Eagles' $100K request

[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

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.

If rick penn gives it to him it goes under the cap aswell

 

[PONTIAN SEA EAGLE]

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.

---

Where was the proof he was drunk was he breath tested???.

 

[SeaEagleRock8]

Ancient history. There was a very hastily prepared report from the club that has been quoted a few times by Gallop (in hindsight) as the basis of his decisions. The details of that report were never made public so far as I know - nor its author ...

 

[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.

---

Where was the proof he was drunk was he breath tested???.

---

Doesn't matter about the test. The club had agreed on an out come and paid the money. Scott Penn was the one who did the deal with Gallop.
Now his farther wants the money back. Good luck

 

[eagles2win]

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.

---

Where was the proof he was drunk was he breath tested???.

---

Doesn't matter about the test. The club had agreed on an out come and paid the money. Scott Penn was the one who did the deal with Gallop.
Now his farther wants the money back. Good luck

---

Technically under rsa rules he is intoxicated when he takes his first sip of alcohol (so guys if the bar-persons an asshole they can cut you off after one drink guys).
But they hardly do this if unless your rude and Brett's hardly seems rude.

 

[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.

---

Where was the proof he was drunk was he breath tested???.

---

Doesn't matter about the test. The club had agreed on an out come and paid the money. Scott Penn was the one who did the deal with Gallop.
Now his farther wants the money back. Good luck

---

Bazinga!

 

[Jatz Crackers]

^^ So then the fact that a request has been made will make little difference.

If you do not ask you will surely not receive.

 

[Rex]

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.

---

Where was the proof he was drunk was he breath tested???.

---

Doesn't matter about the test. The club had agreed on an out come and paid the money. Scott Penn was the one who did the deal with Gallop.
Now his farther wants the money back. Good luck

---

Technically under rsa rules he is intoxicated when he takes his first sip of alcohol (so guys if the bar-persons an asshole they can cut you off after one drink guys).
But they hardly do this if unless your rude and Brett's hardly seems rude.

---

Agreed. And they can refuse to serve you, and judge that you've had enough already, and ask you to leave the premises, even if you haven't had a single drop. Ask Laurie Daley. Ask Grahame Hughes.

It is beyond naivety to think that Snake was suspended, or the club fined 100k, on the basis of the reasons given.

News Ltd arrogantly treated its readers as gullible and plain stupid. And the public reaction to their offerings provided significant evidence they were right.

 

[bob dylan]

Wish in one hand and **** in the other, which one fills first?

 

[PONTIAN SEA EAGLE]

Anyway guys we've been over this brett matter for the last few years on how many threads.Bretts playing great footy & i'm giving this topic closure.

 

[HappilyManly]

Ancient history. There was a very hastily prepared report from the club that has been quoted a few times by Gallop (in hindsight) as the basis of his decisions. The details of that report were never made public so far as I know - nor its author ...

The author was one P. Peters. He, himself, has referenced its penmanship a few times in the media.:-/

The fine will not be refunded, but the ARLC could give a 100k p.a salary cap compensation for Bretty. This would save them face, and allow the third party Sponsors with fair minds to help Bretty clear his costs.:idea: