Everyone trying to draw conclusions about social media, alcohol, the NRL, young men or society from the demise of Joel Moneghan’s League career should give up.

Taking a dive. Joel Moneghan has quit the Canberra Raiders. Picture: Mark Evans

There’s no great lessons for the rest of us - it’s no great illustration of a general societal ill. It’s just gross.

We’ve gotten so used to trying to explain what went wrong when a footballer does something ridiculous, dangerous or just plain illegal.

So far the story about the Canberra Raiders player, who quit this afternoon to save the club further embarrassment after he was caught in a sexual act with a dog, has been discussed in the context of animal cruelty, the perils of mixing footballers with alcohol and the biggie - commentary on how social media such as Facebook and Twitter has changed the rules.

Canberra Raiders chief executive Don Furner seems more appalled that the infamous photograph of Monaghan ended up online than the fact he took part in what Furner called a “prank”.

``The perils of the media and social media today are a great example of why you shouldn’t do it,’’ Furner said last week.

And today: “He’s had to pay a very high price for a party prank at somebody’s house.”

Others have described it as a final straw for the NRL, as if Monaghan was representative of a League-wide trend of bestiality.

And then there’s been the wise heads warning of the culture of alcohol abuse.

As Monaghan himself said this afternoon, it’s not nothing to do with any of those things. He did something disgusting, he’s aware of his humiliation, and he’s leaving.

He’s saved his club and the NRL a whole lot of pain by taking the decision on what action to take out of their hands.

We should stop trying to put it in a sociological pigeon hole and call it for what it was - the stupid and disgusting act of one man, who’s now so embarrassed he’s leaving the country.

67 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Bobster says:

      03:54pm | 09/11/10

      No lessons but perhaps it raises a question - why are footballers held to a higher standard than politicians? Ok, it’s kinda gross but I don’t see how it affects his ability to play football.

      This is just another BS distraction. Don’t we have more important things to worry about?

    • Tedd says:

      03:54pm | 09/11/10

      I dunno, Tors.  It was more than Joel alone whatever happened.

      I think it was the stupid act of a drunk man and his “mates”, and perhaps it was only fully disgusting if intromission took place.  Joel and his mates could have dealt with it a lot more sensibly, whatever happened, rather than it being a several-days-later retrospective.

    • Georgie says:

      03:55pm | 09/11/10

      What kind of sick person would do such a thing. The poor animal.

    • AdamC says:

      03:56pm | 09/11/10

      I dunno, Tory, I think an understanding of the perils of social media is very much a lesson to take out of this affair. I also think it is a manifestation of how society is becoming generally more judgemental and less willing to forgive indescretions. (In this case, of course, we are talking about a fairly major one.)

      Besides, there would be way fewer journos and way more, um ... (help me out here, what is the fall-back job for a journalist?) if the media din’t over-analyse just about every little incident involving anyone vaguely notable.

    • Who says:

      04:23pm | 09/11/10

      Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t it just a simulation of a sexual act in which case I think it is fair to call it a prank.

    • Aussiegal says:

      08:29am | 10/11/10

      Agreed. You’re way off on this one Tors. It was a stupid party prank - one that shouldnt cost a man his career.

    • Zeta says:

      04:26pm | 09/11/10

      Has anyone reported on the fact that bestiality isn’t actually illegal in Canberra? And that if he had have tried it in NSW he could have copped 14 years gaol? I think that’s more hilarious and newsworthy than one stupid footballer doing a stupid thing.

    • Super D says:

      07:15am | 10/11/10

      It makes me think that perhaps Copenhagen was not the first time K Rudd had a run in with ratf#&kers;...

    • Arthur Griffith says:

      04:29pm | 09/11/10

      Who cares?

      Really, I’m pretty sure we need information about plenty of other issues effecting the greater population than some tidbit about some buffoon who happens to play for a two bit badly administered competition.

      It is the greatest game of all but it has a lot of boofheads associated with it.

      Let’s move on.

    • Super D says:

      04:37pm | 09/11/10

      There is actually one lesson.  If you want respect,molest a pit bull and not a labrador.

    • Russ says:

      06:17am | 10/11/10

      Thumbs up!

    • Macca says:

      04:40pm | 09/11/10

      I preferred De Brito’s take on it, that in the grand scheme of things, JM did something very silly and inappropriate whilst drunk. That’s about it.

