full statement:
http://www.rugby.com.au/News/NewsAr...ED-45-000-FOR-ARU-CODE-OF-CONDUCT-BREACH.aspx
Really disagree Das, he was in the professional environment, they basically said he's been suspended already so they won't suspend him again... it's a terrible outcome for the ARU and the sport.
Here's how I see it...
1. There was no proof Beale was involved in a second, more offensive exchange. Without that proof we must assume he's innocent of that part of the accusation. That changes things a bit imho.
2. He apologized to Di for the first picture. He shouldn't have sent it, it was wrong and offensive, but the matter was put to rest at that time and (seemingly) life went back to normal. He had to answer for it at this tribunal and again appears to be apologetic and not belligerent about the situation. So it was the first, proven, offense for which he was rightfully fined.
3. I find it significant that the fight on the plane hasn't been brought up (as far as I can tell) in the decision of this tribunal, which suggests to me that there's either more to it than we'll ever know, or it was just a petty thing that has no bearing on any official misconduct. Had Beale been totally at fault for that flight fight then I would think it would have had some impact on their decision.
That's just how I feel about the basic facts in this case as they have been presented by the media. Beale made a rude joke about a staff member and was punished for it. Also, I don't see it as harassment since it appears to be a one-time thing and not an on-going situation of sexual intimidation (or facts to prove such would have been brought forth to the tribunal). The blow-up on the plane still hasn't been explained to MY satisfaction, but it appears (at this point) to fail to fall under any misconduct codes. So, again, a fine for an offensive picture and rude joke seem appropriate. That's how I feel based solely on the facts that have been presented to us, the public. (By contrast, several players in the NFL have been suspended for alleged
criminal offenses, such as domestic violence and child abuse - such suspensions seem appropriate and are far more serious than a one-off offensive joke.)
Now, how do I feel about the situation as a whole - the state of rugby in Australia, etc.? Well...I think this was a brilliant move on the part of the ARU.
Here's why...
Australian rugby has already been disgraced by this whole situation. There seems to be a general consensus that the administration, and not the players, are at fault. Is this true? I really have no idea, but that's how it appears
to the public. And that's what really matters, isn't it?
Now, a second point. There has been a huge shake-up in the team. The coach has resigned. That can be unsettling to the players. There has been this controversy, another staffer also quitting, and lots of head-shaking and finger-pointing. All of this can demoralize a team. And despite coaching and whatnot, it's still the players who win or lose the game. Many of those players stood behind Beale. In fact, it was a perfect opportunity for any players who thought Beale was a Royal Arsehole to speak out, but to a man it appears they supported him as a valued player on the team. That's important. Why?
Well, because with the 'witch hunt' going on, it may have created a very negative atmosphere within the team to give Beale the boot
at this time. Keeping him could be a positive, stabilizing effect on the team in the short term. Whether or not Beale stays in Australia in the future can be decided later, but right now - with games to play - the ARU really needed to stabilize the team, and move on.
And finally, sacking Beale would have done nothing for the fans. In fact, it may have turned many away. However,
keeping Beale is quite brilliant. People watch rugby, not for the coaches and staff, but for the players. And I'll bet you anything that more people will be watching the next Aussie game than have done so in recent months. They want to see Beale in action, and see whether he lives up to the decision to keep him in the game, or not. Many will be elated to see him succeed, and I'm guessing just as many will feel self-satisfied to see him fail.
The questions will always be whether or not it was the moral thing to do. Were Di and Ewen just fall guys used to protect spoiled players? Did Ewen, with his on-field halftime breaks and such, really create a negative atmosphere in the locker room? Was Di really as meddlesome as some have asserted? Was Beale and his conduct the problem, or just a symptom of a bigger problem? Does Beale deserve a second/third chance, or should he be given the boot out of Australian rugby for good? I'm pretty sure it all boils down to this: If Australia starts winning big games people will soon forgive and forget this whole thing, but if things start going south then this whole mess will continue to be debated until the ends of time, or until Australia wins the World Cup - whichever comes first.
das