Silvertails email to NRL

[Matabele]

Dear Mr Gallop

Please find attached a petition currently containing the signatures of more than 650 people.  These people have all pledged to boycott the sponsors of any product advertised during broadcasts of the coming NRL season until the NRL takes a reasonable and conciliatory stance towards Brett Stewart.

David Gallop and the NRL continue to suggest that the four week suspension given to Brett Stewart, and the $100,000 fine imposed on the Manly Warringah Sea Eagles in 2009 were imposed because he was intoxicated.  Leave aside the many subsequent instances of players in an intoxicated state not suffering a similar fate, this premise has been clearly established in a court of law to be false.  During Brett Stewart' trial last year, where he was found innocent of all charges, it was clearly testified, from several attending police officers, that he was not visibly intoxicated - demolishing the argument that the NRL and David Gallop continue to put forward.

We don't think that Benji Marshall should be suspended because when Gallop and the NRL suspended Brett Stewart for 'drunkenness' and bringing the game into disrepute they were wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right, but what does need to happen is the mistake made in dealing with Stewart and Manly in the first instance needs to be corrected.

What Gallop and the NRL need to do is:
1. admit their mistake in suspending Brett Stewart despite clear police testimony that he was not intoxicated on the night in question;
2. apologise to Brett Stewart and compensate him for the damage to his reputation inflicted by the erroneous suspension.
3. repay the $100,000 fine to the Manly club, with interest.

Until this happens the signatories to the petition will continue to boycott any product associated with the NRL, and will use social networking to spread news of their boycott, the products involved, and why.

Yours sincerely

 

[ManlyBacker]

We don't think that Benji Marshall should be suspended because when Gallop and the NRL suspended Brett Stewart for 'drunkenness' and bringing the game into disrepute they were wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right, but what does need to happen is the mistake made in dealing with Stewart and Manly in the first instance needs to be corrected.

Well said!

 

[Matabele]

   

[quote author=Matabele link=topic=186715.msg320896#msg320896 date=1299581861]
We don't think that Benji Marshall should be suspended because when Gallop and the NRL suspended Brett Stewart for 'drunkenness' and bringing the game into disrepute they were wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right, but what does need to happen is the mistake made in dealing with Stewart and Manly in the first instance needs to be corrected.

Well said!
[/quote]  Not my words - I shanghaid that from a poster on the Silvertails FB page!

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

Be very interested to see if they reply!!

 

[Matabele]

It'll be cut and paste, if at all.

---

Post  automatically merged: [time]1299649557[/time]

---

Well I got a bit more than a cut and paste, but they're still holding their party line:

I write in response to your email and attached petition.  I respect the support that you have for Brett and the club but you have also drawn assumptions from the court case that cannot the substantiated on the basis of a ‘not guilty’ verdict.



The NRL was clear at the time that it would not judge Brett on the basis of police charges. As such the result of the court case that followed those charges does not alter the matters that we acted upon.



The NRL carried out an investigation at the time and reviewed Manly’s own report.  On the basis of the evidence available, the NRL reached a conclusion. The Manly club did not appeal that matter at the time.  The opportunity to do so has since passed.



We wish Brett every success in putting the matter behind him and hope that he is allowed to do just that.



I am sorry that you feel the need to talk of boycotts, they are not warranted and if successful, in the long term would only impact on the revenue that goes back to all clubs, including Manly.



Kind regards





David Gallop

Chief Executive Officer

 

[Jatz Crackers]

Its your fault Mata if the club goes broke. Gallop says its your fault.

 

[Dan]

http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/sport/story/angry-manly-fans-call-on-gallop-to-concede-he-was-wrong/

 

[Matabele]

http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/sport/story/angry-manly-fans-call-on-gallop-to-concede-he-was-wrong/

>>>>>>> SUBMIT NEWS ARTICLES SECTION 

---

Post  automatically merged: [time]1299652797[/time]

---

Its your fault Mata if the club goes broke. Gallop says its your fault.

  He's far from the first to suggest it and probably won;t be the last.

 

[sambo]

Great letter Matas but what a typical bs reply from the goose..."drawn assumptions from the court case"...laughable
Would love to know what " alter the matters we acted upon " were.
As a signatory to your petition,i commend you mate for standing up to this tin god

 

[tookey]

Its your fault Mata if the club goes broke. Gallop says its your fault.