      It’s not like he was caught drink driving or defacating in a hallway, it’s a non-story for all I care

    • AFR says:

      08:05am | 10/11/10

      I actually cringed at the way De Brito tried to justify it, implying that dogs naturally try to nriff crotches, so there was no issue. Bollocks. Joel Monaghan is a grown man, and the act was sick sick sick.

    • damo says:

      04:44pm | 09/11/10

      boo friggin’ hoo. the whole thing is a beat-up.

      the RSPCA and many of the commentators should get off their high horses and relax a little - the guy made a joke which was in poor taste. its cost him his job and has to move halfway across the world to keep his career. lesson learned i would say.

    • SMK says:

      05:07pm | 09/11/10

      Why does everyone keep calling it a sexual act?  It may well have been a urological act.
      It does serve two purposes after all.

    • Rob says:

      05:13pm | 09/11/10

      Finally someone acknowledges that this was not a “prank”. I cannot understand why Monaghan, the Raiders and in particular the media continue to describe this as a prank. The definition of prank is “a trick of an amusing, playful, or sometimes malicious nature.” Nothing Monaghan did fits this definition. This was bestiality plain and simple.

    • Ben C says:

      10:05am | 10/11/10

      So are you condemning him for doing something that isn’t actually illegal where it occurred?

    • Lo says:

      11:35am | 10/11/10

      @Ben C no one has possibly accuse Canberra of having bright people who know when a law should be a law. I presume you feel bestiality is perfectly fine as long as no law exists against it.  Remember the animal doesn’t get to say no.

    • Tom says:

      05:19pm | 09/11/10

      What sort of heartless, haters are out there? I cannot believe the level of hate in those bloggers calling Monaghan a sicko etc. It was a once up stupid act, that’s all. He did not glass anyone, punch anyone, rape anyone, urinate on anyone or sell drugs to anyone. It was a simulated act. His punishment is totally out of all reasonable proportion.

      The media egging on this blood-lust feeding frenzy also marks a low point for our society.

      I just wish the Raiders had stuck by Monaghan and got some different sponsors.

    • Liberal Voter says:

      05:26pm | 09/11/10

      Monaghan has nothing on Craig Gower:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Gower

      er was fired as Panthers captain in December 2005,[6] after incidents at a charity golf event where he argued with several guests, groped the teenage daughter of former league player Wayne Pearce, chased Pearce’s son with a bottle before vomiting on him, streaked nude around the resort, stole and crashed a golf cart, held a butter knife [7] to the throat of a Sydney radio personality before throwing it at resort guests, and engaged in a brawl with resort security before being ejected from the official function and detained by police.[8] Gower was handed a “final warning” by the National Rugby League and fined $100,000, with $90,000 to be paid to an NRL programme encouraging the responsible use of alcohol by league players and $10,000 to replace the destroyed golf cart.[9] Gower was “deeply unhappy” that the Penrith Panthers club did not defend his reputation, and at one stage threatened to “walk” from the club.[10]

    • TrueOz says:

      05:41pm | 09/11/10

      Monaghan is a bloody goose - but it was just a pissy party prank. People seem to forget that he’s just a young man and prone to doing the stupid things that young men sometimes do. Just leave him the f#@k alone!

    • Just saying says:

      06:14pm | 09/11/10

      I’d like to be able to say that we learnt that footy players are boofheads, but we already knew that only too well

      One lesson might be how to spell the guy’s name - one way in your headline and another in the first line of the article wink

    • stephen says:

      06:35pm | 09/11/10

      ...‘he’s so embarrassed he’s leaving the country’.
      And where’s he going ?
      Why, where there’s no dogs : to the polar caps of the Arctic circle, where else ?
      PS If it’s frozen stiff, the only thing it’s good fer is stirrin yer coffee (and jest don’t get invited over there fer supper).

    • Charlie says:

      07:29pm | 09/11/10

      Lesson: ‘Don’t have sex with dogs’

      (It wasn’t ‘simulated’ and do they really think people believe that spin???)

      There endeth the lesson.

    • Jasper says:

      07:30pm | 09/11/10

      There is one conclusion from this whole saga: no seems to know what “simulated” means.

      His offence has been continuously referred to as a “simulated act”, if it was simulated then he hasn’t actually done anything, wrong or right; all he’s done is make a tasteless visual joke. If, however, it was not a simulated act but an actual one then one has to wonder why it was referred to as a “simulated” act.

      Either he actually did something or he didn’t; he can’t be accused of anything if it was simulated and it can’t be simulated if he actually did something.

    • G says:

      08:11pm | 09/11/10

      Although I think what Joel did was inexcusable, I just wanted to mention that there seems to be alarming inconsistency between the punishment and condemnation of Joel’s actions in comparison to the punishment that was handed to Inglis and Bird for glassing their partners.

    • BK says:

      07:18am | 10/11/10

      Bird was in an argument with his girlfriend. She was yelling at him and breaking stuff. She threw a glass of water over him and they started wrestling for control of the glass. They are both a bit vague over how it came to be smashed across her face and we can all speculate, but it wasn’t a glassing.

      Inglis forcibly disarmed his ex after she threatened self-harm. Still, he is male, so he got arrested.

    • j&t and b&h says:

      12:30pm | 10/11/10

      and you belive this BK - wally world mate. of course their gonna deny it when there are no witnesses and make up a lame excuse, no matter what the court bought, i ain’t buying it. hasn’t bird and his bird broken up, there’s your eveidence

    • BK says:

      03:37pm | 10/11/10

      That is the beauty of this idea that DV victims typically lie to protect their attacker. Even when she denies that he did anything wrong, you can still pretend to know better.

    • Spida Never It says:

      08:24pm | 09/11/10

      When will these dogs learn? If you get blind drunk and go to a footballer’s home at 3am it’s not for a tin of PAL?

    • Vicki PS says:

      11:11pm | 09/11/10

      Cha-ching!  Tough on the bloke though—you screw just one little dog…

    • Ian says:

      09:53pm | 09/11/10

      It is of course the beauty of Rugby League - first we had the Hopoate - now we have the Moneghan!

    • Ian says:

      09:53pm | 09/11/10

      It is of course the beauty of Rugby League - first we had the Hopoate - now we have the Moneghan!

    • Steve Smith says:

      10:27pm | 09/11/10

      The lesson learnt here is old.. a picture is worth a thousand words.

      If there was no photo, there is less hype and all is forgotten in a matter of weeks. Much like the alleged incidences with player’s girlfriends accidentally walking into glass bottles or fists. Images stay with us longer than headlines, would Matty Johns have a show if photos turned up?

    • Tim says:

      10:42pm | 09/11/10

      According to ethicist Peter Singer, what Monaghan did was OK.
      Its not my cup of tea but if people want to have oral sex with dogs then that’s their business.
      To claim otherwise would be to push my moral values onto others and thats wrong isn’t it?

    • Lo says:

      11:42am | 10/11/10

      Well hey if Peter Singer says it’s okay it must be right?  He’s got a piece of paper stating his claim.  I reiterate…..animals don’t get to say no…..as weird as that sounds.

    • Mango says:

      11:54pm | 09/11/10

      There are lots of very sensible people commenting here.

      As a non-footy following female, I think the whole thing is a beat-up.  That said, I have followed the story and I admire Monaghan for accepting responsibility and not doing the usual excuses and blame.

      When I first heard radio reports about a ‘photo’ I thought the worst - a photo of a molestation scenario (sadly all to common in football circles).  I was thinking of the poor girl involved. 

      To be honest I was quite relieved to find out it was just a photo of the player with an animal, but having concern for the animal and thanks to caching, I looked up the (pixelated) photo.  The only person damaged by the incident was the player - not another person.

      It outrages me that players in the past have assaulted, glassed and raped women, and yet this is not seen to be as bad as a prank with a dog.  With the overblown reaction to this, it seems to me that the NRL and the sports media are more concerned with abused animals than abused people. Women are valued less than dogs.

    • Castro says:

      06:48am | 10/11/10

      Agree with you 100% Mango; and I am a footy following male and a Raiders season ticket holder to boot.

      What Monaghan did was ridiculous and can’t be defended.  However; Greg Inglis bashed his missus and is rewarded by three clubs and Rugby Union chasing him with huge offers.  It is obvious that bashing someone is worse than what Monners did; however the public outcry does not support this.  Why are we so out of proportion on this?

    • Will Powers says:

      04:08am | 10/11/10

      Castigate this man,send him to the Canning stock route.

    • Jim says:

      05:52am | 10/11/10

      Over the last 10 or so years there’s been - half the Norths squad pissing in cups at a cricket one-day match and throwing it at the crowd, players crapping in hotels and in fellow players shoes, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, assault, domestic violence, sexual assault, glassings, beastiality. Look at some of the main culprits - Julian O’Niell, Jason Taylor, Andrew Johns, Brad Fittler, Craig Field, Jonathan Thurston, Greg Bird, Craig Gower, Jake Freind, Nate Myles, Greg Inglis, Joel Monaghan…ALL have received sympathy from the public after a small dose of outrage, ALL have been painted as ‘the good guy’ by the games commentators. Some have even scored jobs on Channel 9!
      Then there was big, dumb Hoppa…who only got caught on camera doing what his coached Terry Lamb did his entire career and who obviously told Hoppa what to do. “Most Vile Act Ever” - ummm, doesn’t stack up to much of the above.
      But the worst part I feel is Brett Stewart - all the others above were guilty, Stewart was 100% innocent. Accused by a deranged girl goaded on by a criminal dad, yet he will wear that tag for the rest of his life.

    • G says:

      09:10am | 10/11/10

      Greg Inglis should learn a thing or two from Stewart about how to pay your legal bills without whinging about it.

    • WB says:

      11:50am | 10/11/10

      Your comment Jim shows exactly why most people have had enough of the antics of these overpaid and take no responsibility for their actions players. Inglis is a plain disgrace.
      Frankly I am fed up that alcohol, drugs or social media all are given out as excuses now rather than…IT WAS MY FAULT NO EXCUSES.
      I admit Monaghan did state this in his conference but it came days after Furner et al all seemed more concerned that it actually got to the media at all.

      BTW I saw the unpixelated photo and was totally disgusted and I write mainstream erotica sold at normal bookstores.  There are just some boundaries you never cross.

    • Daniel says:

      06:56am | 10/11/10

      What a waste. Sure, you could look down on him for making a fool of himself, but it has nothing to do with playing football. He should have stayed and just been the guy everyone snickered about. There should have been no expectation for him to leave.

    • Lynne says:

      07:08am | 10/11/10

      agreed Mango.  hopefully everyone that is commenting here has actually seen the photo.  I too thought the worst but then saw the photo and thought ‘oh is that it….some drunken idiots have done something really stupid’...it was a stupid thing to do and I certainly dont think its something that is ok but surely we have more important things to be concentrating on.

    • SM says:

      07:49am | 10/11/10

      “he was caught in a sexual act with a dog”

      no he wasn’t, he was photographed simulating a sexual act with a dog

      you should make that distinction

    • bella starkey says:

      07:52am | 10/11/10

      Honestly, the dog didn’t suffer. He didn’t penetrate the dog, he didn’t hurt the dog, he encouraged the dog to do something they generally love doing. The dog licked his balls, dogs do that, it is embarassing, but they don’t really get that it is “sexual”.

      It may be disgusting, and you deffinately wouldn’t want to date the dude, it wasn’t really that bad.

      (yes i have seen the photo, yes I regret looking)

    • Claire says:

      11:44am | 10/11/10

      Not that I disagree with the sentiment of what you’re saying (not that big a deal) but just to play devil’s advocate for a second:

      Babies love to put things in their mouths - babies wouldn’t really get that it was ‘sexual’. If he had done a similar thing with a baby instead of a dog, would you be writing the same things about this incident?

      (no I haven’t seen the photo and am glad of it)

    • Hairy says:

      08:40am | 10/11/10

      Double standards between golf and rubgy league on offer this week. On one hand a footballer has to leave the country because of impulsive lewd behaviour but a golfer whose behaviour was consistently lewd is being paid to enter the country.

    • AFR says:

      08:53am | 10/11/10

      Whilst he is still doing ok, its not like Tiger escaped punishment - his sponsors leaving him as well as his missus (and the divorce settlement that goes with it), and all the lewd details being made public - oh yeah, and he didn’t get a dig to lick his balls.

    • Davida says:

      09:35am | 10/11/10

      Not even remotely similar.  The golfer’s lewd behaviour was consensual.  Was the footballer’s???

    • BK says:

      03:34pm | 10/11/10

      If a footballer attacked his cheating wife with a golf club, then you would see double-standards. There is no way the media would forgive him in the same way they forgave Ms Norgren.

    • MarK says:

      09:06am | 10/11/10

      I agree with Tors.

      Isn’t bestiality against the law? I believe that it is though I must say I don’t know. If it is why hasn’t this idiot been charged?

