GallopStewartGate
Can I suggest that News Items be put on and then locked?
Can I suggest that News Items be put on and then locked?
Does Gallop/NRL have a case to answer ?
- Thread starter Jatz Crackers
- Start date
-
We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
bones
Bones Knows
GallopStewartGate
The back page headline reads 'The Greatest Shame Of All'. They say 'it's two days from kick off. We should be talking about footy. Instead, rugby league is embroiled in controversy'.
Well maybe if they didn't fill their newspaper with lies two years ago about what really happened the night of the allegations against Brett we wouldn't be where we are today.
The back page headline reads 'The Greatest Shame Of All'. They say 'it's two days from kick off. We should be talking about footy. Instead, rugby league is embroiled in controversy'.
Well maybe if they didn't fill their newspaper with lies two years ago about what really happened the night of the allegations against Brett we wouldn't be where we are today.
Jatz Crackers
First Grader
GallopStewartGate
I think its very much current news.
Reports suggest Brett is very happy at the moment so Im not at all sure that he doesnt realise and accept that the current challenge to gallop/nrl is necessary and the right thing to do.
Lastly, i dont believe the clubs intention is to intitiate any legal action themselves. Its an issue for Bretts legal people about the damage done to him.
Greg choice link said:
I think its very much current news.
Reports suggest Brett is very happy at the moment so Im not at all sure that he doesnt realise and accept that the current challenge to gallop/nrl is necessary and the right thing to do.
Lastly, i dont believe the clubs intention is to intitiate any legal action themselves. Its an issue for Bretts legal people about the damage done to him.
Re: GallopStewartGate
I think its very much current news.
Reports suggest Brett is very happy at the moment so Im not at all sure that he doesnt realise and accept that the current challenge to gallop/nrl is necessary and the right thing to do.
Lastly, i dont believe the clubs intention is to intitiate any legal action themselves. Its an issue for Bretts legal people about the damage done to him.
[/quote]
       The fact that gallop has dealed with us and Brett with an iron fist and others with a feather is old news,don't get me wrong Brett should try to sue anyone and everyone who has treated him so poorly, I just think as a club we missed the boat we should have ripped Gallop at the time not now when the water has already flowed under the bridge. I for one would ask the club to lift it's act on how we discipline our players ( not referring Brett in this regard ) Trex last year drink driving hit with a feather and then we come to our problem child Watmough 50 ks over the speed limit the over day on p plates because of his previous poor record and the club did NOTHING not good enough this fool could have killed me you or our family members.
Jatz Crackers link said:
I think its very much current news.
Reports suggest Brett is very happy at the moment so Im not at all sure that he doesnt realise and accept that the current challenge to gallop/nrl is necessary and the right thing to do.
Lastly, i dont believe the clubs intention is to intitiate any legal action themselves. Its an issue for Bretts legal people about the damage done to him.
[/quote]
       The fact that gallop has dealed with us and Brett with an iron fist and others with a feather is old news,don't get me wrong Brett should try to sue anyone and everyone who has treated him so poorly, I just think as a club we missed the boat we should have ripped Gallop at the time not now when the water has already flowed under the bridge. I for one would ask the club to lift it's act on how we discipline our players ( not referring Brett in this regard ) Trex last year drink driving hit with a feather and then we come to our problem child Watmough 50 ks over the speed limit the over day on p plates because of his previous poor record and the club did NOTHING not good enough this fool could have killed me you or our family members.
Jatz Crackers
First Grader
Not being argumentative here Greg but we couldnt rip into gallop at the time with the case pending and can only now with how the NRL has handled other matters. iIts sad but gallop picked the scab & now its bleeding.
My feeling on this is that the distasteful nature of whats going on now is necessary and hopefully this will cause new & better sets of NRL policies to deal with similar issues. The best way gallop should deal with this now is to settle with Brett privately and for us all to hear via wikileaks, the monetary extent of the settlement.
My feeling on this is that the distasteful nature of whats going on now is necessary and hopefully this will cause new & better sets of NRL policies to deal with similar issues. The best way gallop should deal with this now is to settle with Brett privately and for us all to hear via wikileaks, the monetary extent of the settlement.
[/quote]Send it to Peter Fitzsimons too. [email protected]
[/quote]
Fitzsimons is yet to apologise for his massive blast against Stewart in his Saturday column two years ago. Can't see him doing a mea culpa anytime soon, as other than an oblique reference to the 2009 season launch a few months back, he has been conspicuously silent since Brett was found not guilty.
[/quote]
Fitzsimons is yet to apologise for his massive blast against Stewart in his Saturday column two years ago. Can't see him doing a mea culpa anytime soon, as other than an oblique reference to the 2009 season launch a few months back, he has been conspicuously silent since Brett was found not guilty.
