News Jayden Okunbor and Corey Harawira-Naera stood down

[DinkumDog]

So you consider a person that can legally have sex to be a child?

So you are questioning our legislation?

As TT also mentioned, there was no "grooming" at the school on"work time" as clearly indicated by messages that have been publicly displayed.

Disagree with your last statement but we can park that and I’ll answer your question.

Yes, I am questioning the legislation and here’s why:

For decades the age of consent in NSW at least has been between 16-18 at various times and even differing between males and females.

In a broader sense the law considers you a minor ‘a child’ or at least ‘not an adult’ until you’re 18. So you might be able to legally have sex, but you’re still not an adult.

The newer laws around sexting make it clear that under 18 this stuff is illegal.

Therefore there needs to be better alignment between the age of being an adult, the age of personal/private sexual consent and the age of digital carriage of sexual material which may involve any individual.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Disagree with your last statement but we can park that and I’ll answer your question.

Yes, I am questioning the legislation and here’s why:

For decades the age of consent in NSW at least has been between 16-18 at various times and even differing between males and females.

In a broader sense the law considers you a minor ‘a child’ or at least ‘not an adult’ until you’re 18. So you might be able to legally have sex, but you’re still not an adult.

The newer laws around sexting make it clear that under 18 this stuff is illegal.

Therefore there needs to be better alignment between the age of being an adult, the age of personal/private sexual consent and the age of digital carriage of sexual material which may involve any individual.

Absolutely agree, there are large inconsistencies caused by newer legislation that doesn’t align with previous legislation. Politicians seem to commonly believe that anything they come up with is brand new and no one ever thought of it or anything similar to it before. Plainly not the case.

That said, this is not a case where legislated differences matter much as the police have stated on record that no laws were broken and no complaints have been lodged.

Go Dogs

 

[DinkumDog]

Absolutely agree, there are large inconsistencies caused by newer legislation that doesn’t align with previous legislation. Politicians seem to commonly believe that anything they come up with is brand new and no one ever thought of it or anything similar to it before. Plainly not the case.

That said, this is not a case where legislated differences matter much as the police have stated on record that no laws were broken and no complaints have been lodged.

Go Dogs

Correct, hence why it’s down to a workplace matter and the Working with Children legislation.

 

[GDR]

Disagree with your last statement but we can park that and I’ll answer your question.

Yes, I am questioning the legislation and here’s why:

For decades the age of consent in NSW at least has been between 16-18 at various times and even differing between males and females.

In a broader sense the law considers you a minor ‘a child’ or at least ‘not an adult’ until you’re 18. So you might be able to legally have sex, but you’re still not an adult.

The newer laws around sexting make it clear that under 18 this stuff is illegal.

Therefore there needs to be better alignment between the age of being an adult, the age of personal/private sexual consent and the age of digital carriage of sexual material which may involve any individual.

Thank you, by questioning the legislation , you are effectively admitting you are wrong. If and when the law is altered you may have grounds to your claims.

 

[DinkumDog]

Thank you, by questioning the legislation , you are effectively admitting you are wrong. If and when the law is altered you may have grounds to your claims.

Not even close, but happy to leave it there.

 

[Teddybear]

If we do terminate, would the players have any grounds to bring an unfair dismissal claim against the club?

Correct, hence why it’s down to a workplace matter and the Working with Children legislation.

 

[TwinTurbo]

If we do terminate, would the players have any grounds to bring an unfair dismissal claim against the club?

It wouldn’t be hard for them to show inconsistencies in how they were treated versus how others were treated. Breaking the players code of conduct is not unusual and this is a pretty minor breech compared to many others. My view is they could well have a case.

That’s were the NRL needs to come up with a crime that fits the punishment they want to dish out.

Go Dogs

 

[DinkumDog]

If we do terminate, would the players have any grounds to bring an unfair dismissal claim against the club?

It’s a valid question and no doubt the players will be seeking advice on such an outcome. I think Okunbor would face an uphill battle given what’s come to light (and what possibly hasn’t) but CHN’s case still isn’t clear either way.

 

[Teddybear]

Obviously we have recently just come off the back of settling a claim with des which one would assume cost us a packet.
One would think chn contract will be quite large as opposed to okunbur.
Dont think it's advisable to be forking out some more dead cash to be honest

It’s a valid question and no doubt the players will be seeking advice on such an outcome. I think Okunbor would face an uphill battle given what’s come to light (and what possibly hasn’t) but CHN’s case still isn’t clear either way.

 

[TwinTurbo]

Obviously we have recently just come off the back of settling a claim with des which one would assume cost us a packet.
One would think chn contract will be quite large as opposed to okunbur.
Dont think it's advisable to be forking out some more dead cash to be honest

They won’t be pursuing us if the NRL deregisters them. Folau sued RA not the Waratahs.

Go Dogs

 

[Teddybear]

Geez I don't know about that.

Thought the contract was between the player and the canterburyfootball club

With the aru thought contract structured different , as folau was marquee and had both contract with them and another with local club?
As aru subsidied his contract?

They won’t be pursuing us if the NRL deregisters them. Folau sued RA not the Waratahs.

Go Dogs

 

[DinkumDog]

Obviously we have recently just come off the back of settling a claim with des which one would assume cost us a packet.
One would think chn contract will be quite large as opposed to okunbur.
Dont think it's advisable to be forking out some more dead cash to be honest

I’m sure all those factors will be considered by the board in their final determination. (At least they have something to do now eh Teddy ).

 

[Teddybear]

Lol, you carnt let it go mate, im slowly coming around...

I’m sure all those factors will be considered by the board in their final determination. (At least they have something to do now eh Teddy ).

 

[DinkumDog]

Lol, you carnt let it go mate, im slowly coming around...

Only joking mate - yes I couldn’t resist. You’re a great sport .

 

[DinkumDog]

They won’t be pursuing us if the NRL deregisters them. Folau sued RA not the Waratahs.

Go Dogs

That’s a very good point and potentially a minefield. Employed by CBBRLC but contract registered and therefore governed by the NRL.

 

[Spoonman84]

That’s a very good point and potentially a minefield. Employed by CBBRLC but contract registered and therefore governed by the NRL.

There’s no point speculating on legal action we have no idea what is in their contracts and who knows if there’s previous incidents that we don’t know about.

 

[DinkumDog]

There’s no point speculating on legal action we have no idea what is in their contracts and who knows if there’s previous incidents that we don’t know about.

Absolutely agree - just interested to know whose jurisdiction an NRL player contract comes under - club or NRL?

 

[Shire Dog]

That’s a very good point and potentially a minefield. Employed by CBBRLC but contract registered and therefore governed by the NRL.

I’m pretty sure that the board would engage in its own legal department regarding this matter for advice
Management are usually hesitant to pull the trigger these days without consultation
Another wrong decision could end up being very costly which I’m sure they are trying to avoid

 

[DinkumDog]

I’m pretty sure that the board would engage in its own legal department regarding this matter for advice
Management are usually hesitant to pull the trigger these days without consultation
Another wrong decision could end up being very costly which I’m sure they are trying to avoid

Agree. The Hasler settlement mess would’ve been the perfect precedent to this approach.

 

[Spoonman84]

Absolutely agree - just interested to know who’s jurisdiction an NRL player contract comes under - club or NRL?

The Dogs pay them so I’m thinking it’s the Bulldogs.