What’s the NRL’s plan for Barba’s family?
Ilove rugby league with a passion. Brought up on it my whole life. Go Bunnies. But I do not love the National Rugby League. Here’s why. On Tuesday, Ben Barba, tainted but talented, was finally banned from the game for life for allegedly assaulting his partner Ainslie Currie at a Townsville casino on Australia Day. He was sacked by the Cowboys last week. Currie had pleaded with the club to take him back.
My question for rugby league is this: when you take back a genius player with a history of alleged violence and drugs, how much coaching and support do you provide him and his family? And when it all goes horribly wrong, what did you have in place beyond dumping Barba and dumping his entire family? These men need coaching off the field as well as on because they are examples to all of us.
There was absolutely no question about his acts of violence, thanks to the CCTV, and no question Barba had to lose his registration. There must be zero tolerance for violence against women, zero tolerance against any violence, although that’s hard to argue as any actual fan of rugby league would see on the field any day, any round. I’d also argue that there should be zero tolerance for drug, gambling and alcohol offences although the NRL might struggle to get the latter past its sponsors.
Now that Barba is banned, Currie and her four small daughters will be without any ongoing financial support as far as I can discern from my discussions with the NRL.
A spokesperson for the NRL tells me all clubs have welfare officers funded by the NRL but clubs take individual responsibility for the welfare of their players.
The good news at least is the Cowboys have been in contact with Currie but the team’s media manager told me the family was evacuated from their Townsville home this weekend so no financial support is in place yet. How this is just the responsibility of a club and not a reliable, systematic response is beyond me.
For years – years – the NRL has had countless examples of its players being violent towards women, yet it refuses to act as the ruling body beyond its player education and training programme, which is clearly insufficient and not working.
More ongoing support and check-ins are needed for players and where this is not provided, and the partners suffer, the NRL has an ongoing duty of care to them.
NRL gender adviser Catharine Lumby of Macquarie University tells me I’m wrong about NRL inaction. She has just completed her third review for the NRL into off-field behaviour and says that while there is violence against women in society in general it will continue in the NRL.
‘‘It’s a cohort of entitled young men which we find in many places, including elite university colleges.
What pleases me is that we are beginning to see consistency of penalties, including zero tolerance.’’
Jonathon Louth, research fellow at the Australian Alliance for Social Enterprise, University of South Australia, has researched the link between sport and violence and says the culture of rugby league will only change when women participate equally across all levels – from community to elite.
The spokesperson for the NRL says Peter Beattie, chairman of the Australian Rugby League Commission, wants to increase the number of women commissioners, beyond Megan Davis and Amanda Laing.
On the one hand, the NRL desperately seeks women players and women spectators to broaden its financial base. On the other hand it refuses to make the culture of the game safe.
It’s the right thing to do to ban Barba. But the NRL must act to change the culture and support the women who have been betrayed by their partners.