Positive Article

[Ceagle]

Why would they take down the article on both websites? Seems like someone is only trying to report one side of the story.

 

[niccipops]

I'm sick to death of people getting on here and calling david gallop a muppet.That is extremely unfair,and casts a slur and a stain on the muppets that cannot come off.I quite like the Swedish chef,and his and gonzos chickens,and Stadler and Waldorf (spelling!!)are dry witted legends.

Gallop does look a little like Beaker the science muppet.

 

[Ceagle]

Wow I have never seen anything like this before

Type into google "don't overreact to fight greats urge nrl"

every single link has been replaced to the Adam Blair apology story, The Brisbane times, The West Australian, The Age, The SMH, all have taked down the article.

Seriously the NRL is crook, what a manipulative organisation these ****s are. We already know the result, Glenn, Brett, Lussick all out for the season.

**** you NRL

 

[Jono]

It's like we're in Soviet Russia. Why would you put an article up then replace it with that bunch of BS that Melbourne came out with.

PS: As the report says, the DT will have Glenn's side...I think this is all so they can sell more papers.

 

[torana355]

We already know the result, Glenn, Brett, Lussick all out for the season.

Guys it was clear from the start that this was not going to be a simple 1 or 2 week suspension. I was hoping only Glenn and perhaps Lussick would be rubbed out for the season but all 4 players that run over could be in more strife then we were anticipating. The fact the article was taken off is a bloody disgrace though. Prepare for the worst guys....Im gutted btw 🙁

 

[Masked Eagle]

Very strange indeed. I'm not surprised it got yanked from the official site, as it speculates on a judiciary matter but if the same article has been pulled from other press, both fairfax and news ltd, well thats surprising. Does anyone know if the author has a twitter account? If he's freelance he might have something to say about it?

 

[The Eagle]

Havent even seen the charges yet,have you guys?

If so id love to know what they were all charged with

 

[willstyles]

No conspiracy theory, it's pretty standard.

It's an AAP article, the original article goes up early in the day, and then later when new information comes to light (in this case a statement from Blair/Melbourne), the story is re-cast to reflect the new info. It is not anything nrl.com has control over - they take a direct feed from the wire service, so anything that is sent through their goes on their website and anything that is updated by the wire service is automatically updated on their website...

 

[Masked Eagle]

No conspiracy theory, it's pretty standard.

It's an AAP article, the original article goes up early in the day, and then later when new information comes to light (in this case a statement from Blair/Melbourne), the story is re-cast to reflect the new info. It is not anything nrl.com has control over - they take a direct feed from the wire service, so anything that is sent through their goes on their website and anything that is updated by the wire service is automatically updated on their website...

How dare you introduce logic! We had a valid conspiracy theory here!!!!

 

[willstyles]

Haha, in that case carry on. I love a conspiracy more than anyone out there!

 

[Jono]

No conspiracy theory, it's pretty standard.

It's an AAP article, the original article goes up early in the day, and then later when new information comes to light (in this case a statement from Blair/Melbourne), the story is re-cast to reflect the new info. It is not anything nrl.com has control over - they take a direct feed from the wire service, so anything that is sent through their goes on their website and anything that is updated by the wire service is automatically updated on their website...

No!! Bad boy!!

 

[AndyVXI]

No conspiracy theory, it's pretty standard.

It's an AAP article, the original article goes up early in the day, and then later when new information comes to light (in this case a statement from Blair/Melbourne), the story is re-cast to reflect the new info. It is not anything nrl.com has control over - they take a direct feed from the wire service, so anything that is sent through their goes on their website and anything that is updated by the wire service is automatically updated on their website...

That would make sense if the original article had direct relevance to the new article. I don't see how a story on Blairs apology is an "update" to comments made by NRL legends regarding the potential for over-reaction...?