Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Fly direct from
Canberra to New Zealand

Joel Monaghan says goodbye

By johnboy - 10 November 2010 80

[First filed: Nov 9, 2010 @ 15:40]

Joel Monaghan mopo

Courtesy of ABC Radio here is the sound of Joel Monaghan breaking down while announcing his resignation, and that of Raiders’ Boss Don Furner blaming those who brought the photo to light while washing his hands of finding those other players who were in the room taking photos.

Thanks to Mathman for providing the mopo.

Bear in mind that almost every rugby league reporter you hear or see opining on this had the photo a week in advance but decided you didn’t need to know this is, for the men they present to you as heroes and role models, a good time.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
80 Responses to
Joel Monaghan says goodbye
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
Skidbladnir 5:40 pm 17 Nov 10

vg said :

Wrong, both of you

Both? three of us?

16 years old can have sex. That much is undisputed, many of us did it.
Film yourself having sex with a sixteen year old and distribute it either by broadcast or, its illegal under the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Act 1995, for being an unrated explicit or refused film due to not being material of consenting adults, and anything which is a natural human but not an adult is considered a child for the Classification Act.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cfacga1995489/

Online, ACMA receives similar powers (and a similar definition of adult > 18yo, child < 18yo) under Schedule 5 of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 to deem something sufficiently offensive or criminal that it may be referred onto law enforcement, and also taken further action to prevent being spread further even if the subject of the transmission is not a criminal act, but will certainly do so in cases of criminal activity being transmitted.
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/bsa1992214/sch5.html
Read it, learn it, love it.

(ACMA only received a few reports of the original picture, and they were gone before they made a determination on legality, iirc)

Weather the pictures (and evidently there are more) were simply softcore, actually pornographic, confirmed bestiality or merely suggestive of animal contact I’d leave up to lawyers and spin merchants. But creation and distribution online are two very different things.

p1 4:56 pm 17 Nov 10

colourful sydney racing identity said :

vg said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Skidbladnir said :

Mysteryman said :

If what Monaghan did wasn’t illegal, how is recording it and distribute it illegal?

Same as 16 year olds can have sex, but filming it & distributing the result is not.

spot on.

Wrong, both of you

How is that wrong? Do you believe consensual sex between 16 year olds is illegal or do you believe that recording and distributing images of 16 year olds having sex is legal?

…and how can they both be wrong, since one of them was posing a question not stating a position?

vg said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Skidbladnir said :

Mysteryman said :

If what Monaghan did wasn’t illegal, how is recording it and distribute it illegal?

Same as 16 year olds can have sex, but filming it & distributing the result is not.

spot on.

Wrong, both of you

How is that wrong? Do you believe consensual sex between 16 year olds is illegal or do you believe that recording and distributing images of 16 year olds having sex is legal?

cleo 12:22 am 15 Nov 10

The football teams should be setting an example for the upcoming footballers, it’s about time these cowboys started behaving themselves!

vg 6:55 pm 13 Nov 10

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Skidbladnir said :

Mysteryman said :

If what Monaghan did wasn’t illegal, how is recording it and distribute it illegal?

Same as 16 year olds can have sex, but filming it & distributing the result is not.

spot on.

Wrong, both of you

Anna Key 9:35 pm 11 Nov 10

Joel should change his name to Wes Naiqama and he could end up captaining his country, regardless of off-field exploits

Davo111 6:10 pm 11 Nov 10

Gerry-Built said :

@Davo111 (oopsy… I hope it is clear the “you” i was referring to #41, was in fact, not you, you… )

lol, dw i understood 🙂

Pork Hunt 5:43 pm 10 Nov 10

Calochilus said:

“The real issue is that the Rugby League (Substitute the football code of your choice) recruit players from a very specific group, …..”

Yeah, they do. They’re called football players.

As to the rest of your 30,000 word essay, you lost me after what I just quoted.

Ian 2:41 pm 10 Nov 10

TheObserver said :

And with all the hoopla from the NRL I do wonder whether Monners is just a convenient scalp for them – you know, turning the other cheek to gang-banging, glassing of girlfriends, defacation in hotel corridors. I’d like to bet the options from NRL were “sack him or make him resign”

I would expect that if photographic evidence emerged of Bulldogs players (for example as they seem quite keen on it) rubbing dicks and balls together in a gang bang, or of a player taking a dump in a public place, they’d get the same treatment as Monaghan.

p1 2:36 pm 10 Nov 10

Calochilus said :

I guess it’s time for you to put your specs on, interrogate Google and PubMed, the issue of chronic traumatic brain injury is well demonstrated in American Gridiron football, also in childrens soccer in USA but it is a very different issue to frontal lobe inadequacies.

Well, yes I know being hit in the head is bad for you, I mentioned it.

What I found interesting was your claim that the NRL specifically selects players who are so predisposed to, and conditioned to react intuitively, that they show a noticeably impaired brain function compared to the general population.

