Curtis Scott police assault charges dropped after court rules arrest 'unlawful'

[Timbo]

I don't know if it's as simple as saying 'just sack him'.

He's signed a four year deal worth quite a bit of money. What if he lawyers up and sues the club and points to the fact we didn't cut Wighton loose when he went on his rampage twelve months ago?

That'd be a great thing to have hanging over our head going into 2020.

I also don't subscribe to the idea that a centre is very easy to replace. Without BJ, we've lost a lot of our strike power out wide. Scott was brought in to fill that gap. The idea that we just sign Gagai or Douhei doesn't necessarily fix that and won't provide the points we want. Stuart and Mulholland clearly went after Scott for a reason and it must've been because they thought he fits in with the way our side works on the field.

We showed our hand 12 months ago when we didn't sack Jack. You may say 'he was an established player, he'd been here before' - whatever. They're both Raiders contracted players who started swinging when they were having a night on the tiles. Just because we know and like Jack doesn't change that fact.

I would also like to point out I was calling for Jack to be sacked 12 months ago. But the fact we handled it the way that we did suggests to me we will not be sacking Scott.

[Raider47]

Yeah I'm not as crazy about sacking him as some others are. It's a horrible, horrible look what he has done and a terrible way to endear himself to the Canberra public and all fans. I think he is a tosser tbh. However I think the right course of action would be to give him an almighty spray, a hefty punishment and told to clean up his act. He clearly needs some help so with a revised plan maybe we can assist him.

We sack him, we lose out and lose two good centres. Not good in a premiership window.

[Beejay]

Curtis Scott to front Canberra Raiders after being charged by police

Curtis Scott will have to front frustrated coach Ricky Stuart and the Canberra Raiders squad at training on Wednesday with his immediate NRL future balanced on a knife's edge. Stuart will leave any potential club sanctions in the hands of Furner and football manager Matt Ford.

Scott's indiscretions do not fall under the NRL's no-fault stand down policy but he could still be banned by NRL CEO Todd Greenberg as he looks to erase poor player behaviour.

Read more: https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/ ... /?cs=14239

Curtis Scott returns to training as NRL investigates Australia Day taser arrest

Raiders recruit Curtis Scott will return to training with the Green Machine on Wednesday as NRL boss Todd Greenberg continues to examine his case.

Scott joined the Green Machine before Christmas on a four-year deal, with the Melbourne Storm chipping in $200,000 for this season and next season.

Read more: https://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/curtis ... oTl8qZBTV4

[Raiders_Pat]

I don't know if it's as simple as saying 'just sack him'.

He's signed a four year deal worth quite a bit of money. What if he lawyers up and sues the club and points to the fact we didn't cut Wighton loose when he went on his rampage twelve months ago?

That'd be a great thing to have hanging over our head going into 2020.

I also don't subscribe to the idea that a centre is very easy to replace. Without BJ, we've lost a lot of our strike power out wide. Scott was brought in to fill that gap. The idea that we just sign Gagai or Douhei doesn't necessarily fix that and won't provide the points we want. Stuart and Mulholland clearly went after Scott for a reason and it must've been because they thought he fits in with the way our side works on the field.

We showed our hand 12 months ago when we didn't sack Jack. You may say 'he was an established player, he'd been here before' - whatever. They're both Raiders contracted players who started swinging when they were having a night on the tiles. Just because we know and like Jack doesn't change that fact.

I would also like to point out I was calling for Jack to be sacked 12 months ago. But the fact we handled it the way that we did suggests to me we will not be sacking Scott.

I think the outcome could depend partly on whether we would be able to sack him without having to pay him in full or at least whether we would have to take an L on the salary cap to get rid of him.

The situation is different to Wighton's for several reasons: a) Wighton was in a key spine position; b) Wighton had a higher ceiling; c) Wighton had been at our club for many years prior to his incident whereas Scott hasn't played a single game; d) we need to compete for a premiership this year.

I wouldn't be against the club pushing him out if it means we won't cop it as far as the salary cap goes. The question then is who is available if we decide to take this route? I'd be happy to be looking at somebody like Smith-Shields long-term but I think we would need to bring in an experienced first grader for at least a year or two while he develops.

