One day there will be a worthwhile documentary made about rugby league players and their interactions with women. Four Corners’ highly-anticipated program last night, “The Code of Silence”, was not it.
Reporter Sarah Ferguson delivered a muddled, unsatisfying 45 minutes which broke little new ground. It concentrated on four incidents: an allegation of s-xual assault against Dane Tilse in 2005 for which no charges were laid; harsh words by Anthony Watmough to a young woman at Manly’s season launch this year; the alleged rape of a semi-conscious woman by an unnamed player; and a group s-x session between numerous Cronulla players and a 19-year-old woman in Christchurch in 2002 where her level of consent is disputed.
This seemed an odd selection of incidents. If attitudes to women are to be explored, why no mention of Roosters forward Anthony Cherrington who recently pleaded guilty to an assault in which he struck his girlfriend to the face and body before approaching her with a knife?
Why was there no mention of Greg Bird, recently found guilty of one count of reckless wounding and one count of making a false accusation to police after allegedly attacking his girlfriend with a glass (released on bail, due for sentencing on 22 June) and soon to face court again in relation to an alleged assault of a woman at a nightclub?
If Cronulla’s club culture was to be called into question, why not mention that Bird’s former Sharks teammate Tevita Latu was sacked after punching a teenage woman in the face and breaking her nose?
Why spend so long on Watmough’s unpleasant language but not mention that in 2007 his former partner took out an AVO against him?
If the thorny question of s-xual consent was the focus of the program, why was there no mention of the recent accusation by a young woman that she was s-xually assaulted by five Balmain Tigers players at a Caloundra resort?
Why not investigate the case of Titans forward Anthony Laffranchi who had a rape charge dismissed 13 months ago when the magistrate found that the prosecution could bring no direct evidence of lack of consent on the woman’s part?
Similarly, why no mention of Warriors winger Michael Crockett having his rape charges dismissed by a Sydney court last year?
Why was the notorious incident with the Bulldogs at Coffs Harbour given such a cursory mention? Why was there no mention whatsoever of the complaints made by a woman who had s-x in a toilet with three Brisbane Broncos players — Karmichael Hunt, Sam Thaiday, Darius Boyd — last year?
If the incidents that Ferguson omitted are surprising, so was the inclusion of self-styled “cougar” Charmyne Palavi. If her carrying-on was supposed to provide balance and show the temptations thrown at NRL players, it fell short of the mark. Palavi alleged that after drinking too much she fell unconscious in a hotel room and woke to find a “star” player raping her, but said breezily that she did not even consider laying charges.
Ferguson failed to question her closely about the incident, or about the apparent double-standard where she “hooks up” players with females, but is displeased when one young man tells her about forcing a woman to give oral s-x to him and six teammates. Overlay of Palavi partying and applying fake tan to her legs did nothing to make her look more credible.
Ferguson’s distaste for group s-x is palpable and clouds her judgment — I think “degrading” and “depraved” are two adjectives she used. This fails, firstly, to take into account that some people (male and female) want to indulge in group s-x. Secondly, it prevents her discovering if group s-x is more prevalent in rugby league than anywhere else, and if so, why.
Easily the most affecting section was the interview with the New Zealand woman who had s-x with Cronulla players in 2002. The negative impact on her life seems enormous. A possible scenario (given that Four Corners was not saying it was non-consensual) is that the woman felt unable, for various reasons, to stop the group s-x. Why was this so? What was the power dynamic? Ferguson could have profitably interviewed Jason Stephens, a Cronulla player at the time of the incident, who has written a book advocating pre-marital celibacy.
She could have also interviewed feisty women who have long involvement with the game, such as Rebecca Wilson or Deb Spillane, to dig into the myths and realities of rugby league’s culture. Catherine Lumby is a specialist adviser to the NRL on gender politics — where was her input?
The program began clunkily with a profile of the Newcastle Knights club, including full dressing room access. Ferguson asked a player and a coach about young men being “risk takers”, as if risk-taking has anything to do with s-xual assault. This section also featured Brian Smith urging his players not to be “softcocks”, a regrettable term in the circumstances. Apparently the Knights were told the proposed program was about rugby league’s drinking culture when they agreed to cooperate.
Alcohol was rightly identified as one important factor, but Ferguson failed to acknowledge that all of the women in the incidents she chose to highlight had been drinking. Does alcohol render these women more vulnerable? Given that the idea of each party giving formal verbal consent before s-x is unrealistic, does alcohol diminish the ability to give and receive clear non-verbal consent?
It is hard to fathom why there was no attempt to compare rugby league players’ behaviour towards women to that of other sportsmen. What happens in rugby union? The AFL? Cricket? Other sports overseas? Rugby league is a maelstrom of issues around masculinity, but is it unique — and if so, why?
The wash up? The perpetrators of foul deeds that were not raised on the program will be extremely relieved. Matt Johns has had his reputation shredded for what may have been consensual s-x, which hardly seems fair. Many people have suggested that it is also unfair to his children who will probably cop schoolyard taunting. Sarah Ferguson will hopefully move on to better researched, more subtly thought-through stories (preferably unembellished by hokey re-enactments which make reports harder to take seriously).
The Four Corners caravan has packed up and rolled out, leaving behind the malign fact that, for all of the NRL players who have ever been accused of s-xual assault, not one (to my knowledge) has ever been found guilty and jailed. Either there are a lot of women falsely suggesting rape or the system is failing horribly.
Several years ago in a place near Coffs Harbour I was introduced to a grim, taciturn man. Later I learned that he was the father of the woman who had alleged rape by Bulldogs players in 2004. “It has basically killed him,” the person I was with told me, although I could see that already from his face.
There are many more ripples in this murky pool than “The Code of Silence” managed to show.
| Visit the Crikey Sports blog for the latest from the world of sport
|
A good critique of a program which raised more questions than it provided answers and which will be responsible for much collateral damage – and not only to Matthew Johns.
There is little excuse for a well-resourced program such as 4 Corners not displaying more professionalism and responsibility in these matters. I am sure that this story will become essential study material for investigative journalists, along the lines of how not to go about it.
Ferguson’s agenda was at least transparent. Yours is veiled, raising a whole lot of extra incidents that didn’t make the cut in the final program. To what end?
Yes there is a vast array of NRL offences that would not fit into a 45 minute program. Isn’t that terrible? That what we saw last night is only some of it?
You say the issues raised last night are old news. Have they ever been properly dealt with in Australian society? I don’t think so. Not like this.
Also, you cite the old ‘no one has ever been charged’ line, concluding “Either there are a lot of women falsely suggesting rape or the system is failing horribly.”
Which of these options that you suggest would you like us to believe? A bit of both perhaps? It’s a neat way to deflect the discussion from the player’s responsibility to a more abstract discussion of the legal process and its many flaws.
So tell me again about Ferguson’s manipulative and one dimensional take on this crisis.
Nice Piece..your summary of the current RL culture is a harbinger to the ultimate demise
of rugby league as its been known for the past 50 years.,
In 50 years, the NRL will be a NSW /Qld regional blue collar sport, except much smaller & without the big pay packets.
Ah David Butler you rush to the defence of 4 Corners, me thinks perhaps you have a vested interest in some way. I have in the past been an avid fan of the programme however over the last 2 or 3 years I regret to observe a failure of the programme to uphold the high investigitive standards of earlier years. Too often the 45 minutes is taken up by an American or British feature when I would have thought the flagship of the ABC would find it not too difficult to produce a home grown programme on an Australian topic. Perhaps budget demands makes that impossible, perhaps the programme is changing course.
What did we learn last night about league players we didnt already know? Not a lot. I agree with your comment re deflecting a players responsibility and I also question the wisdom of the particular woman who was apparantly violated by at least 6 players, going to a bedroom in the first place. There is enough documented evidence of similar happenings, very difficult to prove.
You say the issues in the programme have not been dealt with like this. Ok, it was deliberately meant to shock and did it? There have been numurous examples in the media of this type of behaviour by sports players of many codes and rugby league seems to figure prominently, but that is not new. The Australian media give it extensive coverage, thats a fact.I doubt we need blurred vision and obviously very distressed females to conjure up what is said to have happened.
I’m afraid I do not believe the programme added a whole lot to the debate, useful but not new. Will it happen again? of course it will, with or without consent, thats the fact of the matter.
Why did the ABC and 4 Corners choose that subject, noone has given a difinitive reason.
No no David 1, there’s no vested interest here unfortunately. I’d love to have the govt bankroll me.
What i did like about the four corners piece was that it included the human cost of these NRL issues which has been absent from so much of the standard news reporting.
Looking back on the news bulletin coverage of incidents like the infamous Cantebury/Coffs Harbour one, i recall lots of player interviews, maybe a cross to a police spokesperson who talks briefly about the police interview process, maybe a David Gallop sound bite where he says that the league is taking this very seriously and will get to the bottom of it, maybe a senior bulldogs club employee who says the club will fully cooperate with all investigations, then some interviews with fans about what it will mean for the club and their take on the whole thing, and maybe some speculation by a sports commentator on how it will affect the club’s performance on the track, accompanied by images of the team at training.
The side of the victim/willing participant is never covered, either because they can’t speak due to ongoing criminal investigations, and/or they simply are terrified of being implicated and having their name and face all over the national media, as we saw with ‘Caroline’ from Bathurst.
For all its faults, last night’s program did address this omission, with damning results. The intensity of hurt and emotion unearthed last night is terrifying for us as a society to address, which is why so much of the post-program discussion is talking about what was left out rather than the horrors that were left in.