For moral and reputational reasons, the NRL must act on player behaviour | Nick Tedeschi

It is hard to imagine any sport enduring an off season where so much damage has been done. In the build-up to the 2019 NRL campaign, that hurt has been inflicted by a group of players who clearly believed they operated outside the bounds of what is deemed tolerable by society and the game.

The damage has also been done by an administration that has for far too long resorted to cheap rhetoric over real action and clubs that have, for the most part, palmed responsibility for their players off to the league.

The result is a situation where St George Illawarra player Jack de Belin, accused of aggravated sexual assault, has not stood down or been stood down by either his club or the league with those charges pending. It is a position few view as acceptable.

The day of reckoning that has long been coming to an administration more focused on populism than policy has finally arrived, and the ARLC is reportedly set to review its disciplinary policy regarding players charged with serious crimes against women this week.

Rugby league, of course, should stand against violence against women – it should stand against violence full-stop – but taking such a position before judicial proceedings are completed can be problematic, given the acceptance that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

The moral justification for passing new guidelines to allow a player facing these kind of serious charges to be stood down are clear, but there are reputational reasons to consider too.

The NRL should not and cannot put up with this behaviour. It is the right and proper thing to stand down a player accused of serious criminal behaviour. The league should also be protecting its own reputation. The two go hand-in-hand and can no longer be separated.

As such, the NRL needs to be clear with its public messaging at this point.

The moral stance can be underscored when investigations are complete, trials are finalised, and verdicts are reached. But at this juncture, the NRL’s public messaging can be about practical terms – the league preserving the interests of the game it has been charged to protect, ensuring rugby league is not marginalised to the point of extinction.

The NRL must understand that if it does not reflect the attitudes of the masses or represent the values of society, it invites the spectre of diminished standing. Failure to keep step with what society demands does damage to not only the brand of the sport but its very core.

It is quite clear that the NRL has not kept pace with how society expects men to treat women, how it expects those who commit and/or are charged with violence against women are handled, and how a sense of entitlement has been used to excuse poor off-field behaviour.

The NRL never thought it would be in this position but through a long period of administrative inaction, inconsistency and incongruence, this is where the game is at. We are here because for so long it has refused to take a stand and deliver a clear and consistent policy, where players are aware of punishments and those facing criminal proceedings are stood down and the reputation of the game is considered.

The game can no longer just fall back and accept its administrators relying on old lines such as “these matters are before the courts”. Few want individuals accused of crimes denied natural justice or procedural fairness. Most though want the game to consider the impact that poor optics have for both the sport itself and the message it sends back to society.

source: theguardian.com