Who should Madge's assistant coaches be for 2022?

[cochise]

Steroids have been (mis) used in sports for ever.

Athletes always looking for a way to get ahead one way or another, the competitive edge.

Have seen docos about steroid use in south America with children getting them ready to be super athletes ready to be drafted for the MLB.

We've all heard the stories about certain NRL players over the years. I won't make allegations as we don't need those legalities the forum may face. However one shouldn't he so oblivious to think the NRL is clean.... keep an eye our for any players who hold fluid around their faces or growth of their heads over the years. No names.

It was explained to me by a former player that typically if some players get caught it's usually only one that goes down. A deal is worked out with ASADA and one takes the wraps for it to save face.

I'd be very surprised that a player found guilty in this situation wouldn't be blowing the whistle.

Can't suspend a 30 man squad.

Of course they can, WADA has banned Russia from competing as a country, an NRL team is small fry.

Why wouldn't the guy that takes the fall blow the whistle, this isn't The Sopranos

Could you imagine....

This season we are running a 15 team comp because team X has been suspended in full for failing a drug test.

I'm sure there'd be financial ramifications for both the club and NRL involved.

Money talks.
No allegations.
The right people are getting paid.

I call rubbish on that, ASADA and WADA are independent to the NRL

Could be complete rubbish.
I just know the almighty dollar wins every time.

In the UFC, Jon Jones urine sample came back with picograms of PEDs in it.
Moved the event from LA to Vegas to get around the legalities instead of losing their main event as Vegas is more relaxed.
Have events in certain states where marijuana is allowed so athletes who use won't fail tests.

I just couldn't see a whole team being suspended
Ever.

How many players at the sharks were effected ?

What about a whole country?

What do you mean?

Russia have been suspended from 2 Olympics by WADA.

But there athletes compete under a different name ..

Some do if they prove they are clean.

It is the country that has been suspended not the athletes.

 

[cochise]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Dont particularly like Flannagan but not sure he was actually complicit the first time.

He was the head coach and was suspended.

I understand that. But how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program? Additionally, there are three versions of events (each version could be further broken down), of which all or any could be true, as i'm sure each individual would have his own truth.
Version 1) There was illegal doping as part of the supplements program, all were complicit.
Version 2) There was illegal doping done by support staff (Dank and his underlings), players and coaching staff were unaware.
Version 3) There was no illegal doping at all, players eventually agreed to 'confess' to slap on the wrist punishment to make the whole ordeal finally over.
Version 1 seems to be the popular opinion amongst the fans. For some the all were complicit includes the players, for others it doesn't include players but includes the coaching staff.
Version 2 was what was widely reported. Most reports of what happened seem to suggest Flannagan actually put an ends to things as soon as he became aware that there was something illegal happening. If this is true he has actually done the right thing. The suspension was handed down as he should be across everything that is happening, even if he actually had nothing to do with it. Kind of like how a publican can get fined if a bartender breaches service laws, even if the publican wasn't on shift.
I know many of the players still claim it was version 3. Dank claimed it was version 3 and (unsuccessfully) tried defending it as such in court. It was actually those signed 'confessions' that largely led to him being found guilty (or so it was reported).

How could any of us know which version is correct? and if version 2, as reported, is true, has Flannagan actually done anything wrong?

If it was version 3 you fight it or accept the accusations you are a drug cheat, it is as simple as that. If it was version 2 then the coach should have been across it and known, problem is he showed himself to be dishonest after that by not complying with the outcome of the investigation so I can't trust his word it version 2. So I am left with version 1.

But that is simply you making an assumption based on not much at all.
I am left with my original statement of "not sure he was actually complicit the first time" and original question of "how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program?" Is it actually reasonable to say "the coach should have been across it and known". I'm not so sure as i don't think there would be any coaches with the specialised knowledge to actively contribute to a supplements porgram.

He was suspended for his involvement.

No he was suspended for "management accountability". As in the support staff report to him so he is ultimately accountable. There is no evidence he was directly involved.

