Season 2016 has been an embarrassment

[Nashy]

Perhaps a little reading about the penalty from the NRL perspective. Shouldn't be hard to find.

I don't care what the NRL think. It shouldn't have been up to them. WADA should have stepped in and made sure that drug cheats, accidental or not, were sat on their arse for an extended amount of time.

Disputing that and you're disputing doping in world sports.

 

[Scorchie]

I don't care what the NRL think. It shouldn't have been up to them. WADA should have stepped in and made sure that drug cheats, accidental or not, were sat on their arse for an extended amount of time.

Disputing that and you're disputing doping in world sports.

This, and a convenient six month suspension at the end of a season. [emoji849]

 

[Organix]

It was all quite convenient for mine. How is an off-season suspension a suspension? Did they still train. Maybe they earnt no money? I just want someone to explain it to me here. I have tried to look it up but it is all quite vague.

 

[Huge]

I don't care what the NRL think. It shouldn't have been up to them. WADA should have stepped in and made sure that drug cheats, accidental or not, were sat on their arse for an extended amount of time.

Disputing that and you're disputing doping in world sports.

Nashy, what should be apparent to you is that not just one or two but three different bodies had all the facts in front of them. Just think about it for a few moments, three separate authorities had the evidence in front of them. You and I had scraps of information, incomplete stories, rumours and aspersions. How can you and I and anyone else outside those bodies know the full and complete picture ?

That doesn't mean we are not entitled to an opinion but it is an incomplete opinion and not an informed opinion at that.

The second thing to grasp is that at least 40 athletes, at least two and possibly more doctors and health staff and upwards of 10 administration staff allegedly acted to dupe the AFL and NRL at the same time! If you believe all these people , 60 or more,across two clubs from differring sports all got the same idea at exactly the same time then you are entitled to think as you do.

It strains credulity to think it was a deliberate act to gain an illegal advantage but it seems much more likely that a lot of people were duped by a snake oil salesman.

Wada, ASADA and the NRL all took time to review the case and all thought the punishment fitted the crime. How can you possibly think you are better qualified to decide what's fair considering you never had access to the evidence?

For the record, I am against doping too. I just cannot think I know better than the well informed people whose sole job is to adjudicate on such matters. I wouldn't tell NASA how to land on the moon.

 

[Nashy]

Nashy, what should be apparent to you is that not just one or two but three different bodies had all the facts in front of them. Just think about it for a few moments, three separate authorities had the evidence in front of them. You and I had scraps of information, incomplete stories, rumours and aspersions. How can you and I and anyone else outside those bodies know the full and complete picture ?

That doesn't mean we are not entitled to an opinion but it is an incomplete opinion and not an informed opinion at that.

The second thing to grasp is that at least 40 athletes, at least two and possibly more doctors and health staff and upwards of 10 administration staff allegedly acted to dupe the AFL and NRL at the same time! If you believe all these people , 60 or more,across two clubs from differring sports all got the same idea at exactly the same time then you are entitled to think as you do.

It strains credulity to think it was a deliberate act to gain an illegal advantage but it seems much more likely that a lot of people were duped by a snake oil salesman.

Wada, ASADA and the NRL all took time to review the case and all thought the punishment fitted the crime. How can you possibly think you are better qualified to decide what's fair considering you never had access to the evidence?

For the record, I am against doping too. I just cannot think I know better than the well informed people whose sole job is to adjudicate on such matters. I wouldn't tell NASA how to land on the moon.

Here's what we know.

1. Sharks players took drugs
2. Sharks players who took drugs missed 3 weeks of professional sport

 

[Foordy]

Here's what we know.

1. Sharks players took drugs
2. Sharks players who took drugs missed 3 weeks of professional sport

And thats all we need to know, because doping rules of all three bodies state that you are responsible for what goes into your bodies, regardless of who gives it to you (coach, trainer, your mum etc)

But it has also been revealed that the doping was performed off site and they players were told not to tell people about it ... both of those should have been massive warning bells to anyone with even half a brain

 

[Morkel]

Nashy, what should be apparent to you is that not just one or two but three different bodies had all the facts in front of them. Just think about it for a few moments, three separate authorities had the evidence in front of them. You and I had scraps of information, incomplete stories, rumours and aspersions. How can you and I and anyone else outside those bodies know the full and complete picture ?

That doesn't mean we are not entitled to an opinion but it is an incomplete opinion and not an informed opinion at that.

The second thing to grasp is that at least 40 athletes, at least two and possibly more doctors and health staff and upwards of 10 administration staff allegedly acted to dupe the AFL and NRL at the same time! If you believe all these people , 60 or more,across two clubs from differring sports all got the same idea at exactly the same time then you are entitled to think as you do.

It strains credulity to think it was a deliberate act to gain an illegal advantage but it seems much more likely that a lot of people were duped by a snake oil salesman.

Wada, ASADA and the NRL all took time to review the case and all thought the punishment fitted the crime. How can you possibly think you are better qualified to decide what's fair considering you never had access to the evidence?

For the record, I am against doping too. I just cannot think I know better than the well informed people whose sole job is to adjudicate on such matters. I wouldn't tell NASA how to land on the moon.

False naivety at its best.

