Greg Bird charged with violent attack

[spider]

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24735634-5001023,00.html

CRONULLA are expected to finally sack Greg Bird on Thursday and then call on the NRL to ban the star player for two years.

The Daily Telegraph understands the Sharks will lobby NRL chief executive David Gallop for Bird to be prohibited from playing in Australia's premier rugby league competition in 2009 and 2010.

Gallop said yesterday the NRL would initially consider outing Bird for next season.

With Bird poised to be suspended from the NRL, English Super League club Warrington are frontrunners to sign the NSW State of Origin five-eighth.
Bird, his manager Gavin Orr and legal representative Les Nicholls will meet the nine-man Sharks board and the club's legal representative, Steve Gorry, on Thursday. Gorry's website claims he has more than "18 years' experience in litigation and dispute resolution".

But the meeting could be pushed back to Friday if Nicholls is unable to return in time from business on the Gold Coast.

If legal advice does not hinder the Sharks' plans, Bird will be axed from the club.

Bird, 24, was stood down by the club in August after being charged by police over the alleged glassing of his girlfriend, Katie Milligan.

Cronulla chief executive Tony Zappia would not comment last night on whether his club would seek a two-year ban.

All Zappia said was: "Greg Bird has been formally advised that he is required to meet the full board and the club's legal representative. At this point, we are trying to confirm a date where all parties can attend." But Orr is stunned at talk the club wants his client banned from the NRL and that he will be sacked this week.

"We haven't been shown anything factual to say Greg's done anything wrong," Orr said. "I don't know how they could terminate him, given he's not guilty of anything.

"We want all the facts presented to us. We don't know what the club and NRL can do before it goes to court."

Bird, who has a contract for the next four years, has had a charge of maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm downgraded to reckless wounding.
He will appear in court on April 26.

Gallop said he was aware Cronulla wanted a two-year ban but was cautious about such a hefty penalty.

"The first step is for the club to make a decision," Gallop said. "We have always said that we would seriously consider not registering him if another NRL club wanted to sign him for 2009."

Asked whether the ban could extend over two years, Gallop said: "We would start with it being for 12 months."

Cronulla's board will meet tonight but the matter will not be resolved.
One leading player manager, who did not want to be named, said Bird would struggle to find an NRL club even if the NRL did not ban him.

"There would be a backlash from fans and sponsors for the club that signs him," he said.

"He'd also struggle to get a club because few, if any, have enough room left under their salary cap.

"Most clubs would also be cautious, given the allegations surrounding Bird."

 

[Vossy]

2 YEAR BAN WTF.....he is yet to be proven innocent or guilty and we want to oust him for nothing, if he is found innocent, it wouldnt surprise me for him to sue us for unfair dismissal and that will lead to more money down the drain..which is what our board seem to like doing, losing money and if we sack him, ill re-think applying for a membership for 09

sometimes i wonder about the people who run this club *shakes head*

 

[Feej]

sometimes i wonder about the people who run this club *shakes head*

I don't.......

We'll never win a comp with the incompetent president and his cronies that we have. Nice to see they had the balls to stand up to one (I understand) sponsor and remind them about the innocent until proven guilty thing. :roll:

Looks like the nice guys finish last again.....

 

[myanonymoususername]

Bird won't be playing in the NRL , Miss Page will ensure of that.

A bloke I know reckons that Bird may have a case for wrongful dismissal. if he went down that track & won that, he would have to be given his old job back.
Theres a quirky one.

Even so, unfair dismissal cases don't usually end up with reinstatement to the job. Payment of damages is the usual result.

 

[PJ]

So he may not get his exact old job back, but he could easily be allowed to play in the NRL again, just not with Cronulla.

So end result Sharks end up paying his contract, damages, and have one of their best players playing against them after all the time, effort and money they have put into him.

 

[SharkShocked]

I can't see any way how this is going to work out in a positive manner for the club.

Forget about how it will work out for Bird, he will no doubt have options to play in England and be compensated.

Cannot possibly see any positives to come out of this especially for 09

 

[Surely]

its a very simple equation... whats more important to the sharks... sponsorship money? and the look of doing the right thing? or Greg Bird playing with the future potential of more trouble...

answer . he is gone.

Yes brilliant and in the next breath they talk about signing smith as a replacement, I guy who in the farkwit stakes is about 5 levels higher than bird. Go figure !

 

[Surely]

Anyway if Bird is sacked prior to having his day in court then I hope they are straight with us all and inform supporters who wanted him dumped prior to him being afforded a court case like every other person in the country is entitled to.

I don't think it is unreasonable to make a decision after the outcome of his trial.

If it turns out to be a sponsor then i will no longer purchase that sponsors goods.

If it is the club then they have lost me, and i would not support another team so that will be the end of league as far as i am concerned.

Super 14 here i come.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

It has been alleged that the police are assisting the NRL & the Sharks every step of the way.
it is also alleged that Birds legal team is going to blow their case out of the water & it will be lucky to run 2 days, so the police must be allegedly giving our club VERY BAD INFORMATION.
I wonder how that sits legally? Especially seeing more information is awarded to any party , except for Birds mob?

 

[Ausguy]

Yes brilliant and in the next breath they talk about signing smith as a replacement, I guy who in the farkwit stakes is about 5 levels higher than bird. Go figure !

i dont ever actually remember anyone but the media saying we were interested in signing smith... are we or is it a beat up to.

 

[myanonymoususername]

Interesting comparison!

http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/new...double-standard/2008/12/01/1227979933644.html

The key points from that article are:

Wearing a Roosters tie, (Seteimata Sa attended court in Wollongong last week charged with grievous bodily harm

and

Sa - who is alleged to have thrown a punch that fractured a man's skull during a scuffle outside a fast-food outlet earlier this year

Valid argument I'd say. Clearly shows that some clubs (Raiders - Goodwin, Sharks - Bird) have higher standards than the Roosters. I think the Raiders and Sharks have done the right thing - which is to stand down someone accused of serious criminal charges pending the finalisation of the legal case, and I think the Roosters doing nothing about Sa are pissweak.

I'd also agree the Sharks would be wrong to sack Bird now, unless they have some evidence that has not been made public, or if Bird has a track record of dickheadedness.

 

[PJ]

Bird has a track record of dickheadedness

He does, but being a dickhead is not a crime.

 

[Frailty]

Interesting comparison!

http://www.leaguehq.com.au/news/new...double-standard/2008/12/01/1227979933644.html

The key points from that article are:

and



Valid argument I'd say. Clearly shows that some clubs (Raiders - Goodwin, Sharks - Bird) have higher standards than the Roosters. I think the Raiders and Sharks have done the right thing - which is to stand down someone accused of serious criminal charges pending the finalisation of the legal case, and I think the Roosters doing nothing about Sa are pissweak.

I'd also agree the Sharks would be wrong to sack Bird now, unless they have some evidence that has not been made public, or if Bird has a track record of dickheadedness.

It also has a bit to do with Bird lying to the club.

 

[millersnose]

hey guys

i am not a moderator of this forum and the posters who are arent always here

it is important to remember the press read these pages so unsubstantiated accusations against club sponsors are not wise both in terms of this site or the sharks nrl club

i recommend you keep such rumours on pm

 

[Coastal Shark]

It also has a bit to do with Bird lying to the club.

What lie?

If you mean that he didn't tell them exactly what happened then he is entitled to do that. It would be on legal advice. If he had told them his story, then whomever he did tell would eligible to be called as a prosecution witness.

This whole case has been handled very badly by everyone concerned not just Bird. This shyt about him having his mate try to lie for him is nothing new. Arrested persons do this all the time. It's also why you very few defendants jump into the witness box to give evidence on their own behalf.

If Bird is sacked then it will cost us a motza, a motza that we don't f*cken have. I wonder if the sponsor that wants him gone is prepared to dip into their pocket a little further and top up out account to that amount? I highly doubt it. Didn't the club learn anything. We've paid out Anderson and Raper. We are not a super rich club. e don't have endless money supplies.