Cronulla coach 'knew of doping'
By Roy Masters and Sydney
March 10, 2013 — 3.00am
The Cronulla Sharks board stood down coach Shane Flanagan and sacked four other key staff members because the directors believe they knew about alleged doping procedures at the club and kept it hidden.

The board believe Flanagan had enough evidence of the alleged doping to ban the practice and report it. A club insider said the board claimed that when injections began on the eve of the 2011 season, Flanagan allegedly said: ''I don't want to know about this.''

There we go, I thought that was the case.

 

[cochise]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Dont particularly like Flannagan but not sure he was actually complicit the first time.

He was the head coach and was suspended.

I understand that. But how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program? Additionally, there are three versions of events (each version could be further broken down), of which all or any could be true, as i'm sure each individual would have his own truth.
Version 1) There was illegal doping as part of the supplements program, all were complicit.
Version 2) There was illegal doping done by support staff (Dank and his underlings), players and coaching staff were unaware.
Version 3) There was no illegal doping at all, players eventually agreed to 'confess' to slap on the wrist punishment to make the whole ordeal finally over.
Version 1 seems to be the popular opinion amongst the fans. For some the all were complicit includes the players, for others it doesn't include players but includes the coaching staff.
Version 2 was what was widely reported. Most reports of what happened seem to suggest Flannagan actually put an ends to things as soon as he became aware that there was something illegal happening. If this is true he has actually done the right thing. The suspension was handed down as he should be across everything that is happening, even if he actually had nothing to do with it. Kind of like how a publican can get fined if a bartender breaches service laws, even if the publican wasn't on shift.
I know many of the players still claim it was version 3. Dank claimed it was version 3 and (unsuccessfully) tried defending it as such in court. It was actually those signed 'confessions' that largely led to him being found guilty (or so it was reported).

How could any of us know which version is correct? and if version 2, as reported, is true, has Flannagan actually done anything wrong?

If it was version 3 you fight it or accept the accusations you are a drug cheat, it is as simple as that. If it was version 2 then the coach should have been across it and known, problem is he showed himself to be dishonest after that by not complying with the outcome of the investigation so I can't trust his word it version 2. So I am left with version 1.

But that is simply you making an assumption based on not much at all.
I am left with my original statement of "not sure he was actually complicit the first time" and original question of "how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program?" Is it actually reasonable to say "the coach should have been across it and known". I'm not so sure as i don't think there would be any coaches with the specialised knowledge to actively contribute to a supplements porgram.

He was suspended for his involvement.

No he was suspended for "management accountability". As in the support staff report to him so he is ultimately accountable. There is no evidence he was directly involved.

Yes, it is his responsibility to know.

Is it your employers responsibility to know what you talk to your doctor about?

Very broad statement.

Doesn't matter, it has been reported he knew.

 

[cochise]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Dont particularly like Flannagan but not sure he was actually complicit the first time.

He was the head coach and was suspended.

I understand that. But how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program? Additionally, there are three versions of events (each version could be further broken down), of which all or any could be true, as i'm sure each individual would have his own truth.
Version 1) There was illegal doping as part of the supplements program, all were complicit.
Version 2) There was illegal doping done by support staff (Dank and his underlings), players and coaching staff were unaware.
Version 3) There was no illegal doping at all, players eventually agreed to 'confess' to slap on the wrist punishment to make the whole ordeal finally over.
Version 1 seems to be the popular opinion amongst the fans. For some the all were complicit includes the players, for others it doesn't include players but includes the coaching staff.
Version 2 was what was widely reported. Most reports of what happened seem to suggest Flannagan actually put an ends to things as soon as he became aware that there was something illegal happening. If this is true he has actually done the right thing. The suspension was handed down as he should be across everything that is happening, even if he actually had nothing to do with it. Kind of like how a publican can get fined if a bartender breaches service laws, even if the publican wasn't on shift.
I know many of the players still claim it was version 3. Dank claimed it was version 3 and (unsuccessfully) tried defending it as such in court. It was actually those signed 'confessions' that largely led to him being found guilty (or so it was reported).

How could any of us know which version is correct? and if version 2, as reported, is true, has Flannagan actually done anything wrong?

If it was version 3 you fight it or accept the accusations you are a drug cheat, it is as simple as that. If it was version 2 then the coach should have been across it and known, problem is he showed himself to be dishonest after that by not complying with the outcome of the investigation so I can't trust his word it version 2. So I am left with version 1.

But that is simply you making an assumption based on not much at all.
I am left with my original statement of "not sure he was actually complicit the first time" and original question of "how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program?" Is it actually reasonable to say "the coach should have been across it and known". I'm not so sure as i don't think there would be any coaches with the specialised knowledge to actively contribute to a supplements porgram.

He was suspended for his involvement.

No he was suspended for "management accountability". As in the support staff report to him so he is ultimately accountable. There is no evidence he was directly involved.

Yes, it is his responsibility to know.

Is it your employers responsibility to know what you talk to your doctor about?

Very broad statement.

Dank isn't a Doctor?

 

[Demps]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Dont particularly like Flannagan but not sure he was actually complicit the first time.

He was the head coach and was suspended.

I understand that. But how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program? Additionally, there are three versions of events (each version could be further broken down), of which all or any could be true, as i'm sure each individual would have his own truth.
Version 1) There was illegal doping as part of the supplements program, all were complicit.
Version 2) There was illegal doping done by support staff (Dank and his underlings), players and coaching staff were unaware.
Version 3) There was no illegal doping at all, players eventually agreed to 'confess' to slap on the wrist punishment to make the whole ordeal finally over.
Version 1 seems to be the popular opinion amongst the fans. For some the all were complicit includes the players, for others it doesn't include players but includes the coaching staff.
Version 2 was what was widely reported. Most reports of what happened seem to suggest Flannagan actually put an ends to things as soon as he became aware that there was something illegal happening. If this is true he has actually done the right thing. The suspension was handed down as he should be across everything that is happening, even if he actually had nothing to do with it. Kind of like how a publican can get fined if a bartender breaches service laws, even if the publican wasn't on shift.
I know many of the players still claim it was version 3. Dank claimed it was version 3 and (unsuccessfully) tried defending it as such in court. It was actually those signed 'confessions' that largely led to him being found guilty (or so it was reported).

How could any of us know which version is correct? and if version 2, as reported, is true, has Flannagan actually done anything wrong?

If it was version 3 you fight it or accept the accusations you are a drug cheat, it is as simple as that. If it was version 2 then the coach should have been across it and known, problem is he showed himself to be dishonest after that by not complying with the outcome of the investigation so I can't trust his word it version 2. So I am left with version 1.

But that is simply you making an assumption based on not much at all.
I am left with my original statement of "not sure he was actually complicit the first time" and original question of "how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program?" Is it actually reasonable to say "the coach should have been across it and known". I'm not so sure as i don't think there would be any coaches with the specialised knowledge to actively contribute to a supplements porgram.

He was suspended for his involvement.

No he was suspended for "management accountability". As in the support staff report to him so he is ultimately accountable. There is no evidence he was directly involved.

Yes, it is his responsibility to know.

Is it your employers responsibility to know what you talk to your doctor about?

Very broad statement.

Dank isn't a Doctor?

He's a scientist?

Weird person to have involved with the club.

Anyway, i don't see a coach as having to be aware 100% of what his players are doing in that sense.

His job is to coach not monitor what supplements they may or may not be using, right?
Probably leave that to the experts (in this case.. bad move, lol)

 

[cochise]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Dont particularly like Flannagan but not sure he was actually complicit the first time.

He was the head coach and was suspended.

