cochise
Well-known member
@Telltails said:
Exactly, there is also reports of a txt exchange between Pascoe and RF's manager that probably hold the key to the NRL's evidence.
Pascoe sanctioned by the NRL
- Thread starter Tiger_Steve
- Start date
Exactly, there is also reports of a txt exchange between Pascoe and RF's manager that probably hold the key to the NRL's evidence.
Darcy said the contract was non-existent..case closed
cochise
Well-known member
@Telltails said:
I guess that would depend on the contents of the messages, it was reported that there a txts asking the manager to not tell the media about the role.
Not talking about the text messages talking about them knowingly not signing when it was offered, on the premise of decieving the NRL. If what you suggest is true, they would have known when the contract was offered not to sign it- and they agreed to. So that suggests they would be as guilty as Pascoe yet they have no case to answer according to the NRL. Why?
cochise
Well-known member
@Telltails said:
I guess that will come out when the NRL makes their final findings known.
Fraze23
Well-known member
That doesn't make sense seeing as the ambassador's role was always public knowledge in the media. I think you could put the texts down to media speculation.
cochise
Well-known member
@Fraze23 said:
How is it public knowledge if he hasn't accepted the role? Just checked its only the offer that is reported on in 2015.
mike
Well-known member
Mate even I knew about the role and I know very little about the inner workings of the club. You would just about have to live in a bubble not to know. It wasn’t a secret.
cochise
Well-known member
@mike said:
The media knowing is not the same as informing the NRL though.
Fraze23
Well-known member
I kind of feel like you've made my point. The offer was reported and maybe that is all that does exist seeing as RF hasn't accepted it.
cochise
Well-known member
@Fraze23 said:
I hope that is true, but the NRL has said they have documents that show the club entered into an arrangement for the role.
mike
Well-known member
As I have stated before, the only certainly about this is that no contract was registered with the NRL. Everything else is still to be decided. ie When is a contact a contact. There has to be an offer and then an acceptance, until that occurs it is just an offer. The sooner this goes before the courts the better.
Fraze23
Well-known member
I still don't see the advantage we've gained or how it can be classed as cheating.
RF leaves for Souths, Tigers offer him a post football role. If Farah had of stayed at Souths and retired at the end of last year we wouldn't even be talking about it.
I completely disagree with your stance on this Cochise, but I admire the way you've stuck to your guns throughout the discussion and have looked at it without the black and gold glasses on. Your posts have stimulated some entertaining discussion.
Here's hoping this is all resolved by the weekend.
RF leaves for Souths, Tigers offer him a post football role. If Farah had of stayed at Souths and retired at the end of last year we wouldn't even be talking about it.
I completely disagree with your stance on this Cochise, but I admire the way you've stuck to your guns throughout the discussion and have looked at it without the black and gold glasses on. Your posts have stimulated some entertaining discussion.
Here's hoping this is all resolved by the weekend.
diedpretty
Well-known member
So Pascoe went to all that trouble to keep the deal quiet and asked Ayoub to not say anything because we want to keep it a secret then notifies the media of the role being offered. Hmmmm I can see how that makes sense.
Providing you trust the NRL to judge this fairly. Just because they make the rules does not prevent them from making decisions that are unjust when implementing them. You seem very philosophical about accepting all they say and do, yet the club you support has not waivered its position in regard to this matter.
The fact they had to question why we welcomed Farah back, was enough to demonstrate to me that they know jack about what occured at our club when he left, nor why he was welcomed back. Because if Nick Weekes did bother to ask a few questions, it is all pretty simple to explain. Instead they impose a ridiculous penalty and attack the integrity of our CEO and leave us hanging while they beat their chests.
The fact they had to question why we welcomed Farah back, was enough to demonstrate to me that they know jack about what occured at our club when he left, nor why he was welcomed back. Because if Nick Weekes did bother to ask a few questions, it is all pretty simple to explain. Instead they impose a ridiculous penalty and attack the integrity of our CEO and leave us hanging while they beat their chests.
fibrodreaming
Well-known member
I hope that's true also.
How, as supporters, are we to reconcile the competing claims ? The NRL claim they have docs supporting their case while our Chair has said we still don't know if Robbie will accept the role, and that there has been a lot of misinformation presented in the media.
You make the point that the NRL would not go in hard without solid evidence, while I find it hard to believe that the Club would protest so much if it was an open and shut case against us.
I am still very hopeful that we can beat this. Comments made by The Pom earlier in this thread and by the Chair of the Club make me optimistic. (But then, I was optimistic Ivan would stay too, so that makes me a bad judge.)
How, as supporters, are we to reconcile the competing claims ? The NRL claim they have docs supporting their case while our Chair has said we still don't know if Robbie will accept the role, and that there has been a lot of misinformation presented in the media.
You make the point that the NRL would not go in hard without solid evidence, while I find it hard to believe that the Club would protest so much if it was an open and shut case against us.
I am still very hopeful that we can beat this. Comments made by The Pom earlier in this thread and by the Chair of the Club make me optimistic. (But then, I was optimistic Ivan would stay too, so that makes me a bad judge.)
cochise
Well-known member
@Fraze23 said:
I 100% agree that if Robbie didn't come back then this wouldn't be an issue, though it is very easy to argue an advantage to the Tigers. That is the problem, the club has either accidentally or purposefully walked into an area that is very vulnerable to a salary cap rort, which is why the NRL as fairly strict rules in this area.
cochise
Well-known member
@Telltails said:
It's not that I am philosophical about accepting all they say and do, I honestly can not stand Greenburg. This is a soft area in the salary cap and has the potential to be exploited easily so I feel the punishments for breaking the rules the NRL has in place in this area need to be strong as a deterrent to all clubs.
The club has waivered in its response to the NRL.
Still cant believe that anyone thinks it feasible that Pascoe did a deal in 2015 to bring him back as a player at 35 years of age, and after the circumstances under which he left why would we even contemplate it. If Liddle was up to it like we expected him to be, Farah as a player would be a fond memory at this club.