[Beejay]

Also 'the Mole' is all chummy with his ex on Twitter right now - Tay Clark. She is posting and liking comments to the effect of Karma's a bitch

Mole alluding to their being a 'real' story from the past that probably wont come out because someone doesn't want it to.

[Johno]

Fact is Ricky and the club don't know Curtis Scott very well. We don't know his character properly, and we can't fully assess his ability to mature and turn things around. I applauded him when he kicked off donations to the bushfire appeal by putting in a big sum of his own, but those good intentions are washed away pretty quickly if you're getting pissed to the point where you're assaulting the police.

These charges are very serious and this incident may well be a sign of things to come. Given the murmurs about his past the best thing here is to let him go if he's found guilty, if only to send a clear message to the squad that this behaviour will not be tolerated on any condition. Ricky and the club cannot afford to be weak here. Centre is the most expendable position in the game at the moment so we won't be losing much, and can still get someone in the near future - although the minority bagging BJ probably have a bit of egg to wipe away from their faces.

Begs the question...did you manage to get all that Sezer omelette off your face?

[LimeGreenMachine]

Foxsports article says the Storm are kicking in 200K the next 2 years. There is no way we are sacking him.

[Azza]

We won't sack him. We probably should, though. But the whole Carney / Dewgone thing has probably taught the club a few things about the rewards of doing that (i.e. nil).

[Seiffert82]

I don't know if it's as simple as saying 'just sack him'.

He's signed a four year deal worth quite a bit of money. What if he lawyers up and sues the club and points to the fact we didn't cut Wighton loose when he went on his rampage twelve months ago?

That'd be a great thing to have hanging over our head going into 2020.

I also don't subscribe to the idea that a centre is very easy to replace. Without BJ, we've lost a lot of our strike power out wide. Scott was brought in to fill that gap. The idea that we just sign Gagai or Douhei doesn't necessarily fix that and won't provide the points we want. Stuart and Mulholland clearly went after Scott for a reason and it must've been because they thought he fits in with the way our side works on the field.

We showed our hand 12 months ago when we didn't sack Jack. You may say 'he was an established player, he'd been here before' - whatever. They're both Raiders contracted players who started swinging when they were having a night on the tiles. Just because we know and like Jack doesn't change that fact.

I would also like to point out I was calling for Jack to be sacked 12 months ago. But the fact we handled it the way that we did suggests to me we will not be sacking Scott.

Joel Monaghan begs to differ. He was sacked and it wasn't even a legal issue. Bronx Goodwin, Steve Irwin...tons of players have been sacked by the club for far less.

These guys would have all sorts of code of conduct clauses in their contract. They could absolutely sack him for being drunk and disorderly, resisting arrest and assaulting a police officer...which isn't at all in doubt.

[Northern Raider]

How Raiders handled the Wighton incident should have no bearing on the Scott case. Jack was a local junior with an extended tenure. The club backing him was something he'd well and truly earned. Scott has only just joined and not even played a game yet. He's owed nothing beyond contract obligations at this stage.

[Makaveli]

Steve Irwin was rightfully sacked. He drove off from the cops and made Todd do everything against his will.

[sprintman]

Steve Irwin was rightfully sacked. He drove off from the cops and made Todd do everything against his will.

Now that’s funny...

[Seiffert82]

Steve Irwin was rightfully sacked. He drove off from the cops and made Todd do everything against his will.

Exactly.

Scapegoat. Sacked. No questions asked.

[Seiffert82]

What I do find interesting, is that there's no noise about Raiders sponsors walking away from the club as a result of this. It tells me that sponsors inherently like a winner more than they do clean behaviour...a phenomenon seen everywhere, except where extremely serious criminal charges are involved. It also tells me that the club is in a position to handle this way better than they have been in the past.

Scott returning to training is a good sign for him. I'm not sure how many other clubs would take a punt on him right now. Maybe the Gold Coast are that desperate?

I'll be **** furious if that **** is retained and pulls another stunt like this though.

[zim]

If he **** up again I don't think you'll have to worry.

[Seiffert82]

If he **** up again I don't think you'll have to worry.

I will if it's half way through a season and it distracts our team and ruins combos. It pissed me off with Carney, I'll be ropeable if this nuffy does it.