I understand that. But how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program? Additionally, there are three versions of events (each version could be further broken down), of which all or any could be true, as i'm sure each individual would have his own truth.
Version 1) There was illegal doping as part of the supplements program, all were complicit.
Version 2) There was illegal doping done by support staff (Dank and his underlings), players and coaching staff were unaware.
Version 3) There was no illegal doping at all, players eventually agreed to 'confess' to slap on the wrist punishment to make the whole ordeal finally over.
Version 1 seems to be the popular opinion amongst the fans. For some the all were complicit includes the players, for others it doesn't include players but includes the coaching staff.
Version 2 was what was widely reported. Most reports of what happened seem to suggest Flannagan actually put an ends to things as soon as he became aware that there was something illegal happening. If this is true he has actually done the right thing. The suspension was handed down as he should be across everything that is happening, even if he actually had nothing to do with it. Kind of like how a publican can get fined if a bartender breaches service laws, even if the publican wasn't on shift.
I know many of the players still claim it was version 3. Dank claimed it was version 3 and (unsuccessfully) tried defending it as such in court. It was actually those signed 'confessions' that largely led to him being found guilty (or so it was reported).

How could any of us know which version is correct? and if version 2, as reported, is true, has Flannagan actually done anything wrong?

If it was version 3 you fight it or accept the accusations you are a drug cheat, it is as simple as that. If it was version 2 then the coach should have been across it and known, problem is he showed himself to be dishonest after that by not complying with the outcome of the investigation so I can't trust his word it version 2. So I am left with version 1.

But that is simply you making an assumption based on not much at all.
I am left with my original statement of "not sure he was actually complicit the first time" and original question of "how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program?" Is it actually reasonable to say "the coach should have been across it and known". I'm not so sure as i don't think there would be any coaches with the specialised knowledge to actively contribute to a supplements porgram.

He was suspended for his involvement.

No he was suspended for "management accountability". As in the support staff report to him so he is ultimately accountable. There is no evidence he was directly involved.

Yes, it is his responsibility to know.

Is it your employers responsibility to know what you talk to your doctor about?

Very broad statement.

Dank isn't a Doctor?

He's a scientist?

Weird person to have involved with the club.

Anyway, i don't see a coach as having to be aware 100% of what his players are doing in that sense.

His job is to coach not monitor what supplements they may or may not be using, right?
Probably leave that to the experts (in this case.. bad move, lol)

That isn't a doctor, the Cronulla Sharks investigation found that Flanagan knew and turned a blind eye so it is irrelevant.

 

[gregjm87]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Dont particularly like Flannagan but not sure he was actually complicit the first time.

He was the head coach and was suspended.

I understand that. But how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program? Additionally, there are three versions of events (each version could be further broken down), of which all or any could be true, as i'm sure each individual would have his own truth.
Version 1) There was illegal doping as part of the supplements program, all were complicit.
Version 2) There was illegal doping done by support staff (Dank and his underlings), players and coaching staff were unaware.
Version 3) There was no illegal doping at all, players eventually agreed to 'confess' to slap on the wrist punishment to make the whole ordeal finally over.
Version 1 seems to be the popular opinion amongst the fans. For some the all were complicit includes the players, for others it doesn't include players but includes the coaching staff.
Version 2 was what was widely reported. Most reports of what happened seem to suggest Flannagan actually put an ends to things as soon as he became aware that there was something illegal happening. If this is true he has actually done the right thing. The suspension was handed down as he should be across everything that is happening, even if he actually had nothing to do with it. Kind of like how a publican can get fined if a bartender breaches service laws, even if the publican wasn't on shift.
I know many of the players still claim it was version 3. Dank claimed it was version 3 and (unsuccessfully) tried defending it as such in court. It was actually those signed 'confessions' that largely led to him being found guilty (or so it was reported).

How could any of us know which version is correct? and if version 2, as reported, is true, has Flannagan actually done anything wrong?

If it was version 3 you fight it or accept the accusations you are a drug cheat, it is as simple as that. If it was version 2 then the coach should have been across it and known, problem is he showed himself to be dishonest after that by not complying with the outcome of the investigation so I can't trust his word it version 2. So I am left with version 1.

But that is simply you making an assumption based on not much at all.
I am left with my original statement of "not sure he was actually complicit the first time" and original question of "how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program?" Is it actually reasonable to say "the coach should have been across it and known". I'm not so sure as i don't think there would be any coaches with the specialised knowledge to actively contribute to a supplements porgram.

He was suspended for his involvement.

No he was suspended for "management accountability". As in the support staff report to him so he is ultimately accountable. There is no evidence he was directly involved.

Cronulla coach 'knew of doping'
By Roy Masters and Sydney
March 10, 2013 — 3.00am
The Cronulla Sharks board stood down coach Shane Flanagan and sacked four other key staff members because the directors believe they knew about alleged doping procedures at the club and kept it hidden.

The board believe Flanagan had enough evidence of the alleged doping to ban the practice and report it. A club insider said the board claimed that when injections began on the eve of the 2011 season, Flanagan allegedly said: ''I don't want to know about this.''

This is an unverified quote attributed to no-one, though there is some evidence that the board may feel this way in Damian Irvine's comments when standing down. He accused Flanagan of not passing on allegations, but not of being involved.

Head coach Shane Flanagan and former high performance manager Trent Elkin have received lengthy bans from the NRL for failing to protect the welfare of players, but not for any involvement in the doping program.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/who-duped-cronulla-sharks-players-and-how-did-they-do-it-20140825-10823s.html


The minimum sentence if he was found guilty is 4 years suspension. He did not receive that, or any suspension from ASADA.


Even after failing to get his suspension overturned Flannagan continued to deny any wrong doing
"One thing is for sure, I am going to fight this decision until I am exonerated and my reputation is totally restored,"

For mine there is also the anecdotal evidence of if Flannagan was involved would he still be respected and re-signed during his suspension and would the NRL really only give him 1 year instead of life?
"Flanno is respected by all the players and staff. He is the leader of our club," Gallen said.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-02/sharks-re-sign-suspended-flanagan/5362550

But again, this isn't me saying Flanagan was not involved. It is me saying that we cant possibly know either way based upon what has been reported.

As for Version 3 All quotes from Gallen
At one stage we're (thinking) 'thank God, this is going to be over hopefully, whatever happens is going to happen and we can just get on with life'.
"Because closure on this thing would just be unbelievable (after) what we've gone through the past two seasons.
"But then you say 'let's stuff this, we've done nothing wrong'.
"It's a real hard situation to be in."
...
"I'm 100 per cent positive I've never taken anything that's been on any banned list," he said.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-20/five-cronulla-players-handed-show-cause-notices/5683778?section=sport

 

[cochise]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Dont particularly like Flannagan but not sure he was actually complicit the first time.

He was the head coach and was suspended.

I understand that. But how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program? Additionally, there are three versions of events (each version could be further broken down), of which all or any could be true, as i'm sure each individual would have his own truth.
Version 1) There was illegal doping as part of the supplements program, all were complicit.
Version 2) There was illegal doping done by support staff (Dank and his underlings), players and coaching staff were unaware.
Version 3) There was no illegal doping at all, players eventually agreed to 'confess' to slap on the wrist punishment to make the whole ordeal finally over.
Version 1 seems to be the popular opinion amongst the fans. For some the all were complicit includes the players, for others it doesn't include players but includes the coaching staff.
Version 2 was what was widely reported. Most reports of what happened seem to suggest Flannagan actually put an ends to things as soon as he became aware that there was something illegal happening. If this is true he has actually done the right thing. The suspension was handed down as he should be across everything that is happening, even if he actually had nothing to do with it. Kind of like how a publican can get fined if a bartender breaches service laws, even if the publican wasn't on shift.
I know many of the players still claim it was version 3. Dank claimed it was version 3 and (unsuccessfully) tried defending it as such in court. It was actually those signed 'confessions' that largely led to him being found guilty (or so it was reported).

How could any of us know which version is correct? and if version 2, as reported, is true, has Flannagan actually done anything wrong?

If it was version 3 you fight it or accept the accusations you are a drug cheat, it is as simple as that. If it was version 2 then the coach should have been across it and known, problem is he showed himself to be dishonest after that by not complying with the outcome of the investigation so I can't trust his word it version 2. So I am left with version 1.

