thierry henry
International Coach
This whole thing has gone over my head. Let me clarify this situation- Tuffey has been fined for having ***? Is NZ Cricket governed by the church?
-
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.
Darrell Tuffey
- Thread starter The Maestro
- Start date
Smudge
Hall of Fame Member
The whole thing was a farce - those two British backpackers need to be brought back to New Zealand, sent down to one end of a net naked, with no padding and face 3 overs each against the mighty pace of..... oh, hang on, we don't have anyone quick.
Aussie, can we borrow Bing off you?
Aussie, can we borrow Bing off you?
Last edited:
Legglancer
State Regular
Seriously ... Someone tell me what a "Milkshake" is ??? 
Richard
Cricket Web Staff Member
A more ludicrous situation I don't know that I have seen.
Tuffey bringing the game into disrepute? By not realising that he was being filmed, when he had precisely no chance of realising it?
By cheating on someone? Not like it ain't bad, but what the hell has it to do with NZC?
Tuffey bringing the game into disrepute? By not realising that he was being filmed, when he had precisely no chance of realising it?
By cheating on someone? Not like it ain't bad, but what the hell has it to do with NZC?
a massive zebra
International Captain
Since when was an individuals *** life a concern of his employer? 
a massive zebra
International Captain
I can see the headlines now:
"Flintoff fined £5000 and banned for a year by the ECB for bringing the game into disrepute after a two-in-a-bed romp with his wife!"
"Flintoff fined £5000 and banned for a year by the ECB for bringing the game into disrepute after a two-in-a-bed romp with his wife!"
lord_of_darkness
Cricket Web XI Moderator
This is stupid.. the news has been blown all over TV newspaper etc.. and NZC are treating Tuffey like he is some sort of criminal.. god damn.. what happend to privacy .. and he didnt do it on tour and like other people mentioned he didnt bring the game in disrepute either.. NZC are probaly like tim said short of a $1000 .. or they are trying to get the publics attention away from us getting thumped by Australia.. Shame on NZC.. and Martin Snedden i cant stand him..
a massive zebra
International Captain
Wouldn't that constitute an abuse of his human rights?Slow Love™ said:
Langeveldt
Soutie
Is he essentially being fined for having ***?
Thats like reverse prostitution
Thats like reverse prostitution
Tim
Cricketer Of The Year
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3220407a1823,00.html
As I suspected, Daryl Tuffey does indeed have a partner...and he's just bought a house almost next door to me.
As I suspected, Daryl Tuffey does indeed have a partner...and he's just bought a house almost next door to me.
Top_Cat
Request Your Custom Title Now!
You guys are missing the point; the problem wasn't that he was cheating on his partner or that he was having *** at all it was that there was DOCUMENTED evidence of him cheating. Ordinarily this would be a private matter (him cheating) but imagine, if you will, that the two women were less than scrupulous (which it seems they are or at least the partner of one of them is) and that Tuffey was interested in retaining the partnership he's involved in. Now, don't you think that documented evidence of his cheating would be information he'd want rid of (which he did, asking them to delete it)? Of course.
Now imagine they said "Sure, for $10 000". What you have here is a situation where the potential for corrupt behaviour involving lots of money exists. If he refuses, they damage his public profile by making it public, for example. If he pays, he's in effect paying for their 'services' which can be used against him in a 'paying for ***' prostitution-type charge. This is probably a best-case scenario. Worst-case, they use the tape as part of a rape allegation (saying, for example, that he threatened them if they didn't comply and didn't fake that they were enjoying it). A tape like that may not be necssarily enough to sustain a charge but throw enough mud and it sticks to the individual (particularly since the issue of consent is so difficult to prove in a rape case). Throw more mud and it sticks to the organisation he's associated with, hence damaging it's public profile, endangering sponsor's agreements, etc. It wouldn't be difficult to imagine sponsors of NZ cricket/Tuffey being upset that the money they pay would be used to pay off hush-money to people who video taped him having *** with them to preserve his relationship.
It's not unreasonable to imagine that NZ cricket might have already throught of all this and told the players to not engage in such conduct, purely because the potential for damage is so great. Tuffey would therefore be in breach of these regs and as such, would be in breach of his contract with NZ Cricket.
His *** life is his own private business and I certainly have zero moral objections to what he's done (other than cheating, of course) but with documented evidence of infidelity, it's not difficult to imagine these scenario's being a very real possibility.
Now imagine they said "Sure, for $10 000". What you have here is a situation where the potential for corrupt behaviour involving lots of money exists. If he refuses, they damage his public profile by making it public, for example. If he pays, he's in effect paying for their 'services' which can be used against him in a 'paying for ***' prostitution-type charge. This is probably a best-case scenario. Worst-case, they use the tape as part of a rape allegation (saying, for example, that he threatened them if they didn't comply and didn't fake that they were enjoying it). A tape like that may not be necssarily enough to sustain a charge but throw enough mud and it sticks to the individual (particularly since the issue of consent is so difficult to prove in a rape case). Throw more mud and it sticks to the organisation he's associated with, hence damaging it's public profile, endangering sponsor's agreements, etc. It wouldn't be difficult to imagine sponsors of NZ cricket/Tuffey being upset that the money they pay would be used to pay off hush-money to people who video taped him having *** with them to preserve his relationship.
It's not unreasonable to imagine that NZ cricket might have already throught of all this and told the players to not engage in such conduct, purely because the potential for damage is so great. Tuffey would therefore be in breach of these regs and as such, would be in breach of his contract with NZ Cricket.
His *** life is his own private business and I certainly have zero moral objections to what he's done (other than cheating, of course) but with documented evidence of infidelity, it's not difficult to imagine these scenario's being a very real possibility.