Surprised that Gallop didn't blame to lack of a major sponsor and state of Brookie on agitating Manly supporters.

 

[MadMarcus]

I am sorry that you feel the need to talk of boycotts, they are not warranted and if successful, in the long term would only impact on the revenue that goes back to all clubs, including Manly.

His punctuation is as bad as his decision making!

 

[SA fan]

I have sent a few letters to the NRL and never received anything back!! 

 

[MadMarcus]

It'll be cut and paste, if at all.

---

Post  automatically merged: [time]1299649557[/time]

---

I respect the support that you have for Brett and the club but you have also drawn assumptions from the court case that cannot the substantiated on the basis of a ‘not guilty’ verdict.

---

---

This is a mistake that was made in some of the club's statements in recent days, but you did not draw assumptions from the verdict at all.  You simply referred to some of the evidence (ie. police testimony) which is factual and can be verified.

It sounds to me like Gallop is saying that information contained in police testimony should not be treated with the assumption that it is true?  He saying that the word of a bouncer (which I understand was subsequently retracted) should be relied on over police testimony - and CCTV footage - to the contrary.

Keep up the good fight Mata.

 

[Jatz Crackers]

I have sent a few letters to the NRL and never received anything back!! 

Its because your from South Australia.

No offence 

---

Post  automatically merged: [time]1299661250[/time]

---

Well pointed out MMarcus.

 

[Rex]

Gallop is also suggesting, isn't he, with both the 4 week suspension and $100k fine, that Manly Wharf Hotel must have severely breached their liquor serving rules, to the point where their licence should be cancelled?

Perhaps Manly Wharf Hotel should be suing the NRL for defamation.

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

No doubt the Goose is under great pressure, but an expected response.

 

[Masked Eagle]

The only bit of recent news to me in recent days is what the NRL has been saying about this supposed Manly report which they used as part of their judgement against Snake and the Club, and also Manly didn't appeal against the fine and suspension. 

I caught the end of a Scott Penn interview yesterday where I think he was alluding to this report when he said something like "we had the same evidence and we didn't suspend Brett".  It would actually be good to know what that report actually said.

If I was to play the Devils advocate a little bit, I would have questions of the Management of the club (more so then), but why didn't they challenge the fine and suspension rather than just copping it on the chin.

We all the think NRL did a terrible job but I don't think we are blameless either in terms of what hindsight tells us was a ridiculous outcome.

 

[Matabele]

Here is my response back:

Dear David (and Kerri)

I wonder who has a better understanding of the Court Case?  Our website had a designated reporter covering the entirety of the case and was privy to every word of testimony, including that of the police officers who, under oath, clearly stated Brett Stewart was not intoxicated.  Further, there was an investigation by licensing police into the activities at the Wharf bar that night which included them viewing CCTV footage of the alleged misconduct on which the NRL based their decision. They could not find any breaches of the RSA provisions. The manager in charge at the establishment that night has publicly stated that the group as a whole were asked to vacate the premises so that they could prepare the premises for public access later that evening and that Brett Stewart was not personally refused service.

Both the evidence in court and the investigation by the licensing police are clearly at odds with the position the NRL took then, and continues to take now.  In your own words this has nothing to do with the police charges about sexual assault allegations, but everything to do with the incorrect conclusions you have drawn on the night in question.

Secondly, your continual reference to the report Manly gave you on the night in question conveniently neglects that the conclusion the Manly Board drew from their report was to take the course of action the NRL has now taken with Benji Marshall.  It is your current action with Benji Marshall that clearly validates the approach Manly wished to take in 2009.  It was the NRL that chose to over rule their decision, suspend Stewart and impose a $100,000 fine.

I am glad you have recognised that our boycott will impact the revenue of the NRL and its associated community.  This gives us additional determination to see this matter through, to advocate it in the media and via social networking until such time as the NRL takes a conciliatory and reasonable approach to Brett Stewart and the Manly club.  We will however endeavour to ensure this course of action has little or no direct impact on Manly.

Yours sincerely

XXXXXX