But that is simply you making an assumption based on not much at all.
I am left with my original statement of "not sure he was actually complicit the first time" and original question of "how hands on is a head coach with a supplements program?" Is it actually reasonable to say "the coach should have been across it and known". I'm not so sure as i don't think there would be any coaches with the specialised knowledge to actively contribute to a supplements porgram.

He was suspended for his involvement.

No he was suspended for "management accountability". As in the support staff report to him so he is ultimately accountable. There is no evidence he was directly involved.

Cronulla coach 'knew of doping'
By Roy Masters and Sydney
March 10, 2013 — 3.00am
The Cronulla Sharks board stood down coach Shane Flanagan and sacked four other key staff members because the directors believe they knew about alleged doping procedures at the club and kept it hidden.

The board believe Flanagan had enough evidence of the alleged doping to ban the practice and report it. A club insider said the board claimed that when injections began on the eve of the 2011 season, Flanagan allegedly said: ''I don't want to know about this.''

This is an unverified quote attributed to no-one, though there is some evidence that the board may feel this way in Damian Irvine's comments when standing down. He accused Flanagan of not passing on allegations, but not of being involved.

Head coach Shane Flanagan and former high performance manager Trent Elkin have received lengthy bans from the NRL for failing to protect the welfare of players, but not for any involvement in the doping program.
https://www.smh.com.au/sport/nrl/who-duped-cronulla-sharks-players-and-how-did-they-do-it-20140825-10823s.html


The minimum sentence if he was found guilty is 4 years suspension. He did not receive that, or any suspension from ASADA.


Even after failing to get his suspension overturned Flannagan continued to deny any wrong doing
"One thing is for sure, I am going to fight this decision until I am exonerated and my reputation is totally restored,"

For mine there is also the anecdotal evidence of if Flannagan was involved would he still be respected and re-signed during his suspension and would the NRL really only give him 1 year instead of life?
"Flanno is respected by all the players and staff. He is the leader of our club," Gallen said.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-02/sharks-re-sign-suspended-flanagan/5362550

But again, this isn't me saying Flanagan was not involved. It is me saying that we cant possibly know either way based upon what has been reported.

As for Version 3 All quotes from Gallen
At one stage we're (thinking) 'thank God, this is going to be over hopefully, whatever happens is going to happen and we can just get on with life'.
"Because closure on this thing would just be unbelievable (after) what we've gone through the past two seasons.
"But then you say 'let's stuff this, we've done nothing wrong'.
"It's a real hard situation to be in."
...
"I'm 100 per cent positive I've never taken anything that's been on any banned list," he said.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-20/five-cronulla-players-handed-show-cause-notices/5683778?section=sport

Gallen probably shouldn't have accepted the suspension then.

 

[Tiger5150]

I think if your options are Cayless or Flanagan...

Easy pick.

Simple Cayless lol

You do realise its rugby league ?
We ain’t assembling a chess club at the local seniors centre .

I don't agree with drugs in sport, is that ok with you?

So you realise the majority of young athletes are all on roids ?
And the majority of league players all use coke ?
Stop living in wonderland mate !
Flanno has served his time and would be a great assist to our club !

Can you show me any evidence of the roid use?

Can't bring the forum into that negative light with allegations.

Who won the grand final this year BTW?
... ?

So no evidence.

Only speculation...
Unless u wanna talk about Xerri, Sandor Earl and many other confirmed cases.

Sandor Earl wasnt roids

 

[Demps]

I think if your options are Cayless or Flanagan...

Easy pick.

Simple Cayless lol

You do realise its rugby league ?
We ain’t assembling a chess club at the local seniors centre .

I don't agree with drugs in sport, is that ok with you?

So you realise the majority of young athletes are all on roids ?
And the majority of league players all use coke ?
Stop living in wonderland mate !
Flanno has served his time and would be a great assist to our club !

Can you show me any evidence of the roid use?

Can't bring the forum into that negative light with allegations.

Who won the grand final this year BTW?
... ?