Send it to Peter Fitzsimons too. [email protected]
[/quote]
Fitzsimons is yet to apologise for his massive blast against Stewart in his Saturday column two years ago. Can't see him doing a mea culpa anytime soon, as other than an oblique reference to the 2009 season launch a few months back, he has been conspicuously silent since Brett was found not guilty.
[/quote]
I think he might already be on the list Brett is sueing.
[/quote]
Fitzsimons is yet to apologise for his massive blast against Stewart in his Saturday column two years ago. Can't see him doing a mea culpa anytime soon, as other than an oblique reference to the 2009 season launch a few months back, he has been conspicuously silent since Brett was found not guilty.
[/quote]
I think he might already be on the list Brett is sueing.
Jatz Crackers
First Grader
Hmmm..........maybe not to him then.
ManlyBacker
Winging it
Yep, he was scathing of both Brett and particularly the Manly club for intending to take no action. He called for his immediate standing down until the trial was complete (no matter that he would deprive someone of income for 1 1/2 years based on an allegation only). His mention of any form of praise for the Sea Eagles is always missing, despite having a large list of weekly sporting achievers in his column.
He has regularly shown his support for the Roosters and it was absolutely no surprise that last weekend he came out in support of Carney with excuse after excuse. The irony was very stark.
He has regularly shown his support for the Roosters and it was absolutely no surprise that last weekend he came out in support of Carney with excuse after excuse. The irony was very stark.
Rex
Bencher
Gallop's scathing attacks on Brett Stewart were all cheap shots. Cheap shots from a sad little man. Every one of them. And the best he can now do is get precious because those attacks have been labelled vilification. Gallop is fraying at the edges. The smell of his blood is in the water.
conanu
Bencher
Add the refund of the 100,000 from Brett in 09 to the other 100,000 prize money for the 07 gf and the 07 minor premiership money and you have over 300,000 I wonder if this had happened to any news ltd or former super league clubs if they wouldn't have got a refund. I'm sick of the incompetent NRL they really dont have a clue I hope the IC changes this
Rex
Bencher
Gallop takes bite at Hasler
  * Dean Ritchie
  * From: The Daily Telegraph
  * March 09, 2011 12:00AM
MANLY and the NRL are officially at war - and the feud is getting ugly.
Angry Sea Eagles coach Des Hasler launched two extraordinary attacks on NRL chief executive David Gallop yesterday as the club demands reasons as to why Brett Stewart was suspended for four weeks in 2009.
The drama erupted after Benji Marshall and Todd Carney avoided any suspension over the past fortnight despite headline-grabbing alcohol indiscretions.
The NRL yesterday took the extraordinary step of firing back at Hasler and the Manly club - releasing a Manly report from 2009 that stated Stewart was asked to leave the Wharf Bar, where the club held its season launch, "due to intoxication".
This is only adding to a week of infamy for the game.
There were even suggestions last night that Stewart may consider taking legal action against Gallop, who continues to claim that the former Test fullback was drunk at the function.
Manly vehemently deny Stewart was heavily intoxicated and want Gallop to either apologise or explain why he suspended the star fullback for four weeks and fined the club $100,000.
Hasler, Manly CEO Graham Lowe and chairman Scott Penn fronted a media conference yesterday to state their case, with the NRL then issuing their own statement three hours later.
"The club wants an explanation," Hasler fumed to The Daily Telegraph last night.
"What has he [Gallop] based the facts on?
"You can't fine a club $100,000 and suspend a player for four weeks because he had a few beers.
"David, what part of Brett's behaviour offended you? David, prove Brett was intoxicated. David, tell us what Brett's behaviour was that led to the suspension? They say he was asked to leave. The licensing police dispute that."
At the media conference early yesterday, Hasler said: "Some sections of the media reported Brett was blind drunk and couldn't remember anything - that wasn't the case. Brett wasn't heavily intoxicated and his behaviour in no way brought the game into disrepute or contravened any code of conduct.
"The NRL claims the Manly club is confused. We are anything but that."
"The NRL only acted on Stewart's alleged intoxication at the time but would not act on the player's sexual assault allegation before he appeared in court. Stewart was cleared.
"Manly say licensing police viewed CCTV of the Wharf Bar that day and found no breaches of conduct. No charges were laid against the licensee for breaches of licensing laws."
NRL management claim they undertook their own inquires into Stewart's behaviour that day and the fullback was, in fact, intoxicated. "We are going over old ground if we talk about the responsibility that Brett had been given by the game [as the face of rugby league in 2009] and the focus on an event such as a season launch," Gallop said.
