Eastwood read the riot act

[skeepe]

Becuase he's a essential ingredient to our future side, thats why! The other two players, well we can deal with not having them easily! Once Carroll retires, Eastwood will be our lock. He's young and he'll learn from this. Give him a warning and lets get on with the finals!

So you're saying the attitude should be "three strikes and you're out... err... unless we need you, then do whatever you want"?

 

[salivor]

Locky hasn't heard of the word consistancy and fairness.

Situation here is that we don't have enough information to compare this to the Seymour and Costigan sackings but by all means keep trying to do so.

 

[Sea_Eagles_Rock]

FMD I can't believe how fast this has come and bit the Broncos on the ass. I knew it would, but in the same season???

Locky, admit. Double standard is at work in what you are talking about. You were all over the positive press release when you axed the other two nuts, now you have to cop the flack when you fail to follow through on what was claimed at the time. It's ok, most clubs would do the same....

 

[lockyno1]

So you're saying the attitude should be "three strikes and you're out... err... unless we need you, then do whatever you want"?

I said give him a stern warning. Thats enough.

 

[skeepe]

Locky hasn't heard of the word consistancy and fairness.

Situation here is that we don't have enough information to compare this to the Seymour and Costigan sackings but by all means keep trying to do so.

I'm not trying to. I simply responded to locky's view that players who are not as important to the club are expendable if they do something wrong, while players who are more important are given a little more lattitude.

 

[The Colonel]

Situation here is that we don't have enough information to compare this to the Seymour and Costigan sackings but by all means keep trying to do so.

That is the disappointing thing isn't it. The Costigan incident however looks fairly similar. I'm rather surprised however that Cullen was unaware until the Bulletin let him know....

After losing his licence earlier this year, Eastwood was caught driving on April 11 on the Logan motorway, resulting in a $350 fine.
He was spotted driving again on April 23 on Chambers Flat Road at Marsden.
He will reappear in the Beenleigh Magistrates Court on September 29.
Eastwood debuted for the Broncos last year and has been so impressive he was drafted into the New Zealand side for a Test spot against Great Britain, only to be forced out through injury.
Meanwhile, Costigan said he deserved everything that came his way after being arrested three times over the blood alcohol limit on August 2.
"I've made a foolish choice in life, I'm just glad no one got injured on the night," he said.

http://www.gcbulletin.com.au/article/2006/09/12/741_news.html

 

[lockyno1]

You were all over the positive press release when you axed the other two nuts, now you have to cop the flack when you fail to follow through on what was claimed at the time.

Meh...the other two were rubbish and screwed us around for long enough. Can't say I wasn't happy when seymour got sacked. He was tripe! As for this, well look all we know is that Eastwood needs to clean up his act and hopefully no more incidents to follow on from this. He is a promising young player, so although it is double standards, I am prepared to give him a few more chances.

 

[salivor]

FMD I can't believe how fast this has come and bit the Broncos on the ass. I knew it would, but in the same season???

Locky, admit. Double standard is at work in what you are talking about. You were all over the positive press release when you axed the other two nuts, now you have to cop the flack when you fail to follow through on what was claimed at the time. It's ok, most clubs would do the same....

It hasn't come back to bite us at all.
1. Locky's attitude is not the clubs.
2. I'll state it for the umptenth time. Seymour and Costigan were not sacked for sole incidents, the club stated that they were given several previous warnings. At this stage this could be Eastwoods first official warning from the club for all we know.

 

[innsaneink]

3 strikes. "Lucky you can play...dont do it again"

 

[lockyno1]

I'm not trying to. I simply responded to locky's view that players who are not as important to the club are expendable if they do something wrong, while players who are more important are given a little more lattitude.

If you don't think your "better" players would receive a bit more lattitude you are on drugs!

 

[salivor]

That is the disappointing thing isn't it. The Costigan incident however looks fairly similar. I'm rather surprised however that Cullen was unaware until the Bulletin let him know....



http://www.gcbulletin.com.au/article/2006/09/12/741_news.html

I'd say it would've been fairly easy for Eastwood to hide it from the club when at that stage he'd only played I think 1 first grade match so was just a junior coming through the grades and out of the media spotlight.

 

[The Colonel]

I'd say it would've been fairly easy for Eastwood to hide it from the club when at that stage he'd only played I think 1 first grade match so was just a junior coming through the grades and out of the media spotlight.

Maybe so. Still doesn't mean what he has done is right...... in that respect by hiding it from the club it is very much like the Costigan incident. He was hardly out of the spotlight either.

 

[lockyno1]

Colonel, as Salivor said, Costigan was given warnings for a series of incidents. As far as we know this is Eastwood's first official warning from the club!

 

[The Colonel]

Colonel, as Salivor said, Costigan was given warnings for a series of incidents. As far as we know this is Eastwood's first official warning from the club!

And the flip side of that is, as far as we know it could well be his second or third warning as well....

 

[lockyno1]

And the flip side of that is, as far as we know it could well be his second or third warning as well....

yes but this could well be Eastwood's FIRST official warning from the club!

 

[salivor]

But we don't so we're just assuming. All we can do is take it on face value. This is the first warning that the Broncos have admitted to giving Eastwood publically while the Broncos sacked Costigan and Seymour on a drink driving and alleged assault case on top of prior warnings. That is the basics of what we've got to go on.

 

[The Colonel]

yes but this could well be Eastwood's FIRST official warning from the club!

Or second or third. I get the point you are trying to make locky....

 

[The Colonel]

But we don't so we're just assuming. All we can do is take it on face value. This is the first warning that the Broncos have admitted to giving Eastwood publically while the Broncos sacked Costigan and Seymour on a drink driving and alleged assault case on top of prior warnings. That is the basics of what we've got to go on.

I just find it very hard to believe that a professional outfit such as the Broncos, having already been stung once with Costigan not telling them of his incident, could allow a second and third incident to pass them by as well.

If it is his first warning then all well and good. Hopefully he learns.

 

[lockyno1]

I get the point you are trying to make locky....

Good to see!

 

[STSAE]

http://www.gcbulletin.com.au/article/2006/09/12/741_news.html



Don't know if this has already been mentioned, but if Eastwood this is a repeated offence as stated above - why isn't he being given the same treatment as Costigan/Seymour?

Another case of Double Standards from the master??

Just like the treatment of Hodges when he signed with Easts but a different stance on Tiquri and Sailor??

Just like when you tell your CEO and club you havent spoken to another club but secretly the deals been done for weeks. But of course when you lie, then renig on a deal, you are a hero-sandwich??

I just wonder how they will blame Gould for this one??

Oh the irony............................