Mini to captain the toothless Sharks?

[Guest]

Realistically if this did eventuate the club ain't gonna put the Captain on any such list.

It just won't happen, at any club.

Also if I were a player forced to go somewhere I didn't want to go I'd be on the phone to Tezza Hill to find out his lawyers name and I'd be taking The NRL to court.

Fine if we had a draft, which is an idea I actually believe in, but they can't force players to go where they don't want to go, mid season.

It would be blokes who mostly play for Pootown the club would put on any list anyways.

Look out Bosden might get moved on.

Another article on this subject did state any transfer would be by agreement,and no players would be forced to move against their will.
The NRL obviously know a lot of players are guilty of drugs and are about to be banned to be openly talking about this back up plan...

[Guest]

Realistically if this did eventuate the club ain't gonna put the Captain on any such list.

It just won't happen, at any club.

Also if I were a player forced to go somewhere I didn't want to go I'd be on the phone to Tezza Hill to find out his lawyers name and I'd be taking The NRL to court.

Fine if we had a draft, which is an idea I actually believe in, but they can't force players to go where they don't want to go, mid season.

It would be blokes who mostly play for Pootown the club would put on any list anyways.

Look out Bosden might get moved on.

It'd be on a volunteer basis mate and I think many fringe players would leap at the opportunity to play in the top grade and perhaps increase their value on the market.

Chook.

[stsae]

Another article on this subject did state any transfer would be by agreement,and no players would be forced to move against their will.
The NRL obviously know a lot of players are guilty of drugs and are about to be banned to be openly talking about this back up plan...

Fair enough mate.

What would happen if clubs said they don't want to put anyone up???

Or no players were willing to move???

Or clubs put all their injured players up???

Or all reserve graders???

I know it's not set in stone and it's just a softener for the fans incase the worst happens.

And I'm glad the new IC are at least trying to be pro-active not re-active like NewsRL were.

I guess I look at it that no one has obviously failed a drug test, otherwise surely they wouldn't have been allowed to begin the season???

IMO if say 14 Tardpoles were in strife and say 10 woManly players, without any actual physical evidence, my preference would be to let the players continue the season but the clubs heavily involved play for zero points. It's been done before with salary cap infringements. It means the game can satisfy TV deals.

That's if they discover it's a club problem, like they were administered to the whole playing group by a doc or such official. IMO if a whole clubs been put in a position like we hear cos the clubs hired a dodgy official well it's really the club that should be sanctioned not the individuals as such. Every player and ex-player that's been interviewed or commented on the matter to a man have said in a team structure you put your faith in the coaching staff.

If it's players going out of the club structure well that's different.

[Cockadoodledoo]

Some clubs no doubt have some highly paid players that they realize are being paid overs and would jump at a chance to free up some cap space of there own in a scenario like this. It makes it easier when the club say to said player, you are not in our long term plans so you can either stay but you may not be picked in First grade or go to the Sharks or some other club which may wind up needing players to fill a roster.. What price Braithy partnering Carney in the halves in the second half of the season?

[Guest]

Fair enough mate.

What would happen if clubs said they don't want to put anyone up???

Or no players were willing to move???

Or clubs put all their injured players up???

Or all reserve graders???

I know it's not set in stone and it's just a softener for the fans incase the worst happens.

And I'm glad the new IC are at least trying to be pro-active not re-active like NewsRL were.

I guess I look at it that no one has obviously failed a drug test, otherwise surely they wouldn't have been allowed to begin the season???

IMO if say 14 Tardpoles were in strife and say 10 woManly players, without any actual physical evidence, my preference would be to let the players continue the season but the clubs heavily involved play for zero points. It's been done before with salary cap infringements. It means the game can satisfy TV deals.

That's if they discover it's a club problem, like they were administered to the whole playing group by a doc or such official. IMO if a whole clubs been put in a position like we hear cos the clubs hired a dodgy official well it's really the club that should be sanctioned not the individuals as such. Every player and ex-player that's been interviewed or commented on the matter to a man have said in a team structure you put your faith in the coaching staff.

If it's players going out of the club structure well that's different.

Samantha Riley used up the get out of gaol card when she blamed her coach for giving her stuff on trust.
The laws were then changed to put the onus on the person taking any substance to check himself.
ASADA must have informed the NRL they are looking to give player bans,which is why this plan is being mentioned.

[Guest]

Fair enough mate.

What would happen if clubs said they don't want to put anyone up???

Or no players were willing to move???

Or clubs put all their injured players up???

Or all reserve graders???

I know it's not set in stone and it's just a softener for the fans incase the worst happens.

And I'm glad the new IC are at least trying to be pro-active not re-active like NewsRL were.

I guess I look at it that no one has obviously failed a drug test, otherwise surely they wouldn't have been allowed to begin the season???

IMO if say 14 Tardpoles were in strife and say 10 woManly players, without any actual physical evidence, my preference would be to let the players continue the season but the clubs heavily involved play for zero points. It's been done before with salary cap infringements. It means the game can satisfy TV deals.

That's if they discover it's a club problem, like they were administered to the whole playing group by a doc or such official. IMO if a whole clubs been put in a position like we hear cos the clubs hired a dodgy official well it's really the club that should be sanctioned not the individuals as such. Every player and ex-player that's been interviewed or commented on the matter to a man have said in a team structure you put your faith in the coaching staff.