We need Bird. He is a very good footballer who hasn't reached his full potential yet. I believe that under Sticky he can become one of the top players in the world, IMO - that's how much I rate him and so do others far more knowledgeable than me. He has been very good for us, NSW and Oz.

 

[Dave Q]

What lie?

If you mean that he didn't tell them exactly what happened then he is entitled to do that. It would be on legal advice. If he had told them his story, then whomever he did tell would eligible to be called as a prosecution witness.

This whole case has been handled very badly by everyone concerned not just Bird. This shyt about him having his mate try to lie for him is nothing new. Arrested persons do this all the time. It's also why you very few defendants jump into the witness box to give evidence on their own behalf.

If Bird is sacked then it will cost us a motza, a motza that we don't f*cken have. I wonder if the sponsor that wants him gone is prepared to dip into their pocket a little further and top up out account to that amount? I highly doubt it. Didn't the club learn anything. We've paid out Anderson and Raper. We are not a super rich club. e don't have endless money supplies.

We need Bird. He is a very good footballer who hasn't reached his full potential yet. I believe that under Sticky he can become one of the top players in the world, IMO - that's how much I rate him and so do others far more knowledgeable than me. He has been very good for us, NSW and Oz.

Too many pigs in a feeding frenzy while the football festers. A scene familiar all over our great game.

I havent seen Bird's employment contract but he may well have breached it notwithstanding that he isnt convicted or whatever.

I doubt his dismissal will rest upon this alleged incident. There will probably be some connection, but not too direct.

He's had it, its time we all got used to life without him and his attendant problems.

The NRL will stick fast to the Sharks and he will easily double his salary at the ESL.

He is a complete boofhead, but a very fine footballer, no doubt about that.

I for one will miss this thread.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

hey guys

i am not a moderator of this forum and the posters who are arent always here

it is important to remember the press read these pages so unsubstantiated accusations against club sponsors are not wise both in terms of this site or the sharks nrl club

i recommend you keep such rumours on pm

These are not rumours Millers. They are quite factual & the source is readily available. Jut pick up the phone.
As for being wise, well , I am of the opinion now that the sponsors are running the clubs & the game. In particular, a few select women, who for some strange farkin reasoning after analysing bullshyte focus groups, believe that women are the future of the game. So they womenising the game & the culture.
The Sharks are being bent over & farked up the arse by certain sponsors. Fact. All well & good as long as they pay extra for their assumed increase in control of the club.

For instance PKF pay f**k all to the club & more than likely it is all based on contras anyway. Now, 50% of what they give, is going to towards education of young footballers blah blah farkin blah. it is no coincidence that person behind that push at PKF is also a woman.

So we are now getting a 100% of f**k from them & they are telling us what to do & yet they get the business of doing the forensic accounting at the club.!!!!!!

FMD if the Sharks had a butt hole it would be bright purple & the size of Euklet tyre it is being rammed that much.

Where is the compensation!!!!!!!!!

 

[samshark]

We are a soft soft club. The impending board meeting where Bird will be sacked will be a dark day in the history of the club. A day that the club lost its soul and let itself be controlled and dictated to by sponsors.

What if the board just said 'Nope we are not sacking him'. Would Harvey Norman or PKF just pull the plug, just like that? If they did well why the fugg would you want a sponsor like that anyway.

 

[blacktip-reefy]

Exactly Sam Shark. A club consists of 40-50 men & boys aged from 15 through to 32. All of them wear the sponsors gear. Do sponsors think that it is actually possible to have 50 guys in that age group, who play a testoserone fuelled contact sport & have a trouble free existence? That maybe, just maybe, there will be a guy in a few photos wearing the brand that isn't the squeeky clean Ian Thorpe type at somestage during their sponsorship?
They are demanding perfection & not paying enough. if they want a grand final every year well that is hard.
if the ywant 50 Ian thorpes every year, then that is impossible. Soon they will be culling players because their hair is too red.
f**k em off now & throw the feelers out for new ones or get these control freaks to pay for their f**k ups.

 

[PJ]

[QUOTE]Soon they will be culling players because their hair is too red[/QUOTE]

Smartest things you've said. Anyway we can extend that to the rest of society?