Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
I can't see how it matters what the bloke in question (can't even remember his name, that's how important he is on my horizon) does for a living, or what football code he's involved with.OK I've sat back and listened and read all you twee guys and hairy legged feminists and would like to put in my 2 bobsworth.
First a declaration, I support The NQ Cowboys and The Manly Sea Eagles.
When they clash I sit back and celebrate the winner.
IMHO they are the 2 greatest teams in the NRL.
Now for some harden up therapy for you weasels who are prone to judge and condemn before the process of judgement has been fulfilled.
Rugby League is about aggression and winning.
Finding a mate is similar, although wooing helps.
I would agree that Alcohol, Marijuana, Ekkies, Cocaine and Amphetamines have changed the mix. But those stimulants are profligate at non NRL functions.
The line between welcome pre intercourse and sexual harassment/assault is a fine one. It has always been thus.
As is a good and a bad tackle and a good try.
Anyone involved in NRL realises this.
You posters need to harden up and wait for the umpires decision.
Rugby League is a beaut game, and the NRL is too quick to punish high testosterone players.
gg
The charge of sexual assault doesn't have anything to do with his occupation.
If a bloke sexually assaults a female, then he deserves to be charged.
Presumably the police have video evidence of what occurred or they wouldn't have been so quick to lay the charge.
For god's sake, stop excusing drunken insulting and assaulting behaviour because the idjit concerned runs around a muddy paddock after a ball.
Just get real about what sexual assault means.
And don't further downgrade your clearly questionable judgement by describing any woman, e.g. Prospector, and now me, who calls you on your comments, a "hairy legged feminist".
In other words, fellas, try playing the argument, not the person.
And gg, although I've quoted your post, I'm by no means suggesting you're the only poster in this thread who needs a re-arrangement of their thoughts as far as women are concerned.
That said, let's wait for what the court decides. I just find it abhorrent that if this character has in fact assaulted the girl, he could be even slightly excused because he's a sportsperson of whatever type.