So no evidence.

Only speculation...
Unless u wanna talk about Xerri, Sandor Earl and many other confirmed cases.

Sandor Earl wasnt roids

Not far off it.

 

[frullens]

I think if your options are Cayless or Flanagan...

Easy pick.

Simple Cayless lol

You do realise its rugby league ?
We ain’t assembling a chess club at the local seniors centre .

I don't agree with drugs in sport, is that ok with you?

So you realise the majority of young athletes are all on roids ?
And the majority of league players all use coke ?
Stop living in wonderland mate !
Flanno has served his time and would be a great assist to our club !

Can you show me any evidence of the roid use?

Can't bring the forum into that negative light with allegations.

Who won the grand final this year BTW?
... ?

So no evidence.

Only speculation...
Unless u wanna talk about Xerri, Sandor Earl and many other confirmed cases.

Sandor Earl wasnt roids

I've listened to Sandor Earl's podcast and he comes across as a very intelligent, articulate and caring guy.
Still can't believe he took performance enhancing drugs all on his own. Kind of makes me think it's more widespread than discussed.

 

[Tiger5150]

I think if your options are Cayless or Flanagan...

Easy pick.

Simple Cayless lol

You do realise its rugby league ?
We ain’t assembling a chess club at the local seniors centre .

I don't agree with drugs in sport, is that ok with you?

So you realise the majority of young athletes are all on roids ?
And the majority of league players all use coke ?
Stop living in wonderland mate !
Flanno has served his time and would be a great assist to our club !

Can you show me any evidence of the roid use?

Can't bring the forum into that negative light with allegations.

Who won the grand final this year BTW?
... ?

So no evidence.

Only speculation...
Unless u wanna talk about Xerri, Sandor Earl and many other confirmed cases.

Sandor Earl wasnt roids

I've listened to Sandor Earl's podcast and he comes across as a very intelligent, articulate and caring guy.
Still can't believe he took performance enhancing drugs all on his own. Kind of makes me think it's more widespread than discussed.

He was going to a clinic at Penrith (outside Clubs knowledge) for an injury rehab

 

[watersider]

Please bring in Flanagan. Yes he has been a villain in the past but he knows a footballer, is a great man manager and can slide into the top job without the fuss the WTs' attracts.

You don't risk the health of our players to win football games.

That's your opinion but it is not shared by me nor others. If he does come you have a decision to make.

So you are happy to put our players health at risk to win footy games, good to know.

The NRL are satisfied he has been punished, served that punishment and is again available to participate. End of matter.

But as you said, you are happy to risk players health to win footy games.

Flanagan is available for consideration to be assistant or coach according to the NRL. His punishment has been served.

That wasn't what you said though. I stated that you don't put players health at risk to win footy games, you disagreed.

He is available for consideration, doesn't make it right to appoint him.

You can write to the NRL detailing your concerns. I have no evidence this will ever happen again. What I do know is that he has been punished and served that punishment. Do you expect him to be punished more than once for what he allegedly did?

Allegedly did? He was suspended for his behaviour, no need to use the word allegedly unless trying to downplay it. Why wouldn't he do it again? He has shown he believes he is above the consequences of his behaviour before, he has shown no evidence he wouldn't go straight back to this behaviour. Just because someone has been punished does not mean that there are no more consequences for their behaviour. We should not have him anywhere near the club.

If you have evidence that he has or is intending to do it again, report it to the NRL.

You have made your opinion known. I am willing to give him the chance.

If you want individuals to be punished twice for the same breach, join the ADF.

You have made your opinion known as well, why wouldn't I counter when you push for Flanno? I don't need evidence, he refused to follow consequences in the past, the risk just isn't worth it.

Coutts-Trotter was gaoled for his crime and will now be head of the NSW Premier's Dept. A great story of redemption.

I am quite happy to give Flanagan the chance. If he comes then as I have stated once or twice, you have a decision to make.

