1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News: Brett Stewart may go to court to have ban overturned

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by DUFFMAN, Mar 19, 2009.

  1. DUFFMAN

    DUFFMAN Active Member

    644
    82
    Ratings:
    +296 / 5
    according to the Daily Telegraph

    By Josh Massoud
    March 19, 2009 12:00am
    EXILED Manly star Brett Stewart has made a shock move to overturn his four-week suspension, firing a lengthy legal letter to NRL boss David Gallop that could lead him to apply for a Supreme Court injunction against the playing ban.

    The Daily Telegraph can reveal Stewart's lawyers sent Gallop a multi-page response on Tuesday evening showing cause why the new face of rugby league should not be forcibly stood down as he waits to face court on a sexual assault charge.

    Gallop last night admitted that he was taken aback by the development, given Manly's public undertaking not to appeal over Stewart's suspension.

    But the footballer's barrister Geoff Bellew said the action was "independent of Manly".

    Read the Full Article
     
  2. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    11,596
    843
    Ratings:
    +971 / 7
    Re: Brett Stewart may go to court to have ban overturned

    I think the strength of Brett's position will depend on what the NRL decide today on the Friend case. With Seymour suspended indefinitely this example probably won't come into the equation. However the Roosters have made a decision that I doubt the NRL will be able to live with.
     
  3. Berkeley_Eagle

    Berkeley_Eagle Current Status: 24/7 Manly Fan 2016 Tipping Competitor

    15,995
    1,849
    Ratings:
    +2,115 / 14
    <p>EXILED Manly star Brett Stewart has made a shock move to overturn his four-week suspension, firing a lengthy legal letter to NRL boss David Gallop that could lead him to apply for a Supreme Court injunction against the playing ban.

    The Daily Telegraph can reveal Stewart's lawyers sent Gallop a multi-page response on Tuesday evening showing cause why the new face of rugby league should not be forcibly stood down as he waits to face court on a sexual assault charge.

    Gallop last night admitted that he was taken aback by the development, given Manly's public undertaking not to appeal over Stewart's suspension.</p>

    <a href="http://www.silvertails.net/news/Sea-Eagles/brett-stewart-may-go-to-court-to-have-ban-overturned.html">Read the full article</a>
     
  4. ManlyBacker

    ManlyBacker Winging it Staff Member

    11,596
    843
    Ratings:
    +971 / 7
    Re: Brett Stewart may go to court to have ban overturned

    Actually, the NRL will have to review both cases. As Rex reported earlier Seymour has been cleared:

    "CRONULLA could be headed for a showdown with the NRL board over Brett Seymour after an independent investigation into the halfback's behaviour on Sunday night cleared him of any wrongdoing.

    Seymour was stood down by the Sharks yesterday morning pending the outcome of the investigation into his actions at a drinking session, during which he was alleged to have thrown pizza and abused patrons.

    The former Broncos halfback was also alleged to have urinated on himself, although bar staff have since confirmed Seymour had a drink spilt on him.

    Although Seymour has admitted he was drunk, the investigator found no evidence of the other claims made against the Sharks No7.

    As such, Seymour's suspension by the club could be lifted as early as today - the same day the NRL board will meet to discuss incidents involving the Sharks half and Sydney Roosters hooker Jake Friend, who was charged with high-range drink driving on Monday. "
     
  5. blitzkrieg

    blitzkrieg Active Member

    627
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0
    I think Gallop, not Seymour, will be the one urinating himself ;D
     
  6. Pittwater Legend

    Pittwater Legend Well-Known Member

    1,690
    352
    Ratings:
    +780 / 28
    Gallop should be holding an umbrella on him at all times as a **** storm will be coming his way.

    Is the guy plain retarded? How can be confused to have received a letter from the club?

    Well Dave, here it is. We sent you a letter because you are a hypocrite of the highest ****ing order. Absolute dickhead.
     
  7. Dan

    Dan Administrator Staff Member Administrator 2016 Tipping Competitor

    32,370
    3,610
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Ratings:
    +5,462 / 74
    He is confused because the Club said they weren't going to contest Bretts charge.

    However this is not from the club and is from Brett's legal team
     
  8. DSM5

    DSM5 Well-Known Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    9,997
    516
    Ratings:
    +516 / 0
    Gallop is a piss poor lawyer.  Any brief worth his/her salt would have at least thought about an independent action.  Just where is this guy's head?  This guy is THE problem with our game.  He's obviously a one thought thinker, can't see trains coming, and has no B, C, or D game plan.  Total idiot. 
     
  9. Jatz Crackers

    Jatz Crackers Moderator Staff Member

    9,128
    1,149
    Ratings:
    +1,242 / 7
    :D

    Classic !

    As a lawyer, Gallop makes a bloody good puppet.
     
