn him.

I think it's prudent to wait until I see the footage before I start making any comments .

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Why 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?
Um, 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.
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.

So if they’re ‘coloured or homosexual’ as you put it, it’s OK to run around bashing people?

Roger Kenworthy · Post by **Roger Kenworthy** » October 10, 2018, 1:19 pm

There were 5 spontaneous deaths in Civic that evening. The footage will show Jack went around belting life back into them.

hrundi89 · Post by **hrundi89** » October 10, 2018, 3:07 pm

sprintman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 12:16 pm
simo wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 11:45 am
Pigman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 8:19 am
dubby wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 7:35 am I'm not defending Jack, nor am I going to condemn him.

I think it's prudent to wait until I see the footage before I start making any comments .

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Why 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?
Um, 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.
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.
So if they’re ‘coloured or homosexual’ as you put it, it’s OK to run around bashing people?

How could you possibly have interpreted the statement in that way?

sprintman · Post by **sprintman** » October 10, 2018, 4:09 pm

hrundi89 wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 3:07 pm
sprintman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 12:16 pm
simo wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 11:45 am
Pigman wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 8:19 am
dubby wrote: ↑October 10, 2018, 7:35 am I'm not defending Jack, nor am I going to condemn him.

I think it's prudent to wait until I see the footage before I start making any comments .

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
Why 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?
Um, 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.
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.
So if they’re ‘coloured or homosexual’ as you put it, it’s OK to run around bashing people?
How could you possibly have interpreted the statement in that way?

You’d better read it carefully

gangrenous · Post by **gangrenous** » October 10, 2018, 5:06 pm

Better read it again with sarcasm turned on sprintman!

Lucy · Post by **Lucy** » October 10, 2018, 5:15 pm

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

Timbo · Post by **Timbo** » October 10, 2018, 5:53 pm

I’ve heard in a few places the Dragons have shopped Dufty and we’re an interested party - contingency in case this goes south?

Botman · Post by **Botman** » October 10, 2018, 5:57 pm

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

VictorTheViking · Post by **VictorTheViking** » October 10, 2018, 6:07 pm

The NRL has already seen this footage have they not?

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Green eyed Mick · Post by **Green eyed Mick** » October 10, 2018, 6:46 pm

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

VictorTheViking · Post by **VictorTheViking** » October 10, 2018, 6:48 pm

Green 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.

The NRL won't shoot themselves in the foot by adding more, or so you'd think

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

gerg · Post by **gerg** » October 10, 2018, 7:19 pm

VictorTheViking wrote:
Green 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.
The NRL won't shoot themselves in the foot by adding more, or so you'd think

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

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.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Post by **greeneyed** » October 11, 2018, 8:48 am

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.

Post by **greeneyed** » October 11, 2018, 12:01 pm

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.

Woodgers · Post by **Woodgers** » October 11, 2018, 12:04 pm

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.

Botman · Post by **Botman** » October 11, 2018, 12:16 pm

Woodgers wrote: ↑October 11, 2018, 12:04 pm 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.

Keghead · Post by **Keghead** » 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

Lucy · Post by **Lucy** » October 11, 2018, 12:37 pm

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

Can't let too much get in the way of fact.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Timbo · Post by **Timbo** » October 11, 2018, 12:56 pm

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?

Botman · Post by **Botman** » October 11, 2018, 1:52 pm

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

What happened is not in actually in dispute.
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 · Post by **Northern Raider** » 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.

Green eyed Mick · Post by **Green eyed Mick** » October 12, 2018, 11:05 am

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 footage won't be released until after sentencing.

Northern Raider · Post by **Northern Raider** » October 12, 2018, 11:07 am

Green eyed Mick wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:05 am
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 footage won't be released until after sentencing.

OK. Explains it then. Didn't expect so much restraint from that rag.

Post by **greeneyed** » October 16, 2018, 11:03 pm

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.

Bigcheese · Post by **Bigcheese** » October 17, 2018, 11:14 am

Woodgers wrote: ↑October 11, 2018, 12:04 pm 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.

Good point Woodgers! Very lucky

Raider Azz · Post by **Raider Azz** » October 18, 2018, 2:31 pm

Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:07 am
Green eyed Mick wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:05 am
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 footage won't be released until after sentencing.
OK. Explains it then. Didn't expect so much restraint from that rag.

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 · Post by **Northern Raider** » October 18, 2018, 2:37 pm

Raider Azz wrote:
Northern Raider wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:07 am
Green eyed Mick wrote: ↑October 12, 2018, 11:05 am
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 footage won't be released until after sentencing.
OK. Explains it then. Didn't expect so much restraint from that rag.
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.

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.

Sent from my SM-G955F using The Greenhouse mobile app powered by Tapatalk

Post by **greeneyed** » October 18, 2018, 2:42 pm

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.

Beejay · Post by **Beejay** » October 18, 2018, 3:23 pm

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.

Post by **greeneyed** » October 18, 2018, 3:32 pm

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.

gerg · Post by **gerg** » 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

Post by **greeneyed** » October 18, 2018, 5:08 pm

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 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.

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 · Post by **gangrenous** » October 18, 2018, 5:09 pm

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

Botman · Post by **Botman** » October 18, 2018, 5:38 pm

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

Post by **greeneyed** » October 18, 2018, 5:49 pm

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.