seven07
Kennel Established
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2013
- Messages
- 708
- Reaction score
- 1,020
The Bulldogs are likely be the latest in a long list of NRL clubs punished for doing the right thing.
Former Bulldog Corey Harawira-Naera is reportedly a target of several teams, with the August 3rd deadline for registering players for 2020 approaching.
CHN was de-registered earlier this season after a pre-season incident was uncovered. He and Jayden Okunbor were dismissed from the club and banned from playing NRL.
That said, the incident is not one that will likely see CHN especially exiled from the game in the long-term.
Given the spate of injuries we’ve seen over recent weeks combined with Harawira-Naera’s undoubted talent, there is bound to be interest in acquiring his services should the NRL register his contract.
For mine, the Bulldogs should absolutely have first right of re-signing their former player should he be allowed back into NRL action, especially for 2020.
The Dogs did the right thing in sacking the player. The NRL deregistered the players regardless, effectively making the Bulldogs decision for them.
Therefore, the Dogs should be given the opportunity to re-sign their player on the same terms. If the Dogs should decide to waive that right then by all means yes, other clubs could take their shot should they so desire.
If the Dogs are not given this shot, then CHN could realistically find his way into a more successful side, possibly even on higher pay than prior to his stupid decisions that landed him in hot water.
What type of message would that send?
The Dogs face the very real chance that they become the next club in a long list of being hurt after doing the right thing.
Canberra were forced to sack Todd Carney after a string of incidents. He went on to win a Dally M with the Roosters.
*Deep Breathe*
Sticking with Canberra, they released Blake Ferguson after the player refused to front a hearing and going AWOL. His punishment? A premiership at the Roosters.
AFB is arguably the best prop in the game right now despite being correctly sacked by the Dragons after pleading guilty to assaulting his partner.
Zane Tetevano was sacked by both Newcastle and then Manly after pleading guilty to eight charges of attacks on his former girlfriend. Two Premiership ring.
Where did sacking these players get any of those clubs? Were they afforded the right to welcome back players who had successfully completed their rehabilitation?
The Bulldogs have every right to deny a return to the club of a player whose selfish actions disrupted their preparation for round one as well as putting the club into the media in a negative light.
They may very well thumb their nose at allowing CHN to return to the club, but they should be given that right rather than seeing the player they were forced to remove from the club walk into a big contract elsewhere.
We’ve seen successful clubs like the Roosters and (formerly) the Broncos deny sacking stars despite off field incidents. They’ve signed players returning from suspensions and reregistration and have enjoyed success as a result.
What motivation do clubs have to do the right thing by standing down or sacking players?
Only the clubs and their fans suffer while players post a faux apology on social media, sit through a day of supposed sensitivity training before cashing in and running out for finals footy.
It’s absolutely ridiculous but it happens literally every season.
I already hear it in the comments “you can’t sack a player then expect him to come back”. Somewhat true, but in circumstances where the club has done right by the game or has acted on direction of the NRL, there has to be a safeguard for the clubs.
At least an option.
Otherwise we’ll keep seeing clubs do the right thing in standing down players who have done wrong only to see them return to action elsewhere while the club suffers.
Alternatively there’s going to be a time where clubs simply refuse to sack players regardless of the incident. The NRL will be forced to make the decision and open themselves up to all sorts of issues from club land.
Ultimately, there’s no complete fix for player misbehaviour but something has to be done to allow the club some protection or advantage for doing the right thing.
The Dogs were forced to lose a very talented back rower due to an incident they could not have seen coming, and now face the very real possibility of seeing said talented back rower running around for another club as soon as this year through NO fault of their own.
Former Bulldog Corey Harawira-Naera is reportedly a target of several teams, with the August 3rd deadline for registering players for 2020 approaching.
CHN was de-registered earlier this season after a pre-season incident was uncovered. He and Jayden Okunbor were dismissed from the club and banned from playing NRL.
That said, the incident is not one that will likely see CHN especially exiled from the game in the long-term.
Given the spate of injuries we’ve seen over recent weeks combined with Harawira-Naera’s undoubted talent, there is bound to be interest in acquiring his services should the NRL register his contract.
For mine, the Bulldogs should absolutely have first right of re-signing their former player should he be allowed back into NRL action, especially for 2020.
The Dogs did the right thing in sacking the player. The NRL deregistered the players regardless, effectively making the Bulldogs decision for them.
Therefore, the Dogs should be given the opportunity to re-sign their player on the same terms. If the Dogs should decide to waive that right then by all means yes, other clubs could take their shot should they so desire.
If the Dogs are not given this shot, then CHN could realistically find his way into a more successful side, possibly even on higher pay than prior to his stupid decisions that landed him in hot water.
What type of message would that send?
The Dogs face the very real chance that they become the next club in a long list of being hurt after doing the right thing.
Canberra were forced to sack Todd Carney after a string of incidents. He went on to win a Dally M with the Roosters.
*Deep Breathe*
Sticking with Canberra, they released Blake Ferguson after the player refused to front a hearing and going AWOL. His punishment? A premiership at the Roosters.
AFB is arguably the best prop in the game right now despite being correctly sacked by the Dragons after pleading guilty to assaulting his partner.
Zane Tetevano was sacked by both Newcastle and then Manly after pleading guilty to eight charges of attacks on his former girlfriend. Two Premiership ring.
Where did sacking these players get any of those clubs? Were they afforded the right to welcome back players who had successfully completed their rehabilitation?
The Bulldogs have every right to deny a return to the club of a player whose selfish actions disrupted their preparation for round one as well as putting the club into the media in a negative light.
They may very well thumb their nose at allowing CHN to return to the club, but they should be given that right rather than seeing the player they were forced to remove from the club walk into a big contract elsewhere.
We’ve seen successful clubs like the Roosters and (formerly) the Broncos deny sacking stars despite off field incidents. They’ve signed players returning from suspensions and reregistration and have enjoyed success as a result.
What motivation do clubs have to do the right thing by standing down or sacking players?
Only the clubs and their fans suffer while players post a faux apology on social media, sit through a day of supposed sensitivity training before cashing in and running out for finals footy.
It’s absolutely ridiculous but it happens literally every season.
I already hear it in the comments “you can’t sack a player then expect him to come back”. Somewhat true, but in circumstances where the club has done right by the game or has acted on direction of the NRL, there has to be a safeguard for the clubs.
At least an option.
Otherwise we’ll keep seeing clubs do the right thing in standing down players who have done wrong only to see them return to action elsewhere while the club suffers.
Alternatively there’s going to be a time where clubs simply refuse to sack players regardless of the incident. The NRL will be forced to make the decision and open themselves up to all sorts of issues from club land.
Ultimately, there’s no complete fix for player misbehaviour but something has to be done to allow the club some protection or advantage for doing the right thing.
The Dogs were forced to lose a very talented back rower due to an incident they could not have seen coming, and now face the very real possibility of seeing said talented back rower running around for another club as soon as this year through NO fault of their own.
