ahh right, not yet bought my copy

I recommend a nice Shiraz with the dog food. If it's in jelly I'd go for a Merlot.

As am i !

hi there,first time poster.in regards to the whole gleeson thing i'm amazed agar,hethington have both got off scott free.i don't believe for a minute that niether knew and with agar speaking to the press regarding the reasons gleeson was'nt in the squad should he have a case to answer?

Probably. But the RFL may be wanting some damage limitation here if it's true there are no further sanctions. Plus with the Richard Owen story coming out tomorrow (which on Twitter is reported as being a big story by some people), the appetite to take action against a current SL head coach and the Hetheringtons, who are woven into the fabric of the last 20 odd years of RL, is maybe quite limited . From a big picture perspective the lack of a sponsor for a comp that kicks off in a month is probably another priority too, rather than muckraking in an area where we already have 3 people guilty with a combined ban of 7 years.

I thought probiz are super league sponsors

What do you mean?

I didn't think a sponsor was in place yet. Neil Barraclough tweeted his New Year wishes today here:
[urlhttp://neilbarraclough.com/2012/01/rugby-league-wishes-2012/[/url

Which included:
"That the new Super League title sponsor (there is going to be one, right?) is a nationally-recognised brand."

Also that:"London Broncos, Hull FC and Bradford Bulls all improve." Good judgement IMO - the comp would be stronger overall if these three teams stepped it up.

Can we not speculate please - PM

not a good 2nd post mate !

I think if they had brought in Hetherington and/or Agar then the club as a whole would have had to have been investigated and if proved subsequently punished. This would have shown a club wide conspiracy rather than what is now seen as a CEO being a numpty and trying to cover up a mistake.

The only time I can think a club has been punished for the actions of a club official was when Harlequins RU covered up the bloodgate saga and they only recieved a fine so the likelihood of points deductions is slight to none even if it was pursued.

After a bit of a discussion on a certain Rovers fans FB last night this has made my day. Not that I didnt already think we wouldn't recieve further punishment. Despite being totally embarassed that our club is at the foot end of this scandal especially by previous board members etc, I am for one just happy to know we can hopefully put this behind us and move our discussions to on the field action come the middle of this month.

What exactly is it that you believe Agar is guilty of?

At worst, he didn't tell the fans or the media the reason for Gleeson's non-selection; given that the UKAD investigation was confidential, he did exactly the right thing; if he'd have said "I'm not selecting Gleeson because he's under investigation following a failed drugs test" and the investigation subsequently found that Gleeson was innocent, he'd have been guilty of casting doubt over Gleeson's professional reputation, which is of course impeccable...

Must be gospel then

A lot of people assume that Agar knew about the incident and the same goes for Kath. However it is just gossip with no solid evidence to back it up.

agar seemed to struggle to know the difference between his 4rse and his elbow most of the time so I wouldn't be surprised if he knew nothing about it

You really cannot fault that logic Jake

Bollox!

I meant to phone Sportstalk tonight to ask Gollum if he'd got through all the socks he received for Christmas yet

Sorry to labour the point, but do you mean he knew about and was complicit in the cover-up, or just that he knew that there had been a failed drug test and that an investigation was ongoing?

TBF there are probably few people who know the answer to this and I doubt many of them post on here. Probably he knew about the failed test and investigation, but he was effectively sacked in August, so probably didn't give a stuff what happened after that and could conceivably have avoided any involvement. He used his free time (ensured annually in August by failure to progress in the cup) to prioritise engineering the shabby transfer of Luke Briscoe to Leeds, and ensuring we slid down the play-off places with a parting gift to Kath of us bending over for another seeing-to by Leeds in the final game.

Being a Chairperson of any Committee or Board you know what going on If you don't you have no right to hold that position

So he didn't do anything wrong then? In fact, he did exactly the right thing by keeping schtum so as not to jeopardise the investigation or cast aspersions on Gleeson's character.

I know you lot have a fatwa out on the guy, but I don't think you can reasonably pin this one on him.

Much the same as your lame attempt to land Hull FC with vicarious liability.

Now toddle off and look forward to the great strides you'll be making this season.