News: Gallop's plea over boycott falls on deaf ears

ManlyBacker

Winging it
<div class="content-item" />
<p>DAVID Gallop has expressed his disappointment towards the Sea Eagles’ fans petition against the NRL.</p>


<a href="http://silvertails.net/news/5415-gallops-plea-over-boycott-falls-on-deaf-ears.html">Read the full article</a>
 
A couple more incidents like this and Gallop will know what it is like to be a Manly fan. Although I would guess that when no one likes him, he will care.
 
Not directly on point but I have heard a number of people suggesting that continuing to air this issue is a) futile because Gallop will never apologise b) counterproductive because Brett (and Manly) needs to move forward.

I think it is really important that the club and the fans have spoken out - and attracted a lot of support from sections of the media - because it is highlighting through the mass media that Brett did NOTHING wrong.

One of the worst effects of the charges and the headlines is very simply that mud sticks. All the people who saw the headlines wouldn't necessarily have seen the not guilty verdict,and even those who did probably still assumed at least the was guilty of drunken misconduct - because he was punished for it by Gallop.

Therefore I think the recent publicity is priceless because it has been defending his unfairly tarnished reputation. I think a lot of the public would now have had second thoughts about their assumptions, and this is helping to restore Brett's good name in a very real way.
 
Realise it's the Storm, but this was interesting in view of the NRL not meeting with Brett since he was cleared.

Storm coach Craig Bellamy raised the issue of the late addition of the 2007 premiership punishment with Gallop at a meeting at the end of last season. It followed complaints that the NRL chief executive had ignored the club's playing and coaching staff since ''22/4'' as some Storm staffers call the day the bomb dropped on the club.
http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/league-news/why-the-storm-penalties-could-be-revised-20110310-1bprq.html
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Team P W L PD Pts
24 19 5 148 44
24 17 7 212 40
24 16 8 120 38
24 15 9 172 36
24 15 9 109 36
24 14 10 21 34
24 13 10 107 33
24 13 11 132 32
24 12 12 125 30
24 12 12 21 30
24 10 14 -76 26
24 9 14 -146 25
24 9 15 -135 24
24 9 15 -181 24
24 8 16 -130 22
24 6 18 -199 18
24 6 18 -300 18
Back
Top Bottom