Because there was photos of them with white powder.Why would they
And on top of this you're taking away from the fact that you reacted to my post by picking one part of it without taking the obvious meaning into consideration.
Because there was photos of them with white powder.Why would they
They both need each other equally.
And it is an illegal drug. They should get in more **** than they should. Here is hoping there is actual testing done.
I agree, though, without testing they could sit back and deny it all. Was all a gee-up. But I highly doubt it. Either way, isn't a good look.
Yeah not keen on hauling people in for drug tests because that might've been cocaine on the table. Their season was over, leave em alone.Because there was photos of them with white powder.
And on top of this you're taking away from the fact that you reacted to my post by picking one part of it without taking the obvious meaning into consideration.
It doesn't matter what you think mate. It's what has happened in the past. Do you think Ben Barba was just unlucky to have been tested after winning the Grand Final? That he was next on the list under Mr No Names Canterbury fullback in the President's Cup? Bit of rotten luck? That was the whole point of my post.Yeah not keen on hauling people in for drug tests because that might've been cocaine on the table. Their season was over, leave em alone.
That was Ben's 2nd positive test in 12mths. He wasn't the only one tested nor was he the only positive.It doesn't matter what you think mate. It's what has happened in the past. Do you think Ben Barba was just unlucky to have been tested after winning the Grand Final? That he was next on the list under Mr No Names Canterbury fullback in the President's Cup? Bit of rotten luck? That was the whole point of my post.
But it was obviously a targeted test. Why do you keep making points that have nothing to do with the context of my original post?That was Ben's 2nd positive test in 12mths. He wasn't the only one tested nor was he the only positive.
You made out like poor Barba was singled out, he wasn't.But it was obviously a targeted test. Why do you keep making points that have nothing to do with the context of my original post?
Thank you for addressing my actual post.You made out like poor Barba was singled out, he wasn't.
NRL 'fans' demand blood. We want everyone punished & suspended for some reason.Give them a fine, let's be hard and say $20k.
No point in banning them for 2 games, because this will be forgotten about in 10 days time, and instead in March next someone will ask "why isn't cheese or Munster playing" and someone will remind them there was a 7 second video of them in the same room as cocaine.
That punishment would be based on the video, not a positive drug test.
I'm sure the NRL could drug test them outright, but it wouldn't exactly be random.
I couldn't care less. Without the players, the NRL would have gone bust midway last year. Let them have a few nose beers.
Give them a symbolic fine and move on.
Evidence. They got some on Walsh. Nothing proven against these lads yet.Might have never even existed!
But can anyone tell me how Walsh gets a strike (in season) and they don’t (out of season)?
Is in/out actually nothing to do with it and it’s just a he got formally charged by cops and they haven’t and NRL is going to consider them out of season in terms of testing
Well if it’s not anything illegal I’m sure Muntster and big sniffy Smithy will volunteer for a test to avoid a fine and suspension. Sniffing white is punishable but just dancing white shouldn’t be. If they didn’t do anything wrong why cop a fine and suspension?Evidence. They got some on Walsh. Nothing proven against these lads yet.
Far out though. Pearce got a bigger suspension and fine for pretending to root a dog. He got what, 8 weeks or so, 100K something fine.
If these blokes get less than that it is a joke.
I wasn't attempting to answer in season v out of season. I don't know their criteria. You'd think Barba after the GF (last game) would be out of season if after being KO'd from a prelim was. Gotta remember there is ASADA random testing and NRL random testing & the consequences of returning a positive result differ depending on who busts you & when.Well if it’s not anything illegal I’m sure Muntster and big sniffy Smithy will volunteer for a test to avoid a fine and suspension. Sniffing white is punishable but just dancing white shouldn’t be. If they didn’t do anything wrong why cop a fine and suspension?
So the NRL does have evidence and whilst it is not strong doesn’t seem they are gunna try disprove it.
Anyway, your answer didn’t really respond to my question about why that article brought up in season vs out of season.
100%. Just because they (a previous admin from yrs ago) got it wrong on Pearce doesn't or shouldn't mean we must continue to apply exorbitant punishments. We used to convict & punish people for being homosexual - just because we dished out bullshit punishment before doesn't mean we have to keep it up.The Pearce punishment was OTT, NRL got that horribly wrong.
Pretty much all NRL punishments are out of step with the offences, zero consistency
I couldn't care less. Without the players, the NRL would have gone bust midway last year. Let them have a few nose beers.
Give them a symbolic fine and move on.
Without players the NRL doesn't have a product to sell to have money to pay anyone anything.
An infinite amount won't get the message across to all.If it’s slap on the wrists it doesn’t send a message. Then again how many messages have to be sent for an nrl player to realise that their in a spotlight position.
It’s obviously coke, need proof that’s a big part. The players could come clean like Walsh and cop it. Denial of it just makes it worse.
Obviously ASADA didn’t find a positive test, so their bans don’t apply.
Will be interesting to see.