Pride of the League & Arizona

[El Diablo]

learn how to post a link

 

[Captain Apollo]

Prove it

You obviously did not read the article which I posted the link to in this post earlier in the thread. If you had bothered, youw oudl have read this quote from Chris Caisley who was the lawyer representing Luke Burgess on the matter -

But English lawyer Chris Caisley, who represented Burgess in court, revealed his client paid 21-year-old security guard Patrick Scruggs a financial settlement to have the charges against he and Sutton dismissed.

Both were charged with disorderly conduct; Sutton was also charged with assault.

"Luke Burgess pleaded not guilty to all charges put to him, as did John Sutton," Caisley told The Daily Telegraph.

"There was an agreement entered into between the complainant (Scruggs) and Luke Burgess, which will remain confidential. Under the terms of the agreement it has to remain confidential between Luke Burgess and the complainant."

Then I refer you to this part -

UK-based Caisley, who manages the four Burgess brothers, dismissed claims Souths paid Scruggs a cent.

"Absolutely not. Souths had no involvement in it," he told The Daily Telegraph. "They weren?t across this. This was something done by me on Luke?s behalf, involving the state prosecutor, the city prosecutor and the complainant."

Hope that answers your contention.

Also don't think by my posts I condone what went on at all.

 

[BCH]

You obviously did not read the article which I posted the link to in this post earlier in the thread. If you had bothered, youw oudl have read this quote from Chris Caisley who was the lawyer representing Luke Burgess on the matter -



Then I refer you to this part -



Hope that answers your contention.

Also don't think by my posts I condone what went on at all.

I did see your link. My reply to El Diablo was in jest. Nevertheless, please forgive any ongoing scepticism as to the whole sorry affair.

 

[muzby]

You obviously did not read the article which I posted the link to in this post earlier in the thread. If you had bothered, youw oudl have read this quote from Chris Caisley who was the lawyer representing Luke Burgess on the matter -



Then I refer you to this part -



Hope that answers your contention.

Also don't think by my posts I condone what went on at all.

 

[Big Sam]

LOL

'Yeah I murdered someone but it's the cops fault I'm in gaol'

Biggest slippery slope fallacy if ever there was. You can't settle with a dead bloke you murdered :lol:

Burgess paid the money and did not tell Souths abut it

I think this is very close to what actually occurred.

 

[muzby]

Biggest slippery slope fallacy if ever there was.

rubbish.

"planes don't fly in the rain" would top that..

 

[BunniesMan]

So the NRL and Burgess's lawyer acknowledge we didn't know about the settlement. And yet we got fined. The settlement is not against the law. How are we supposed to find out the details of a private and confidential agreement on the other side of the world?

Can someone explain to me how we could have forced Burgess to tell us about something we didn't know existed. Charges get dropped for many reasons, how were we supposed to read minds and know this happened this way and then tell the NRL.

And IF we told the NRL, what would have happened? They now know all the facts and they didn't the punish the players any more severely than what already happened before it came out.

So in summary, we were punished for not mind reading and finding out about information that didn't even change anything when it did come out.

 

[El Diablo]

dumber than dog shit

 

[muzby]

So the NRL and Burgess's lawyer acknowledge we didn't know about the settlement. And yet we got fined. The settlement is not against the law. How are we supposed to find out the details of a private and confidential agreement on the other side of the world?

Can someone explain to me how we could have forced Burgess to tell us about something we didn't know existed. Charges get dropped for many reasons, how were we supposed to read minds and know this happened this way and then tell the NRL.

And IF we told the NRL, what would have happened? They now know all the facts and they didn't the punish the players any more severely than what already happened before it came out.

So in summary, we were punished for not mind reading and finding out about information that didn't even change anything when it did come out.

why did a player for your club feel the need to lie, cheat and deceive his employer?

it just screams of a toxic culture...


strip the title.

 

[yobbo84]

why did a player for your club feel the need to lie, cheat and deceive his employer?

I know I shouldn't feed the troll but.. I think it's pretty fair what the club thought of his actions. We told him to find another club.

 

[Big Sam]

I don't think we'll get to the bottom of this until we see some sort of evidence as to how the club informed the IU at the time.

The fact our management is still "exploring its options regarding its response to the breach notice, including the merits of the findings" rather than immediately copping the decision and paying the fine, seems to point to the idea that we fully disclosed everything to the IU back in November.

Perhaps Richo in his interview with Frothfield was not protecting his (now) former employer over not fully disclosing everything, but rather protecting his (then) future employer over a lack of further NRL-imposed punishment?

 

[muzby]

I know I shouldn't feed the troll but.. I think it's pretty fair what the club thought of his actions. We told him to find another club.

if the club took such a hard line on 'his actions' by sacking him, why did they put out the line that the move was all about helping him to get more game time?

if they're washing their hands of him, why not explain the proper reason, rather than make up another lie?

the question remains - what is it about the culture of souffs that people can't tell the truth? both from the players to the club, but also the club to the press & the NRL?

 

[muzby]

Perhaps Richo in his interview with Frothfield was not protecting his (now) former employer over not fully disclosing everything, but rather protecting his (then) future employer over a lack of further NRL-imposed punishment?

if your allegation is true, it sets off alarm bells about severe conflict of interests, which leads to questions about integrity and suitability for the role.

best for him to step aside till all this is answered..

for the good of the game..

 

[Captain Apollo]

I don't think we'll get to the bottom of this until we see some sort of evidence as to how the club informed the IU at the time.

The fact our management is still "exploring its options regarding its response to the breach notice, including the merits of the findings" rather than immediately copping the decision and paying the fine, seems to point to the idea that we fully disclosed everything to the IU back in November.

Perhaps Richo in his interview with Frothfield was not protecting his (now) former employer over not fully disclosing everything, but rather protecting his (then) future employer over a lack of further NRL-imposed punishment?

The thing is Big Sam, we don't know that. When people wondered why John Sutton had lost the captaincy to GI, Michael Maguire said it was football related. It was not till later it emerged that it was as a consequence of what occurred in Arizona, and that was only after digging by the media. Had Souths been upfront at the time regarding the captaincy issue this would not still be bubbling away.

 

[betcats]

Wayne has lost confidence in these clowns. Death to the IU!

http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/...th-in-nrl-integrity-unit-20150304-13ut2t.html

 

[Valheru]

I don't think we'll get to the bottom of this until we see some sort of evidence as to how the club informed the IU at the time.

We will never find out, that is the nature of a cover up.

 

[BunniesMan]

We will never find out, that is the nature of a cover up.

Do you not see how ridiculous it is to punish us for supposedly hiding something that didn't even change anything when it did come out? Should we also cop a 20k fine for not telling the NRL what colour undies the players were wearing?

 

[oikee]

Now they have finally won a premiership, it all seems a little too much for the Ho's, the Rabbitho's.
They are falling apart at the seams with this new found success, and players are leaving in droves (Sam Burgess, Ben Teo, Luke Burgess) and many more have plans to get out.
The culture is becoming toxic with hiding simple drunken fools on holidays, and now this premiership ring caught up in a coke bust.
What next,,,?

Fame and a tital are too much pressure for this club to handle.
They have reached the summit, and OMG, the fall is going to be mighty.
Only one way down as well.
Inglis to the new Ho's next year, the Broncho's.

 

[Snappy]

You're a deadset dribbler

 

[alien]

Fame and a tital are too much pressure for this club to handle.

:lol: