Eagles' $100K request

[ManlyBacker]

From the Rothfield column in today's Sunday Telegraph:

MANLY'S multi-millionaire part-owner Rick Penn wants the NRL to overturn the decision to fine the Sea Eagles $100,000 for the Brett Stewart drama at the 2009 Manly season launch.

Now that David Gallop has gone, Penn plans to approach commission chairman John Grant. Penn wants to give the $100,000 straight to Stewart to put towards his legal fees.

"Brett was cleared of any wrong-doing by the courts and the NRL should give us our money back to help Brett," Penn said.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/confidential/australias-best-sporting-gossip-with-phil-rothfield/story-e6freye0-1226413125749

 

[Captain Moondog]

Gallop was never going to return the money as that would have been seen as an admission that he got it wrong. Hopefully Grant is more accommodating.

 

[PONTIAN SEA EAGLE]

I've always believed he was innocent,the nrl should give the $100,000 to brett to cover his legal costs.

 

[Berkeley_Eagle]

cant see it happening tbh

 

[Chip and Chase]

They will continue the charade that Brett was suspended and fined for being drunk at an official function. Something that wasn't directly tested in a court of law. They won't give the money back because then they will leave themselves open for claims of compensation for the 4 week suspension.

Just be thankful that the spineless fool who orchestrated this public humiliation of Brett has been shown the door.

 

[byso]

Has nothing to do with the allegations
They fined him because the club agreed he was drunk. They won't get the money back

.

---

C & c beat me to it.

 

[bones]

Has nothing to do with the allegations
They fined him because the club agreed he was drunk. They won't get the money back

.

---

C & c beat me to it.

---

I thought that the club only agreed that he was asked to leave. Which they all were because the venue had to set up for the night trade.

 

[MadMarcus]

Can't see the point in asking tbh...

 

[manlywarringah]

Ironic that the smelegraph are putting an article about this when they were the creeps who hung him out to dry in the first place!

 

[ManlyBacker]

Has nothing to do with the allegations
They fined him because the club agreed he was drunk. They won't get the money back

.

---

C & c beat me to it.

---

I thought that the club only agreed that he was asked to leave. Which they all were because the venue had to set up for the night trade.

---

The club was fined for the way the season launch was conducted. It included the claim that Choc had assaulted a sponsor, that players were asked to leave, there was an open bar and no minders being there. Not officially included in that decision but definitely having a bearing was the Stewart allegation.

In order to limit the press damage and pressure from the NRL Penn admitted there was a problem and instigated a no booze rule for future functions.

Now that Gallop has gone and a lot of the hysteria of that night is in the past I can see how those monies could be directed to Brett by a new look ARLC. Will it happen? I know what I think but I won't prejudice the opportunity the ARLC has to do something about it. Man up Commission and right a wrong.

 

[Mal Cochrane]

if the line the NRL took was that they were fined for the way the season launch was conducted, why would Manly have a chance of getting it back due to Brett's case...

Won't happen.

 

[Masked Eagle]

I can see the NRL wanting to include a payment like this in the salary cap. Regardless of the circumstances giving a player something like this could thought of as an inducement to help them stay. Imagine if the Roosters said to Snake, we'll pay you this much to play but we'll also give you $100k to help pay for your legal bills.

I applaud the club for asking but considering the $100k was paid for the by the club and not Brett I can't see how we could give him the money. That being said, I'm sure the is some sort of precedence set in the past with players facing legal charges. I wonder what has happened there if the club has supplied legal assistance to players facing charges and they have been acquited?

Although I do like the club making enquiries to the IC, I would have preferred not to read about it in the paper.

 

[Cameron]

They might get the money back but if they give Brett 100k they will include it in the cap.
What scares me about this is if grant over turns this do Melbourne go to him to get their premierships back. Hughes has already mentioned on talkin ****e that he believes now gallops gone the scum will get their comps back.

 

[bennyeagle]

Atleast it shows that we are still being proactive about the situation, good to see the club still supporting the financial losses of Brett, but how much of this article is true only God knows !

 

[lovefooty]

Has nothing to do with the allegations
They fined him because the club agreed he was drunk. They won't get the money back

.

---

C & c beat me to it.

---

I thought that the club only agreed that he was asked to leave. Which they all were because the venue had to set up for the night trade.

---

The club was fined for the way the season launch was conducted. It included the claim that Choc had assaulted a sponsor, that players were asked to leave, there was an open bar and no minders being there. Not officially included in that decision but definitely having a bearing was the Stewart allegation.

In order to limit the press damage and pressure from the NRL Penn admitted there was a problem and instigated a no booze rule for future functions.

Now that Gallop has gone and a lot of the hysteria of that night is in the past I can see how those monies could be directed to Brett by a new look ARLC. Will it happen? I know what I think but I won't prejudice the opportunity the ARLC has to do something about it. Man up Commission and right a wrong.

---

And who was the event manager and media manager at that event and has taken no responsibility for any thing. ZORBA

 

[Rex]

Anyone who thinks for one second that Brett Stewart would have been suspended, or the club fined $100k, without the false and discredited sexual assault allegations is living in fairy-land.

Anyone who thinks it is fair or reasonable that Brett Stewart is out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the false allegations lacks compassion and humanity.

Anyone who cannot see the NRL's significant culpability (if not legally, then logically), via Gallop's handling of these circumstances is simply blind.

If there was a will the NRL could go a long, long way to righting these wrongs.

 

[Earnie the Eagle]

I don't know about anyone else but I find this is a bit of a coincidence coming up in the middle of Brett's new contract negotiations.

 

[lovefooty]

Anyone who thinks for one second that Brett Stewart would have been suspended, or the club fined $100k, without the false and discredited sexual assault allegations is living in fairy-land.

Anyone who thinks it is fair or reasonable that Brett Stewart is out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the false allegations lacks compassion and humanity.

Anyone who cannot see the NRL's significant culpability (if not legally, then logically), via Gallop's handling of these circumstances is simply blind.

If there was a will the NRL could go a long, long way to righting these wrongs.

Your missing the point, the club got fined not Stewart. If anything the money comes back to the club.
The best Brett would get is an apology.

 

[Cameron]

Anyone who thinks for one second that Brett Stewart would have been suspended, or the club fined $100k, without the false and discredited sexual assault allegations is living in fairy-land.

Anyone who thinks it is fair or reasonable that Brett Stewart is out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the false allegations lacks compassion and humanity.

Anyone who cannot see the NRL's significant culpability (if not legally, then logically), via Gallop's handling of these circumstances is simply blind.

If there was a will the NRL could go a long, long way to righting these wrongs.

Your missing the point, the club got fined not Stewart. If anything the money comes back to the club.
The best Brett would get is an apology.

So do you disagree with what was printed that the club would give that to Brett to help recoup the money lost in legal fees

 

[lovefooty]

Anyone who thinks for one second that Brett Stewart would have been suspended, or the club fined $100k, without the false and discredited sexual assault allegations is living in fairy-land.

Anyone who thinks it is fair or reasonable that Brett Stewart is out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars because of the false allegations lacks compassion and humanity.

Anyone who cannot see the NRL's significant culpability (if not legally, then logically), via Gallop's handling of these circumstances is simply blind.

If there was a will the NRL could go a long, long way to righting these wrongs.

Your missing the point, the club got fined not Stewart. If anything the money comes back to the club.
The best Brett would get is an apology.

So do you disagree with what was printed that the club would give that to Brett to help recoup the money lost in legal fees

Why doesn't Rick Penn just give him the money anyway to help with his legal cost. If the club give it ,as you said cam, there may be an issue with the salary cap. To much risk.