Todd Carney Combined Mega Thread

[G-land Express]

FFS Rex and everyone else. Let's not exaggerate when we post. The $100.000 fine was for not policing the consumption of alcohol at a club function. It's plausible we would have received said fine regardless due to the fact Watmough ploughed his fist into a sponsors nose.

the vermin never got fined 100k either when falongo smashed the coach

 

[DSM5]

But he deserved it G-Land.

 

[Chip and Chase]

Gallop knows he made a mistake by suspending Brett. He was too gutless to admit at the time that the suspension was in response to the sexual assualt allegations and the media frenzy that caused him to wilt under the pressure. Just as he was too gutless to apologise for the disgusting way the NRL treated Brett once his case was laughed out of court. Did anyone ever establish that Brett was intoxicated or refused service that night ?? I never heard of any evidence to support Gallops claims, quite the contrary in fact. A real leader would have admitted that they made a mistake.

Email the muppet and let him know what a spineless goose he is. Better still email the club and tell them you will refuse to renew your membership until they publicy condemn Gallops bid to be the CEO of the new IC. I'm gobsmacked that the club don't have the balls to stand up to this idiot and call him out in public for his treatment of Brett. They should be asking for an apology, or at the very least lobbying to get rid of this moron from the game moving forward. How Penn, Lowe, Quantam or whoever can sign off on this idiot's bid for an executive role for the future is an insult to Brett, and us as fans.

 

[Matabele]

I agree with Rex.

 

[Pride]

We have our club season launch function tomorrow so lets hope things are quiet and nobody plays up...

 

[mickqld]

Another major point that is being missed in all this. He was caught at 7am on his way to meet his manager for a 9am meeting. Where is his manager in ****ing Newcastle or Canberra?????? What a load of ****. The guy was tanked all night probably stopped drinking around 3 or 4am and decided he would be ok enought to drive home at 7 showing both how much of a dumb **** he really is as well as a blatant liar.

 

[silvertail]

At the club launch tomorrow, Manly officials should announce and deliver a 5 point plan for Gallop:

1. Apologise to Brett
2. Refund our club 100K
3. Fund a defamation case for Brett vs News Ltd
4. Make no comment on matters to be addressed by the law
5. Leave Carney alone and learn from what you did to Brett

Only in dreams!!!

 

[Matabele]

At the club launch tomorrow, Manly officials should announce and deliver a 5 point plan for Gallop:

1. Apologise to Brett
2. Refund our club 100K
3. Fund a defamation case for Brett vs News Ltd
4. Make no comment on matters to be addressed by the law
5. Leave Carney alone and learn from what you did to Brett

Only in dreams!!!

  They'll also announce they're recruited the CEO from the Green Bay Packers.

 

[The Eagle]

[quote author=silvertail link=topic=186624.msg319461#msg319461 date=1299150017]
At the club launch tomorrow, Manly officials should announce and deliver a 5 point plan for Gallop:

1. Apologise to Brett
2. Refund our club 100K
3. Fund a defamation case for Brett vs News Ltd
4. Make no comment on matters to be addressed by the law
5. Leave Carney alone and learn from what you did to Brett

Only in dreams!!!

  They'll also announce they're recruited the CEO from the Green Bay Packers.
[/quote]

And as many owners as the Philly eagles in 1949

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

pressure is on Gallop as Carney WILL stuff up again

 

[Stevo]

MadMarcus i thought you were a man of intelligence but that is questionable! Rex you can listen to this too. Marcus, Did you not comprehend that article or did you just leave out certain parts to prove your point?

This bit for instance....

"The NRL said today's decision was not made on the back of the police investigation of Stewart.

Instead it said the decision was made under a section of its Code of Conduct which states players are expected to conduct themselves in at all times in public in a sober, courteous and professional manner. The club has five days to appeal the decision".

So when i said the fine was for the club "not policing the consumption of alcohol" i would have been correct wouldn't i? And is it not possible that just because this article does not mention the adventures of Anthony Watmough on the night, that it wasn't also a factor in their decision. Do you not think that the night as a whole was taken into account? Wouldn't the Watmough incident just have given the NRL more another leg to stand on when it came to issuing that fine?

 

[MadMarcus]

I extracted the quotes of the NRL's statement  which were contained in the article. The part you extracted was not a quote from the NRL statement so I did not extract it. I couldn't find the statement itself so that was the best I could do.

Of course the NRL didn't come out and say the suspension was for the Stewart incident and Manly's handling of it. Instead they claimed that it was for breaching a section of the code of conduct which has not been enforced in that way before or since. If you look at the statement and consider the timing of  the imposition of the fine it is quite easy to read between the lines and see the real reason for the fine. It had nothing to do with Watmough and still would have happened if he didn't punch a sponsor.

 

[Rex]

Fonz, we both know Gallop is a lawyer, not a manager, not even a manager's bootstraps.  A lawyer's existence depends on looking through fine print looking for anything, however ludicrous or non-sensical, that supports - or could be twisted to support - their predetermined outcome.  You've quoted Gallop's.

If you believe Brett Stewart received four weeks suspension, and Manly $100k fine, based on that clause, can you explain to me:
1.  Why not one other player at Manly's season launch received four weeks suspension? Note the $100k fine to Manly was supposedly made on the basis of Stewart not being the only Manly player refused service and/or intoxicated. Where was say Watmough's 4 weeks, eh?
2. Why this clause has never before, and never after, been invoked for any other player given alcohol has been freely served at virtually all NRL functions.  No one has ever been refused service before or after? The Freddy Fittlers and Todd Carneys of this world have always said "No just one beer" when it is free on tap?
3.  How Gallop determined that Brett Stewart was intoxicated, given the allegation was denied, and evidence under oath given and accepted in court was that he was in control - not drunk - that night.  In fact the prosecution was so desperate to establish that he was drunk that night, that they showed video footage of Brett tripping at the launch, yet could not provide one witness at the launch to establish he was drunk, not even the bar tender who allegedly refused service.  So now Gallop doesn't believe in due process to establish the truth of allegations? He just makes up his own mind based on newspaper rumours?
4.  How Gallop established that the bartender who allegedly refused service of alcohol - if this happened - was not simply mistaken? There was no objective testing of alcohol levels.  Brett Stewart has a condition (type 1 diabetes) that is known to give symptoms mimicking drunkenness when blood sugar levels are out.

I could go on, but there's a start for you.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Its easy to forget that gallop was under a great deal of pressure for a year or more leading up to the 09 launch. There were many incidents and the game & gallop were copping it in the media severely each time a new scandal/media beat up arose.

One gallop interview at the time suggested he was taking it all personally as he had been directly involved in installing Brett as the face of the game.

Any CEO would have felt the pressure and even to the point of considering his own position was under threat. He had to be seen to act.

Forget codes of conduct or the specifics of the incident, I have zero doubt gallop acted to quell the bad press and limit the damage to his own credibility.

Of course it was all an overreaction but you wont get any lawyer on this planet to admit wrong/liability/defeat.

 

[Rex]

Agreed Jatz.  And that lack of class, that lack of composure, that out-of-control ego are exactly why Gallop is most out of his depth.

You would never have seen the likes of Arko or Quail knee-jerking like Gallop has. They would have handled the situation with coolness, balance, and statemanship, and have quelled the media feeding frenzy rather that incited it.

 

[Stevo]

I'm not really sure why you're both arguing with me. It doesn't matter what your interpretation of what Gallop said is does it? You said it yourself Rex. Gallop is a lawyer. Everything he says is pre thought and strategic. The fine was handed down for reasons that have foundation. Was Watmough drunk? Yes. Did he punch a sponsor? Yes. Did things get out of hand? Who really knows? Stewart was aquitted of all charges and rightly so. But he was still asked to leave a licenced premises. Do i think he was blind? No. Do i think the fine or suspension were warranted? No. But it's quite obvious the NRL were embarrased by this night and they acted. Again you said it yourself Rex. Gallop worded it in a way that he had a safety net. Which was my point from the start. He's a very smart man. All i'm trying to point out is that you are not going to get an admission of wrong doing from the NRL, or the money back. I understand people are pissed off but it's getting ****en annoying.

 

[MadMarcus]

I'm confused Fonz - are you agreeing with me now that Gallop's statement was just a carefully worded cover for the real reason for the fine?  That is the only point I have trying to get across this whole thread!

And btw I think you are the first person ever on this forum to claim David Gallop is smart!

 

[eagles2win]

I suggest you all read Rothfield's article about this.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/znrl/nrl-double-standards-on-todd-carney-brett-stewart/story-e6frfgh6-1226015601242

Sorry about not adding it as an article

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

read page 128 of todays tele
Rothfield sums it up perfectly

Next time Gallop walks into a Manly dressing room LOL, I  don't think he would be invited in anyway

Carney's worst priors of any Australian sportsman  High speed pursuits
Drink driving (twice isn't  it ?)
Stomping on cars
Pissing on a person
Setting a mans groin alight
there is more I think

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Rothfields article is a very generalised piece. It does little to advance any debate.