• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Australia tour of New Zealand Feb-Mar 2024

Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
HeathDavisSpeed said:
Unacceptable behaviour, particularly in role models, doesn't simply begin at a conviction for rape. He was found not guilty of that, fine.

However, what he admitted to in court does not to my mind reach appropriate standards of behaviour in any way. In his own words:

"When asked about the complainant's evidence that she said "no" "dozens of times", he said it was "a lie". "I tried [having ***] twice, like she might have said 'no, no' a few times but it wasn't dozens of times."

How many nos are required?

And as a result, NZC's position of not making any statement at all about his behaviour is not a neutral approach. It is tantamount to saying that such behaviour is acceptable as it hasn't been broached.
Click to expand...
I think it's also important to note Hurricane that any of us CWers would be seeing jail time in his place. I was pretty surprised he was found not guilty, going by the evidence and discussion with someone present at the house.

I think he got lucky. He's entitled to everything a not guilty person is and almost everyone is worth a redemption arc, but I think NZC and he should have made some restorative actions.
 
Bahnz

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
Chubb said:
Let’s pick an alleged rapist over the hard working decent young men who have impressed in FC recently, sure great idea NZC.

Initially this post was about Nathan Smith but as far as I know every other bowler in NZ FC is a better person than Kuggs.

It goes against every fibre of my being to support Aus over NZ. But if Kuggs plays I will.

If Henry is out for a while it might bring Smith into the equation but I now think it will need Southee retiring before he gets a shot and even then the coach will have to change.
Click to expand...
Jeez, if Smith opened the bowling with Southee that'd be an extremely deep batting lineup.
 
Bahnz

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
Chubb said:
If Henry is out for a while it might bring Smith into the equation but I now think it will need Southee retiring before he gets a shot and even then the coach will have to change.
Click to expand...
From the sounds of it Henry's resting for the t20's is precautionary and he should be fit for the tests.
 
Bahnz

Bahnz

Hall of Fame Member
Hurricane2 said:
He probably can’t apologise publicly or be interviewed about it so he can display his remorse due to legal ramifications.
Click to expand...
Nah, he could definitely say "I behaved poorly and wish I could have done things differently." without opening himself up to any legal jeopardy. Of course the time to have done that would've been 5 years ago when he debuted. Would feel a bit weird and hollow if he did it now.
 
H

Hurricane2

U19 Cricketer
Flem274* said:
I think it's also important to note Hurricane that any of us CWers would be seeing jail time in his place. I was pretty surprised he was found not guilty, going by the evidence and discussion with someone present at the house.

I think he got lucky. He's entitled to everything a not guilty person is and almost everyone is worth a redemption arc, but I think NZC and he should have made some restorative actions.
Click to expand...
I don’t think there can be restorative actions without legal implications. I hope my point is clear. I speculate that NzC would have taken legal counsel on this.
Finally if he did donate 20 000 to the women’s refuge he can’t publicise that anyway or it would be revolting: Like he tried to buy public goodwill
 
X

Xix2565

International Regular
He could've expressed some remorse during the trial right? Like what on Earth was stopping him from accepting responsibility for his actions?
 
Immenso

Immenso

International Vice-Captain
Was wondering when the last person was to get a test debut who hadn't already had a taste of some JAM series beforehand.

Probably Jeet Raval, 2016?

Seems an almost mandatory stepping stone (thinking about Nathan Smith).

Actually. Sommerville would be the last. But that is a very niche role.

We need anothrr JAM tour of Pakistan during IPL window so we can hurry along some pathways.
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
Bahnz said:
Nah, he could definitely say "I behaved poorly and wish I could have done things differently." without opening himself up to any legal jeopardy. Of course the time to have done that would've been 5 years ago when he debuted. Would feel a bit weird and hollow if he did it now.
Click to expand...
There's not enough public animosity to prompt it. It would feel weird as you say. If there was still loud outcry, he would do well to be contrite well after the fact, but his naming produced nothing.

Incidentally, I am 100% for the vitriol he's received on here, just think the R word is getting into murky legal waters. He was found not guilty and therefore gets the freedom of a normal life, is available for selection, basically has all his liberties. But having read the evidence, and what he admits to have done, we are free and right to decide he's a subpar human. He doesn't get a free pass at redemption in that regard. Never will.
 
X

Xix2565

International Regular
SteveNZ said:
His lawyer was a crude piece of **** during the trial, too. It was disgusting and Scott cannot ever wash his hands of that.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much why I don't get people who support him in cricket now and act like he's now beyond reproach.
 
The Hutt Rec

The Hutt Rec

International Vice-Captain
SteveNZ said:
There's not enough public animosity to prompt it. It would feel weird as you say. If there was still loud outcry, he would do well to be contrite well after the fact, but his naming produced nothing.

Incidentally, I am 100% for the vitriol he's received on here, just think the R word is getting into murky legal waters. He was found not guilty and therefore gets the freedom of a normal life, is available for selection, basically has all his liberties. But having read the evidence, and what he admits to have done, we are free and right to decide he's a subpar human. He doesn't get a free pass at redemption in that regard. Never will.
Click to expand...
I mean, if you take the legal definition of rape in NZ, he actually admitted it in the trial. The jury were a bunch of absolute braindead assholes.
 
Flem274*

Flem274*

123/5
The thing is it was so long ago that if found guilty he could have served his time, done the work to be a better man (maybe even with players union support), and still have an international career. I would respect that.

This could have been an example of how NZC respects women and creates better people, but I bet if he had been found guilty then he would never be selected even if he showed he was a better person.

This didn't have to be a constant deadweight on the public perception of NZC. It must be a kick in the guts for the victim every time his name is out there.
 
_Ed_

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
The Hutt Rec said:
I mean, if you take the legal definition of rape in NZ, he actually admitted it in the trial. The jury were a bunch of absolute braindead assholes.
Click to expand...
Probably worth remembering too that the first trial produced a hung jury. It was the retrial that ended in the acquittal (by which time the alleged victim was probably pretty worn out from having her own life repeatedly scrutinised on the witness stand, and as a result she may not have "performed" convincingly).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top