[zim]

I think we're a stronger squad than that now. We'd quickly get on with it while waving good bye.

[Off]

Silly billy but not really of the Ivan Milat/Bill Cosby level... 4 weeks and a fine coupled with a grog ban.

[Lucy]

12 weeks. 30k fine. Good behaviour bond and a signed jersey to be raffled for the Redfern Police Station Xmas Party Fund.

He’ll be back.

[Botman]

I don't know if it's as simple as saying 'just sack him'.

He's signed a four year deal worth quite a bit of money. What if he lawyers up and sues the club and points to the fact we didn't cut Wighton loose when he went on his rampage twelve months ago?

That'd be a great thing to have hanging over our head going into 2020.

I think all contracts have a pretty standard clause for detrimental behaviour and the club's decision to not inact that clause in on contract doesnt mean they can do with another. THey are individual contract and we are entitled to excercise our clauses as we see fit

If the club sacks him for breach of contract, i doubt he has a legal leg to stand on the basis that we elected not to exercise our get out clause on another contracted player.

I dont know that for absolute fact but id be STUNNED if the situation was we are legally trapped into keeping Scott because we kept Wighton.

But that's all pretty moot, he's not going to be sacked, im 99% sure of that.

[Botman]

We won't sack him. We probably should, though. But the whole Carney / Dewgone thing has probably taught the club a few things about the rewards of doing that (i.e. nil).

Yep, and conversely, Wighton is a very fresh, very real example of how they didnt sack a guy and the culture of the club and Stuart got it sorted (knock on wood)
I just dont think they'll even consider sacking him. It'll be more about what sort of leash he's on and what he's got to agree to in regards to his conduct.

[greeneyed]

NRL expected to reach punishment calls before Nines

The NRL is likely to announce decisions by the end of next week on whether to punish a number of players involved in off-field controversies.

New Canberra centre Curtis Scott is facing six charges, including two counts of assaulting a police officer, and resisting arrest after an alleged incident early on Monday in Sydney. Scott might be stood down at the discretion of NRL CEO Todd Greenberg.

Read more: https://wwos.nine.com.au/nrl/nrl-nearin ... fa82399a4c

[afgtnk]

I don't know if it's as simple as saying 'just sack him'.

He's signed a four year deal worth quite a bit of money. What if he lawyers up and sues the club and points to the fact we didn't cut Wighton loose when he went on his rampage twelve months ago?

That'd be a great thing to have hanging over our head going into 2020.

I also don't subscribe to the idea that a centre is very easy to replace. Without BJ, we've lost a lot of our strike power out wide. Scott was brought in to fill that gap. The idea that we just sign Gagai or Douhei doesn't necessarily fix that and won't provide the points we want. Stuart and Mulholland clearly went after Scott for a reason and it must've been because they thought he fits in with the way our side works on the field.

We showed our hand 12 months ago when we didn't sack Jack. You may say 'he was an established player, he'd been here before' - whatever. They're both Raiders contracted players who started swinging when they were having a night on the tiles. Just because we know and like Jack doesn't change that fact.

I would also like to point out I was calling for Jack to be sacked 12 months ago. But the fact we handled it the way that we did suggests to me we will not be sacking Scott.

Two different incidents, two different people. You can't make direct comparisons because they're not the same situations.

[BJ]

I think Curtis Scott would have to receive an actual jail sentence for him to be sacked.

I also think it’s very unlikely that he will see jail time. Some sort of suspended sentence would be most likely.

[Seiffert82]

The club has a way longer record of sacking players.

I suspect they won't sack Scott, but my goodness they have every right to do so.

[Beejay]

If we signed him for $375-400k pa and the storm are chipping in $200k for this year AND next year, we should be focusing on rehabilitation and breakout season from him as payback.

[Seiffert82]

It was reported that he signed a 3 year, $1.5 million contract extension with the Storm. He'd be on a fair bit more than $400k per season.

[InFernos_Raiders]

Scott was given a chance at the Raiders he knew the club had a good culture I’m sure Ricky would have spoken to him about the clubs culture etc....so for Scott to go and drink is OK but to get that drunk where you pass then punch and kick a cop.
He should have stopped drinking but he obviously has no self control when drinking and he has a temper.
The only question I have is it said he was out with team mates now I’m sure they were drinking but you’d think maybe they could’ve stepped in..but then again I wasn’t there.