"It remains disappointing that this is being revisited at a time when Brett should be allowed to move on with everyone's support.
"Comments the NRL has made in relation to Brett Stewart in recent days have only been in reply to emotional accusations by Des Hasler and questions from the media."
Manly officials urged Gallop to meet with Stewart but that appears unlikely.
The Sea Eagles statement, in part, read: "Manly is bitterly disappointed that after two years spent clearing his name, Brett Stewart continues to be vilified. Brett continues to be dragged into the limelight every time another player allegedly misbehaves. This is not acceptable."
Manly claimed the penalty imposed on Stewart was "grossly unfair".
Manly are attempting to retrieve the $100,000 fine from the NRL.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/gallop-takes-bite-at-hasler/story-e6frfgbo-1226018059563
  * Dean Ritchie
  * From: The Daily Telegraph
  * March 09, 2011 12:00AM
MANLY and the NRL are officially at war - and the feud is getting ugly.
Angry Sea Eagles coach Des Hasler launched two extraordinary attacks on NRL chief executive David Gallop yesterday as the club demands reasons as to why Brett Stewart was suspended for four weeks in 2009.
The drama erupted after Benji Marshall and Todd Carney avoided any suspension over the past fortnight despite headline-grabbing alcohol indiscretions.
The NRL yesterday took the extraordinary step of firing back at Hasler and the Manly club - releasing a Manly report from 2009 that stated Stewart was asked to leave the Wharf Bar, where the club held its season launch, "due to intoxication".
This is only adding to a week of infamy for the game.
There were even suggestions last night that Stewart may consider taking legal action against Gallop, who continues to claim that the former Test fullback was drunk at the function.
Manly vehemently deny Stewart was heavily intoxicated and want Gallop to either apologise or explain why he suspended the star fullback for four weeks and fined the club $100,000.
Hasler, Manly CEO Graham Lowe and chairman Scott Penn fronted a media conference yesterday to state their case, with the NRL then issuing their own statement three hours later.
"The club wants an explanation," Hasler fumed to The Daily Telegraph last night.
"What has he [Gallop] based the facts on?
"You can't fine a club $100,000 and suspend a player for four weeks because he had a few beers.
"David, what part of Brett's behaviour offended you? David, prove Brett was intoxicated. David, tell us what Brett's behaviour was that led to the suspension? They say he was asked to leave. The licensing police dispute that."
At the media conference early yesterday, Hasler said: "Some sections of the media reported Brett was blind drunk and couldn't remember anything - that wasn't the case. Brett wasn't heavily intoxicated and his behaviour in no way brought the game into disrepute or contravened any code of conduct.
"The NRL claims the Manly club is confused. We are anything but that."
"The NRL only acted on Stewart's alleged intoxication at the time but would not act on the player's sexual assault allegation before he appeared in court. Stewart was cleared.
"Manly say licensing police viewed CCTV of the Wharf Bar that day and found no breaches of conduct. No charges were laid against the licensee for breaches of licensing laws."
NRL management claim they undertook their own inquires into Stewart's behaviour that day and the fullback was, in fact, intoxicated. "We are going over old ground if we talk about the responsibility that Brett had been given by the game [as the face of rugby league in 2009] and the focus on an event such as a season launch," Gallop said.
"It remains disappointing that this is being revisited at a time when Brett should be allowed to move on with everyone's support.
"Comments the NRL has made in relation to Brett Stewart in recent days have only been in reply to emotional accusations by Des Hasler and questions from the media."
Manly officials urged Gallop to meet with Stewart but that appears unlikely.
The Sea Eagles statement, in part, read: "Manly is bitterly disappointed that after two years spent clearing his name, Brett Stewart continues to be vilified. Brett continues to be dragged into the limelight every time another player allegedly misbehaves. This is not acceptable."
Manly claimed the penalty imposed on Stewart was "grossly unfair".
Manly are attempting to retrieve the $100,000 fine from the NRL.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/nrl/gallop-takes-bite-at-hasler/story-e6frfgbo-1226018059563
Good points and fair questions. Let's see your alleged evidence David.
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 23 | 10 |
|
5 | 4 | 1 | 14 | 10 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 48 | 8 |
|
6 | 4 | 2 | 28 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 25 | 8 |
|
5 | 3 | 2 | 14 | 8 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 38 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 2 | 21 | 7 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 37 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | 16 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -13 | 6 |
|
5 | 2 | 3 | -15 | 6 |
|
6 | 3 | 3 | -36 | 6 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -5 | 4 |
|
6 | 2 | 4 | -7 | 4 |
|
5 | 0 | 5 | -86 | 2 |
|
6 | 1 | 5 | -102 | 2 |
