Scandal Elijah Taylor charged with assault of girlfriend.

Remove this Banner Ad

Yep. The automatic stand down rule in the NRL sets a pretty high bar. Im also not sure how it works given each state sets their own penalties so there will be differences.

GBH in QLD stood down, GBH in VIC free to play. Etc.
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned so here it is:

The NRL’s CEO can use his discretion to stand down players charged with less serious criminal offences, particularly where the offence involves women and children.
 
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned so here it is:

The NRL’s CEO can use his discretion to stand down players charged with less serious criminal offences, particularly where the offence involves women and children.

Broad unregulated powers. Just the way the AFL wants it. I wonder how long til the AFL does the same.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned so here it is:

The NRL’s CEO can use his discretion to stand down players charged with less serious criminal offences, particularly where the offence involves women and children.

That's also good to know, and not an unreasonable proviso to add into the stand down rules.
 
It is a good decision. Just hope the lass has the appropriate supports as this will escalate his behaviour. Police should have remanded him after the second incident

That would definitely be a consideration. I'm assuming the club notified the AFL, the AFLPA, the WA police, and the representatives for both Elijah and Lekhani. This decision had to be taken, so the best that the club can do at that point is make sure that the necessary parties aren't taken by surprise.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The chance of a lifetime to live your dream and set yourself up for life and he blew it. He's a piece of s**t and deserves whatever he gets which I'm sure will be a lot of sleepless nights thinking about what might have been.
 
Just wanted to come in here and see how many of you conflated the earlier accusations made by his girlfriend and the separate incident leading to this arrest into the single incident.

You did not disappoint bigfooty.

Swans decision seems at ends with recent announcements from the AFL. Not a surprise that another sensitive issue is going to be handled on the hop by club and league. (to be clear, im not taking a position as to whether Sydneys decision is right or wrong)
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to come in here and see how many of you conflated the earlier accusations made by his girlfriend and the separate incident leading to this arrest into the single incident.

You did not disappoint bigfooty.

Swans decision seems at ends with recent announcements from the AFL. Not a surprise that another sensitive issue is going to be handled on the hop by club and league. (to be clear, im not taking a position as to whether Sydneys decision is right or wrong)
He's been charged, not convicted. Sacking him now without due process would open them up to a massive claim later if he turns out to be acquitted.

They clearly went to the detail of mentioning his inability to 'follow instructions on a number of occasions previously' or words to that effect, to give themselves breathing room on even that point.

Standing him down is the only possible course of action. I'm sure if he records a conviction for this he will be officially sacked.
 
He's been charged, not convicted. Sacking him now without due process would open them up to a massive claim later if he turns out to be acquitted.

They clearly went to the detail of mentioning his inability to 'follow instructions on a number of occasions previously' or words to that effect, to give themselves breathing room on even that point.

Standing him down is the only possible course of action. I'm sure if he records a conviction for this he will be officially sacked.

Firstly, I don't need to be told how to suck eggs regarding drawing the distinction between charged and convicted.

Secondly, the premise that it was the "only possible course of action" is incorrect. He is innocent until proven guilty. They could have equally maintained that position and continued on without standing him down. Again not discussing the merits of either choice just pointing out that there was more than one course of action.
 
Just wanted to come in here and see how many of you just came here to make yourself feel better about your own club by throwing digs at the swans and other clubs that have had similar issues.

You did not disappoint bigfooty.

Swans decision seems completely logical and reasonable given this little thing in Australian criminal law called 'the presumption of innocence'. Not a surprise that another sensitive issue is going to be used to score points against opposition clubs and their supporters and/or to propose their own manifestly more sensible and intelligent ways of handling crisis situations at national sporting teams on this wonderful forum that is BigFooty
 
Firstly, I don't need to be told how to suck eggs regarding drawing the distinction between charged and convicted.

Secondly, the premise that it was the "only possible course of action" is incorrect. He is innocent until proven guilty. They could have equally maintained that position and continued on without standing him down. Again not discussing the merits of either choice just pointing out that there was more than one course of action.
If you genuinely believe they could have feasibly maintained the 'innocent until proven guilty' position and continued on with him as an active member of the club until his trial, I have some money tied up in my late father's estate back in Nigeria you might be able to help me with.
 
If you genuinely believe they could have feasibly maintained the 'innocent until proven guilty' position and continued on with him as an active member of the club until his trial, I have some money tied up in my late father's estate back in Nigeria you might be able to help me with.

You don't like reading entire posts, do you?

Again not discussing the merits of either choice just pointing out that there was more than one course of action.
to be clear, im not taking a position as to whether Sydneys decision is right or wrong
 
He's been charged, not convicted. Sacking him now without due process would open them up to a massive claim later if he turns out to be acquitted.

They clearly went to the detail of mentioning his inability to 'follow instructions on a number of occasions previously' or words to that effect, to give themselves breathing room on even that point.

Standing him down is the only possible course of action. I'm sure if he records a conviction for this he will be officially sacked.
What happened in the end with Andrew Lovett? He was charged with rape, then the charge was dropped. He was sacked the next day?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top