The bottom line is I really feel for Ricky and the team including the fans Scott really let them all done esp Ricky.

[Neeeegz]

Now we have seen some reason in here for a change.
Sacking him does nothing. Storm chipped in for his salary.for the next 2 years.
I'm pretty sure he will understand he has **** up badly. All the raiders boys have gone quiet on Instagram, and they are usually tight as.
That's why I suspected Joey was gone, he didn't train all off season

[casta66]

Does anyone recall the details of Noa Nadruku being sacked? From memory, he drank 34 beers, 6 whiskeys, half a bottle of wine then slapped 2 women. Neither of whom were police officers as far as I know.

I recall the details reasonably well as everytime I have a few cans I think "well I haven't had as much as Noa"

Sent from my ANE-LX2J using Tapatalk

[Lui_Bon]

Fact is Ricky and the club don't know Curtis Scott very well. We don't know his character properly, and we can't fully assess his ability to mature and turn things around. I applauded him when he kicked off donations to the bushfire appeal by putting in a big sum of his own, but those good intentions are washed away pretty quickly if you're getting pissed to the point where you're assaulting the police.

These charges are very serious and this incident may well be a sign of things to come. Given the murmurs about his past the best thing here is to let him go if he's found guilty, if only to send a clear message to the squad that this behaviour will not be tolerated on any condition. Ricky and the club cannot afford to be weak here. Centre is the most expendable position in the game at the moment so we won't be losing much, and can still get someone in the near future - although the minority bagging BJ probably have a bit of egg to wipe away from their faces.

Mostly I agree with your post. And by that I mean that it's well reasoned by its own lights. So believe me I'm just quoting you because it's the last post I've seen here, not for any antagonistic motive.

The thing I find a bit nebulous is this idea that "assaulting the police" is somehow a hanging offence. Don't get me wrong, no-one should "assault" anyone. Ask, however, is a wild swinging arm while newted an "assault" in the way a normal person would understand it? Or is it a $500 fine and move along?

Getting hit up with the trifecta doesn't always mean you're a bad person; more likely you're just an idiot. Since when has this stopped blokes from being on football teams? My guess would be he'll cop the fine (no pun intended) and if the NRL are up to their usual moral standards he'll be unlucky enough to get maybe a 4 week suspension.

[Bennyinthewest]

Give him 6 games

Then play 3 trial games this year n say he ya would have been named in all 3

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

[robtheraider]

Heard from a number of different and reliable sources that this guys is a grub of the highest order, and a seriously loose unit....to the point that if rumoured indiscretions come to light, there would be a number of people here who would want nothing to do with him donning the lime green.

Everything points to him being a serious risk to the cohesion of the team unit....hence why Bellamy was so keen to remove him, and ....and possibly why he was found alone and not in the company of his team mates.....i'm guessing that they'd had enough of him and left him to it.

I have no doubt that Don and Stick are well aware of his previous form, hence the "pissed off" comment from stick.

I am hoping he is immediately shown the door and no further correspondence entered into

[kona_dream]

I don't get the NRL making decisions on penalties while a criminal case is pending. I thought that was the point of the no fault stand down. In which case if it was a serious criminal charge you stand the player down until they have had their day in court. Otherwise you let the player play until the court has made their decision.

[Johno]

Heard from a number of different and reliable sources that this guys is a grub of the highest order, and a seriously loose unit....to the point that if rumoured indiscretions come to light, there would be a number of people here who would want nothing to do with him donning the lime green.

Everything points to him being a serious risk to the cohesion of the team unit....hence why Bellamy was so keen to remove him, and ....and possibly why he was found alone and not in the company of his team mates.....i'm guessing that they'd had enough of him and left him to it.

I have no doubt that Don and Stick are well aware of his previous form, hence the "pissed off" comment from stick.

I am hoping he is immediately shown the door and no further correspondence entered into

Interesting comment Rob, if closer to the playing group, for instance Cotric, you'd imagine he would be looked after, given Scott is new and has history, perhaps as you allude to they cut him loose if he kepyt acting an idiot.
Im sure more facts will come to light via players who were in his company on the night