If it's players going out of the club structure well that's different.

Different kettle of fish mate. The salary cap is an in house mechanism and any breach of it can be dealt with internally. Whereas with regards to the anti doping rules, the code and even ASADA have to comply with the WADA rules which state no player found to have taken XXX can participate in their chosen sport.

Chook.

[Guest]

Some clubs no doubt have some highly paid players that they realize are being paid overs and would jump at a chance to free up some cap space of there own in a scenario like this. It makes it easier when the club say to said player, you are not in our long term plans so you can either stay but you may not be picked in First grade or go to the Sharks or some other club which may wind up needing players to fill a roster.. What price Braithy partnering Carney in the halves in the second half of the season?

Poor old Braith would be the last bloke picked in a draft selection.The Tigpies wont get rid of him that easy...

[roosterproud]

anasta as the shires #6 and captain

[stsae]

Some clubs no doubt have some highly paid players that they realize are being paid overs and would jump at a chance to free up some cap space of there own in a scenario like this. It makes it easier when the club say to said player, you are not in our long term plans so you can either stay but you may not be picked in First grade or go to the Sharks or some other club which may wind up needing players to fill a roster.. What price Braithy partnering Carney in the halves in the second half of the season?

Shit you beat me to it Coqqers, I just had that thought too.

[stsae]

Samantha Riley used up the get out of gaol card when she blamed her coach for giving her stuff on trust.
The laws were then changed to put the onus on the person taking any substance to check himself.
ASADA must have informed the NRL they are looking to give player bans,which is why this plan is being mentioned.

Well that's wrong IMO, IF it's an employee of the club whose administered a drug club wide.

Wouldnt there be some duty of care or something similar???

It would be a brave player to step outside the team mentality, especially a young bloke, and refuse anything they are told to do.

Especially in the past week with the cricketers and Dugan situation in mind.

Look at the salary cap rorts. The players individually can't be blamed individually when the club has the responsibility to organize contracts and their salary cap. I see this situation, as I said IF it's a paid employee administering the drug, as pretty much on par.

Interesting times ahead.

[stsae]

Different kettle of fish mate. The salary cap is an in house mechanism and any breach of it can be dealt with internally. Whereas with regards to the anti doping rules, the code and even ASADA have to comply with the WADA rules which state no player found to have taken XXX can participate in their chosen sport.

Chook.

Yes I dig that mate, the rules we are looking at are a world wide thing.

What if there is no physical evidence mate??? As in failed a test???

Hearsay and people rolling over alone is a dangerous way to convict individuals IMO.


BTW I agree with your earlier post about players wanting a chance to get a full time gig elsewhere. Maybe that's why we bought Benny Jones back???

[Guest]

Well that's wrong IMO, IF it's an employee of the club whose administered a drug club wide.

Wouldnt there be some duty of care or something similar???

It would be a brave player to step outside the team mentality, especially a young bloke, and refuse anything they are told to do.

Especially in the past week with the cricketers and Dugan situation in mind.

Look at the salary cap rorts. The players individually can't be blamed individually when the club has the responsibility to organize contracts and their salary cap. I see this situation, as I said IF it's a paid employee administering the drug, as pretty much on par.

Interesting times ahead.

The Sharks Football Club are worried about law suits against them from any players banned over this whole fiasco.The six month ban deal they offered had a waiver clause stopping any liability recourse against the board.
As far as the law is concerned,the guilty player is still responsible for whatever he takes.

[stsae]

The Sharks Football Club are worried about law suits against them from any players banned over this whole fiasco.The six month ban deal they offered had a waiver clause stopping any liability recourse against the board.
As far as the law is concerned,the guilty player is still responsible for whatever he takes.

Well if it goes down like you say mate I hope the players sue their arse off and NewsRLs for that matter.

Any irony in the fact this drugs issue comes out right after NewsRL relinquish control???

I mean if it's been a year long investigation wouldn't that mean it started right about the time the game was handed to the IC???

Hmmmm, again News escapes any blame methinks.

[BUDDY]

Well if it goes down like you say mate I hope the players sue their arse off and NewsRLs for that matter.

Any irony in the fact this drugs issue comes out right after NewsRL relinquish control???

I mean if it's been a year long investigation wouldn't that mean it started right about the time the game was handed to the IC???

Hmmmm, again News escapes any blame methinks.

Backwards you are assuming that just because 14 players said they didn't know what they were taking was illegal that they must be innocent. So must we assume that of the 50 in question that none of them knew what they were doing was wrong? I think that is being a little naive.

How many crims plead not guilty but are found guilty? My understanding is that Marion Jones and Armstrong never produced a positive swab and that meant jack sh!t in their defense.

Ultimately the individual is responsible to find out what they are putting in their system. I am sure all players know that. It's black and white.

Why did the players allegedly go to the private practice of a doctor to have these drugs administered rather than inhouse?

There are claims that ASADA have phone recordings and credit card receipts on these products. Wouldn't clubs be paying for any supplements the players take?

They must have clear cut evidence to convict these players of wrong doing especially if their own legal advice is to take the 6 months.

The NRL would not be mentioning "one of many possible contingency plans" if they didn't think it will be required.

[stephenj]

a least hed be guaranteed to drop it against us?