Mason not involved at Coffs - Folkes

[nqboy]

From Foxsports.com.au

BULLDOGS coach Steve Folkes yesterday revealed his troubled forward Willie Mason was not among the players fined last Monday for bringing the game into disrepute by misbehaving in the Coffs Harbour scandal.

"He is still being mentioned for being involved in what happened in Coffs Harbour and he was not one of the fined players and he certainly had nothing to do with anything up there but he's still getting labelled with that," a frustrated Folkes said yesterday.

Although Folkes had told The Australian on Monday "that he (Mason) was not anywhere near anything that happened in Coffs Harbour" it is the first time anyone from the club has been named as either being fined or not.

Well, I guess speculation is what you get when you don't tell people what's going on. Can't say I have much sympathy for Folkes or Mason. And who's to say that Folkes is telling the truth?

 

[Twizzle]

After some of Folkes' previous statements on the matter, I don't believe too much of what he says.

 

[ELIZABETH]

After some of Folkes' previous statements on the matter, I don't believe too much of what he says.

yeh twizzle your heaps right there.... steve folkes is only the coach of the club. He spends more time with the players then their own mother's do...but hey WHAT WOULD HE KNOW!! ](*,)

 

[DJ1]

Ray Hadley story continues to get more holes in it.

 

[t-ba]

After some of Folkes' previous statements on the matter, I don't believe too much of what he says.

yeh twizzle your heaps right there.... steve folkes is only the coach of the club. He spends more time with the players then their own mother's do...but hey WHAT WOULD HE KNOW!! ](*,)

Just because he's the coach does that make him incapable of lying? Twizzle never said anything about his knowledge of the players, just that he doesn't think much of the way he has handled this whole episode. I trust Folkes about as much as I do Gould a week out of from Origin Selection...

 

[wittyfan]

Given that Canterbury won't reveal the names of players, there is absolutely nothing to verify Folkes' statements. So you'd take it with a grain of salt.

 

[ELIZABETH]

How do you expect the bulldogs to reveal names when the woman herself wasnt able to identify all six players she says raped her?
Players were fined but i gaurantee you that it wasnt 6 of them. Anyways, the players have been proven innocent AND its beyond me how you all still believe this woman when her ex-boyfriend has put an AVO against her for making 'false statements' AND she put an AVO against him for beating the crap out of her :? :?

Onto Folkesy, I think I will trust what he has to say rather than a bored journalist that ONLY whats to sell papers.

Also, congrats to the daily telegraph for printing a decent front page about how a woman murdered her own son rather than how willie mason acts like a clown

 

[ibeme]

Given that Canterbury won't reveal the names of players, there is absolutely nothing to verify Folkes' statements. So you'd take it with a grain of salt.

He explicitly named a player that wasn't involved. That's verification. It's not rumour, nor speculation. It's a statement from a club representative.

You can continue to believe what you want to believe, but your basing your belief on speculation, and ignoring a factual statement. Obviously you don't want to believe that Willie wasn't involved in the Coffs Harbour incident.

You have no reason to believe that he was involved, and the club says he wasn't involved, yet you choose to 'take it with a grain of salt'

 

[Cammo]

Ibeme just about said everything I was thinking. Well said ibeme

 

[wittyfan]

Given that Canterbury won't reveal the names of players, there is absolutely nothing to verify Folkes' statements. So you'd take it with a grain of salt.

He explicitly named a player that wasn't involved. That's verification. It's not rumour, nor speculation. It's a statement from a club representative.

You can continue to believe what you want to believe, but your basing your belief on speculation, and ignoring a factual statement. Obviously you don't want to believe that Willie wasn't involved in the Coffs Harbour incident.

You have no reason to believe that he was involved, and the club says he wasn't involved, yet you choose to 'take it with a grain of salt'

Given that Canterbury are not known for being transparent on any issue, forgive me for being sceptical. ;-)

 

[Cammo]

Sullyfan, I don't have an issue with you being sceptical. It just amazes me that when The Dogs do finally come and put a name to something that no-one wants to believe it.

I thought people here wanted to know if someone was fined or not. If they say Willie was not one of the ones fined then I can't see how he was fined. If he had been fined then the club would not have commented.

 

[Eels Dude]

How do you expect the bulldogs to reveal names when the woman herself wasnt able to identify all six players she says raped her?
Players were fined but i gaurantee you that it wasnt 6 of them. Anyways, the players have been proven innocent AND its beyond me how you all still believe this woman when her ex-boyfriend has put an AVO against her for making 'false statements' AND she put an AVO against him for beating the crap out of her :? :?

Onto Folkesy, I think I will trust what he has to say rather than a bored journalist that ONLY whats to sell papers.

Also, congrats to the daily telegraph for printing a decent front page about how a woman murdered her own son rather than how willie mason acts like a clown

Let's not go down this road again. They have not been "proven innocent", no charges being laid means nothing of the sort.

You criticized the journaslists for just using Willie Mason to sell papers, yet you're quite happy to believe them when they claim that the alledged victim made 'false statements'. It cannot work both ways.

I feel sorry for Willie Mason in this whole affair. It's obvious that people such as Ray Hadley are after him for their own reasons rather than anything to do with football, and I really think the reaction has been over the top.

I don't think we should automatically be believing Steve Folkes, he is most probably right but we don't know for sure and there is no reason to believe he's telling the truth.

 

[Kaz]

Hasn't Folkes broken the confidentiality clause that the Bulldogs players 'have' in their contracts.

Hope the Lawyers are on to this.

 

[DJ1]

No. He refuted a comment by media that a particular player was fined.

 

[Penelope Pittstop]

Hasn't Folkes broken the confidentiality clause that the Bulldogs players 'have' in their contracts.

Hope the Lawyers are on to this.

:lol:

 

[ibeme]

We'll just have to wait to see if Willy takes legal action against them for clearing him of any wrong doing in the Coffs saga

 

[CouldaBeenAnything]

[
Let's not go down this road again. They have not been "proven innocent", no charges being laid means nothing of the sort.

.

Call me an old idealistic fool, but isn't the idea to prove guilt rather than innocence?? I always thougt we were all innocent until proven otherwise??

I get what you mean, I just think it is a shit house term and goes against a lot of legal principles...

 

[Penelope Pittstop]

Surely, the other players who were not fined must now be named. Fair is fair, if Willie has been named as not being fined then the club is obligated to name the others.

 

[ibeme]

Maybe, and I think they'd be demanding it if they were under the same pressure or scrutiny that Willie is. I'm pretty sure that the players could force the club into identifying who wasn't fined, but as it stands they haven't done that.

 

[ibeme]

And I'm sure the inidividual players are free to tell whoever wants to know that they were or weren't fined.