A slight diversion from the topic but I don't see the Coutts-Trotter story as a great redemption one. He was from a wealthy family and went to an elite private school and still got caught up in drugs and such. Probably relied on family connections and private school network to get another opportunity. I'd guess there'd be no redemption story if he came from a lower socioeconomic situation. Not knocking him, but feel it is more a story of the value of wealth and connections rather than redemption.

 

[Fade.To.Black]

I hate cheats as much as anyone, they disgust me. But with it being a safe assumption that most of the successful clubs in the NRL in recent seasons are cheating or "severely bending the rules" in many aspects so if you can't beat 'em, join 'em IMO. Next we have to figure out the art of getting good players to the club by looking after them outside of the salary cap rules. That's where the real success is to be had.

 

[cqtiger]

Steroids have been (mis) used in sports for ever.

Athletes always looking for a way to get ahead one way or another, the competitive edge.

Have seen docos about steroid use in south America with children getting them ready to be super athletes ready to be drafted for the MLB.

We've all heard the stories about certain NRL players over the years. I won't make allegations as we don't need those legalities the forum may face. However one shouldn't he so oblivious to think the NRL is clean.... keep an eye our for any players who hold fluid around their faces or growth of their heads over the years. No names.

It was explained to me by a former player that typically if some players get caught it's usually only one that goes down. A deal is worked out with ASADA and one takes the wraps for it to save face.

I'd be very surprised that a player found guilty in this situation wouldn't be blowing the whistle.

Can't suspend a 30 man squad.

Of course they can, WADA has banned Russia from competing as a country, an NRL team is small fry.

Why wouldn't the guy that takes the fall blow the whistle, this isn't The Sopranos

Could you imagine....

This season we are running a 15 team comp because team X has been suspended in full for failing a drug test.

I'm sure there'd be financial ramifications for both the club and NRL involved.

Money talks.
No allegations.
The right people are getting paid.

I call rubbish on that, ASADA and WADA are independent to the NRL

Could be complete rubbish.
I just know the almighty dollar wins every time.

In the UFC, Jon Jones urine sample came back with picograms of PEDs in it.
Moved the event from LA to Vegas to get around the legalities instead of losing their main event as Vegas is more relaxed.
Have events in certain states where marijuana is allowed so athletes who use won't fail tests.

I just couldn't see a whole team being suspended
Ever.

How many players at the sharks were effected ?

What about a whole country?

What do you mean?

Russia have been suspended from 2 Olympics by WADA.

But there athletes compete under a different name ..

They competed under a different flag

 

[Tiger Tarl]

I'm not a fan of Flanagan but had a thought... Flanagan is mates with Buzz Rothfield, right? So if he were to get the assistant job with us, would that mean Buzz would lay off bagging us at every chance in his column...? Maybe even talks us up for once...?

 

[jirskyr]

I'm not a fan of Flanagan but had a thought... Flanagan is mates with Buzz Rothfield, right? So if he were to get the assistant job with us, would that mean Buzz would lay off bagging us at every chance in his column...? Maybe even talks us up for once...?

Why would one do anything to placate or encourage support from that drunk fool?

 

[Tiger Tarl]

I'm not a fan of Flanagan but had a thought... Flanagan is mates with Buzz Rothfield, right? So if he were to get the assistant job with us, would that mean Buzz would lay off bagging us at every chance in his column...? Maybe even talks us up for once...?

Why would one do anything to placate or encourage support from that drunk fool?

Good point.

 

[Russell]

Surley no body actually thinks Flanagan is going to be sneaking around putting illegal supplements into the players water haha

Would be funny if not so serious.

We're talking young lives here. This man cannot be trusted.

 

[Chicken_Faced_Killa]

I'm not a fan of Flanagan but had a thought... Flanagan is mates with Buzz Rothfield, right? So if he were to get the assistant job with us, would that mean Buzz would lay off bagging us at every chance in his column...? Maybe even talks us up for once...?

Buzz would just amp up the heat trying to get his mate in the top job. Who cares what he thinks/says anyway he’s the laughing stock of the league and I’ve never heard anyone say anything positive about him. Zero respect from the league community