  10. Rex

    Rex Well-Known Member

    4,334
    761
    Ratings:
    +2,338 / 60
    http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/news/binges-threaten-funding/2009/03/18/1237054905839.html
    You'll note in this article that Brett Stewart denies he was refused service of alcohol at Manly Wharf Hotel.  If so, the trumped up charges by Gallop, which set a new precedent for a suspension based on simply being refused service of alcohol are actually based on a lie. So it seems.

    In any case it has already been established that Manly's function finished at 3pm and the action Gallop is claiming to act on, he is apparently claiming happened many hours after the function finished.

    So Gallop's attempt to differentiate Stewart from the Friends and Seymours based on some meaningless technicality (splitting of hairs) - of it supposedly being at an official is in fact totally untrue.  So it seems.

    We need to keep repeating "so it seems" in our minds because you can't trust what is reported in the papers, and you certainly can't take it at face value.  I quoted above, based on a news report, that Stewart admitted getting intoxicated after the function.  I'm seriously beginning to wonder whether he's actually admitted getting intoxicated, or whether that is just ANOTHER abstraction from the truth, another assumption, made by some reporter.
     
  11. The Wheel

    The Wheel Well-Known Member

    10,887
    805
    Ratings:
    +1,761 / 72
    Look Gallop is a clown but until News Ltd gets out of running NRL we are stuck with him IMO
     
  12. niccipops

    niccipops un echidna spillo mia bevanda Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    5,436
    2,922
    Ratings:
    +5,519 / 50
    The facts are simple. If three, four or thirty players have all generated negative publicity due to public intoxication, then all three, four or thirty players should get a 4 week suspension due to the precedent set by David Gallop.
    Brett's got a bloody good case then.
     
  13. brookiegreg

    brookiegreg Active Member

    739
    66
    Ratings:
    +66 / 0
    Poor Mr Gallop has painted himself into a corner here  :'(  if he doesn't act he'll be very publicly seen as weak or biased or a hippocrite (or all 3) and all hell will break out every time a player gets in trouble from alcohol in the future. No one will know what the rules are if gallop doesn't act now the same as he did to Stewart.

    He'd be hating the fact he has only 7 days ago given himself the exact precedent and actions that he needs to apply now.

    So whats the betting on how Gallop will be: gettin hard...or going limp?

    Somebody must be making this up - what an unbelievable twist of events within one week. Then again after the Roosters performance its no wonder they were drinking  ;)
     
  14. Dan

    Dan Administrator Staff Member Administrator 2016 Tipping Competitor

    32,370
    3,610
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Ratings:
    +5,462 / 74
    He will find some lame loophole, at which point Brett should immediately be re-instated to play by either the tribunal or the supreme court injunction.
     
  15. Fluffy

    Fluffy Well-Known Member

    17,768
    1,417
    Ratings:
    +3,624 / 132
    i thought this would take a couple of months to come to fruition.

    Im very glad its happened so soon.
     
  16. Jethro

    Jethro This space is for rent Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    7,127
    1,492
    Ratings:
    +1,897 / 7
    There you go DSM. You can have an applaud for that fine comment. ;D
     
  17. Jatz Crackers

    Jatz Crackers Moderator Staff Member

    9,128
    1,149
    Ratings:
    +1,242 / 7
    Its obvious where Brett is getting his advice from. As I said previously, im pleased Bellew and Des are in his corner.

    The letter sent to Gallop is a kind of "show cause" heads up. Gallop will be busy assessing the NRLs position and if he believes an injunction would be possible based upon the Seymour/Friend case (amongst oither factors) he will never let it get to a Supreme Court hearing.

    Before that happens, he will find a lame loophole (as Dan says) and backflip faster than a circus midget facing a skunk.

    But dont think we will get a transparent reversal of his original decision. It will come in the form of a spun version of events and sold amongst the parties who all agree how it will be sold to the media and public.

    Doesnt change the fact that Gallop is a mong and has made vey poor decisions on this matter.

    News Ltd.....................Sack Gallop NOW !
     
  18. deadlyeagle

    deadlyeagle Member

    671
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0
    the problem with sacking Gallop is that he is probably on an undeserving lucrative wage meaning the termination of his contract will involve a few milllion $ spent, perfect example is the recent sacking of Sol from Telstra which cost $20 Million to get rid of him.
     
  19. DailyTerrorgraphHater

    DailyTerrorgraphHater Member

    208
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Not only that... but...
    He will probably get replaced by someone like Nick "the virus" Politis.

    ;D
     
  20. Jethro

    Jethro This space is for rent Staff Member Premium Member 2016 Tipping Competitor

    7,127
    1,492
    Ratings:
    +1,897 / 7
    Didn't I see on the news last night or the day before that Rudd is trying to introduce legislation preventing those sort of payouts to executives?
     

Share This Page