It strains credulity to think it was a deliberate act to gain an illegal advantage

You can't be serious. Why else would they have done it? Why else were they told to not tell anyone about it? Why was Flanagan and other officials caught out in deceitful behavior, eg, having Dank in the dressing rooms weeks after being told that he is no longer to be a part of the Sharks' campaign? Contrary to your argument, it would be amazing to believe all these occurrences were completely innocent and it was just a massive co-incidence that there were illegalities going on that they were all unaware of.

If it was snake oil, and completely legal, why has Earl been banned long term? Why did Essendon face much tougher sanctions? Because the NRL is a joke. It's rotten to the core. I'll stop short of calling it corrupt, but the Sharks were allowed to continue for the same reason that the Storm players and managers were not punished further - the NRL can not allow the embarrassment of a club being crippled by sanctions, regardless of it being its own doing. Nor the long-term suspension of its highest profile players.

If the NRL had no power in regards to the sanctions, then how come the Bombers received such a different punishment to the Sharks? They were caught doing the exact same thing through the exact same dodgy criminals. With Dank somehow immune to the investigator's sanctions, ASADA had to rely on the respective governing bodies to help determine culpability. The AFL said "**** them, cheat and you'll be punished harshly". The NRL took the easy way out, like it always does. Like refusing to sanction Fifita during the regular season yet ruling him out of Australian rep duties literally two days after he wins them the trophy.

 

[tommy]

Does anyone know why none of the players have taken legal action against Dank if they claim he duped them? I'm genuinely curious and have never heard a reason for this?

 

[john1420]

The NRL admin is piss weak

 

[Morkel]

The NRL admin is piss weak

This here is the core of why I agree that 2016 was a joke of a season.

The biggest difference between the NRL and AFL is the media. The AFL controls the media. Sure there are leaks, but journos know that if they want info, they need to tow the line. It's the complete opposite with the NRL. The media controls the NRL, absolutely.

Being a Broncos fan, a club constantly demonised in the media, has probably exposed us to the worst of it - we've seen the NRL cave in again and again. Referees dropped, not for poor performances (indeed, they had the gall to referee to the actual rules) but because commentators "didn't like the rules". Players suspended for far less inocuous events than were perpetrated by players of other clubs, seemingly as punishment for being the beneficiaries of the aforementioned rules. Or because a media blitz caused a crackdown in Week X, while other team's players, who did the exact same thing in weeks W and Y, got off scott free. Oh, and remember, Bennett himself was crucified in the media for suggesting Golden Point was a farce - subsequently he was booted from the Board (and replaced by the Roosters coach, big surprise), even though ultimately the NRL agreed with him and scrapped GP for the finals series of this very season.

It seems to me that it's been worse since the Independent Commission came in. Ironically, because the IC is at least partially doing its job. The old dinosaurs that used to sit up the back of meetings, or pulled the strings of their puppets from afar, all of a sudden lost a great deal of power. The media is their new way of forcing control upon the game. Instead of pressure being applied by powerbrokers, politics, and mutually scratched backs, it now comes in the form of manufactured "public" outrage.

Front and centre in all this are two of our old friends, Rothfield and Greenberg. Two people who rarely get mentioned in the same sentence. Rothfield has no feel for the game. At all. He is not even a journalist, he is a tabloid grub who just so happens to have very powerful friends. As such, he is both a master manipulator, and the perfect puppet. Don't underestimate how much pull the DT's "top" journo has had in the Shark's favourable treatment, and why he's been so quiet since this Hayson shit got out. And then we have Greenturd. Lauded as the Next Big Thing because his deception and slipperiness reminded everyone of how slick the AFL get through their PR business. He's been exposed as dirty not one, not two, but on three separate occasions, but nothing sticks. The game's bias towards certain teams, and even more blatantly, certain players comes as no surprise when you remember Todd is at the helm, and you get the impression that if he can get away with shit that's become public, he's sure as hell going to be able to pull off some nasty stuff behind closed doors. Like any good manipulator, he says all the right things in public - see his polished performance on the Footy Show about players and clubs needing to take responsibility for their actions. Or player safety being paramount. But behind the scenes, he'll let anything go, so long as it fulfills a favourable agenda. Like allowing said misbehaving players to play right up until the GF (but banning them for rep duties). Or overseeing a textbook shoulder charge be overlooked for the sake of keeping one of a team's most important player on the field for the finals series. I tell you what, it's amazing, with all the dramas going on with the NRL, it's amazing a certain Todd Greenberg seems to be immune to any of the criticism. Almost as if he receives a free pass from the media. Tell me again, who is the Daily Telegraph's top journo, and what team does he support??? Mutually scratched backs indeed.

 

[Socnorb]

Was it intentional that you said "tow the line" ,instead of "toe the line" . If so it was an act of genius.

 

[Morkel]

Was it intentional that you said "tow the line" ,instead of "toe the line" . If so it was an act of genius.

No but I'll claim it.

 

[Dash]

As much as I completely agree Cronulla got off WAY to lightly, in the end the difference between their substantive punishment and Essendon's was due to the guilty plea. Essendon fought it tooth and nail all the way to bloody Sweden, while the Sharks took the deal and copped it.

Essendon wasn't allowed backdating for in-season, but were for the offseason (which I can cop). Indeed, certain players actually have longer suspensions as they were still playing reserve grade finals after the first grade team was knocked out.

Cronulla getting back-dated suspensions while still playing through the period in question is an absolute joke, and this is where they were treated far too lightly.