I was not saying it wasn’t true, I was stating that I thought it was unlikely that there was reliable studies supporting it. A very quick google didn’t show anything, perhaps you could link to something?

Calochilus 1:24 pm 10 Nov 10

p1 said :

Calochilus said :

Thus there is a significant proportion of players who have significant inadequacies of frontal lobe activity in their brains.

Nice theory, not sure if their is a lot of valid research to actually prove it.

That said, there is the issue of these guys being hit in the head over and over again over a long period of time. That can’t do good things to the brain.

I guess it’s time for you to put your specs on, interrogate Google and PubMed, the issue of chronic traumatic brain injury is well demonstrated in American Gridiron football, also in childrens soccer in USA but it is a very different issue to frontal lobe inadequacies.

PantsMan 1:12 pm 10 Nov 10

TheObserver said :

Joel was a soft target for the NRL and the Sponsors. I don’t actually buy Canberra Milk and would encourage people to shop around. In fact I am too lazy to do the shopping and get my milk from Aussie Farmers direct – http://www.aussiefarmers.com.au – I would encourage anyone who is thinks the Raiders got strongarmed by the sponsors to do the same.

Is this an ad for some type of bestiality farm camp?

AngryHenry 1:07 pm 10 Nov 10

Frano said :

YOU laughed out loud?! I laughed out loud when I read your comments about Churchill and John Raper. Is that the same John Raper who nothing else in a London street, apart from a bowler hat?

Yeah I did… Sucked in to the prick.

Nudie run in a bowler hat vs violating a dogs mouth.

Apples and oranges.

The point still remains that those guys had a higher level of interraction with the rest of society due to the fact that they were in the workforce, meaning they were answerable to more than just their club and their team. They had to deal with bosses and colleagues from backgrounds other than that of a rugby league player.

So while they still may have engaged in some silly stuff, none of them would have done something as stupid and disgusting as what we’ve all had to endure through the media this week.

I did say it was just a theory.

Erg0 12:46 pm 10 Nov 10

AngryHenry said :

Nope not the legacy of not being caught. Don’t put words in my mouth.

I don’t think any of those old guys were saints but they had things like normal day jobs because they weren’t paid these ridiculous salaries to chuck around a ball.

As a consequence outside of the game they were probably more functional members of society.

Just a theory.

My comment was made in jest, though I think there’s a decent chance that the same sort of carry-on has been occurring unseen for many years due to less sophisticated communications, media/club complicity and changing societal values.

Frano 12:43 pm 10 Nov 10

AngryHenry said :

I must say I thoroughly enjoyed watching him squirm at the press conference. And I laughed out loud as the troops rallied behind him. I even snorted when I heard Don Furner say that this was the kind of drunken stupidity other people might get away with.

If he thinks he’s gonna get away from it in England he’s dreaming. Ever heard of British tabloids?

All these blokes have to do is go to training and play footy, I’m not saying it’s physically demanding and a tough job, but it’s the only job they have and they get paid a lot for it. When are they gonna learn?

I am partial to having a punt on the odd game but I feel like I have had a gutful of enabling these tools. They do nothing for the game and undermine the legacy left by great players like Johnny Raper and Clive Churchill.

YOU laughed out loud?! I laughed out loud when I read your comments about Churchill and John Raper. Is that the same John Raper who nothing else in a London street, apart from a bowler hat?

p1 12:40 pm 10 Nov 10

Calochilus said :

Thus there is a significant proportion of players who have significant inadequacies of frontal lobe activity in their brains.

Nice theory, not sure if their is a lot of valid research to actually prove it.

That said, there is the issue of these guys being hit in the head over and over again over a long period of time. That can’t do good things to the brain.

PBO 12:33 pm 10 Nov 10

Calochilus said :

Interesting to note that the person who took the photograph and the person who posted it on the web are unmentioned and unpunished, is there justice here?

Who cares who they are, they did a public service. Aside from using a carriage service to distribute questionable material, they did the right thing.

Holditz 12:26 pm 10 Nov 10

Calochilus said :

Interesting to note that the person who took the photograph and the person who posted it on the web are unmentioned and unpunished, is there justice here?

Oh, I reckon the club know who they are, and have taken inhouse punitive measures against them. No need to inflame the public situation any further, hey? Let Monaghan be the fall guy, we’ll take care of the rest.

Skidbladnir 12:15 pm 10 Nov 10

TheObserver said :

I would encourage anyone who is thinks the Raiders got strongarmed by the sponsors to do the same.

On the other hand, I would encourage anybody who thought that the Raiders’ & NRL’s responses to the players’ (IE: Joel and the others who were there) actions didn’t go far enough to instead take it to the sponsors. 😛

The Raiders & NRL could have used this event as the example that sets the standard for future Code of Conduct and misbehaviour, but chose not to exercise the opportunity to its fullest.
Neither did, but instead they’ve isolated Joel Monaghan into being the betrayed confederate\fall guy, instead of merely being the face of the broader phenomenon.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site