    • SM says:

      10:35am | 10/11/10

      he wasn’t having sex with the dog, he was simulating a sexual act with a dog.  Bad behaviour, but very different to beastiality. 

      Beastiality not illegal in ACT anyway as pointed out by Zeta above, but is moot point

    • MarK says:

      11:06am | 10/11/10

      That is mildly concerning I guess that bestiality is legal in the ACT (thanks for that I missed Zeta’s post) but all we have is a picture, a snapshot…..not saying he did but to take the devils advocate position if the dog was a girl would we say he had sex with her?

      Just for arguments sake.

      It is interesting he lost his job over this and Matty Johns gets a new contract, Milne still plays etc etc etc there are so many examples of bad behaviour to draw from.

      Strange.

    • Hugo Boss says:

      09:14am | 10/11/10

      This whole situation just makes me feel sorry for the guy. Across both major codes we have sexual assualts, glassings, drug dealing etc and this poor bloke has had to quit because someone has taken a photo of him skylarking with his mates at an ened of season piss-up.

      We have “opinion” journo’s like yourself Tors saddling up on your moral high horse (and what a mighty steed it is) casting judgement on this guy who was photographed mucking around wth his mates far from the public eye(or so he thought).

      I’d love to be a fly on the wall at times when some of our judging journos least suspected it. No doubt you have never done anything that would be percieved as disgusting if it was whacked on a front page.

      And lets not start going down the beastiality path. He was doing it to entertain his mates and you don’t have to be a detective to know he wasn’t doing it for sexual gratification. The real asshole is the person who photographed and publicised the photo!

      Thats my rant..

    • Eric says:

      10:13am | 10/11/10

      Since Joel Moneghan was drunk, he was legally incapable of consent. Therefore, if we assume the dog wasn’t drunk, he was raped.

      So why are we blaming the victim?

    • Kent says:

      10:40am | 10/11/10

      Gold, absolute gold.

    • bogan says:

      10:57am | 10/11/10

      it was the stupid b*tch who got herself in that position in the first place…. oh wait what? it was a dog? ohhhhhhh

    • jim moris says:

      11:15am | 10/11/10

      The lesson from this prank is that even though it was only simulation (from what I can gather) the holier than thou journalists keep misrepresenting it as a “lewd act” to give the impression the dumb-ass really had sex with the dog. So the truth has gone out the window just like the poor suckers career and life. He should have claimed it had something to do with art and they would have given him a grant.

    • SM says:

      11:46am | 10/11/10

      agree totally.  Ms Maguire is either being deliberately misleading or has misunderstood the incident. 

      My money’s on the former

    • Jono says:

      01:29pm | 10/11/10

      What is this, the Clinton defence?  “I did not have sexual relations with that canine…”  The dog was licking his balls.  It wasn’t simulating licking his balls.

    • Traxster says:

      11:47am | 10/11/10

      And who was the goody two shoes a***hole who put the pics on the net ??.

    • steve says:

      12:55pm | 10/11/10

      when i first heard about this story, i thought the worst. when i finally got the courage to see the picture i was disapointed in what he did, but greatly releived that it wasn’t far worse.  i wonder about the whole situation, i gather he was very drunk but did his so called mates set him up?

    • Ange says:

      12:59pm | 10/11/10

      The lesson?  Doesn’t matter what you do, where you do it, or whom (or what) you do it with….just DON’T GET CAUGHT!!!!  We’ve all done stupid, wrong or even illegal things but the majority of us will never have it splashed in headlines across the media.

      Agreed that footballers should not be held up as models for society but equally if you’re in the public eye then you need to be more vigilant about your indiscretions. And just out of interest - what about the ‘friends’ who made the picture public? Surely they should take some of the flack here for helping to destroy the man.

    • loxy says:

      02:49pm | 10/11/10

      While I give credit to Monaghan for the way he has handled the situation i.e. taking full responsibility, I am quite honestly sick to death of the embarrassment to our country that the NRL is. Given the socioeconomic backgrounds most of the players come from, their age and the boozing and whoring culture, the NRL either need to bring in some serious education programs and a zero tolerance policy or get rid of NRL altogether. Unless of course we want our country’s reputation continually damaged by these bogans?

    • Yon Toad says:

      03:17pm | 10/11/10

      Only 120 days until the Roosters start their march to 2011 Grand Final glory!

    • Wok says:

      06:01pm | 10/11/10

      This is why rugby league is popular.  Not the football, it’s the carry on.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter