Wouldn't that be his mam?

please explain

It could easily be yes, not sure why you'd find that weird though. Oh wait you tried to be clever and failed miserably

I dare to imagine were we would be if we still had the previous regime in placed as I reckon we would have the book thrown at us but with the new regime been in place I reckon its softened the blow, I’d be interested to know if Hull began to fully cooperate with the UKDA fully once Pearson had found out that the previous board had over looked telling him about this shenanigan.

Also in the statements it mentioned that Hull have fully cooperated with the RFL so I would assume that Hulls new regime would of potentially discussed the consequences of this with the RFL as part of their discussions, individual punishments fit the crime. I’m with Codhead in that this will be thrown way into the long grass as I’m sure Hull aren’t the only team to have this problem, our problem is that we got caught trying to cover it up.

Would be intrestign to know how many of the players knew about this at the time or did they have the wool pulled over their eyes as well?

We win as a team and lose as a team the same principle should apply for when we celebrate glory and when the hits the fan as a club, onwards and upwards.

Seems I've caught your bug.

what people are forgetting is it was a slimming table and was only found out
that it had a drug in it and was banned from 2011 ..So other players from other teams must have use
it ..It was obtained from a shop in Wigan..so you must be able to get it over the counter
It didn't do Hull any good we lost 2 out of the 4 games that were played ..People have be caught and dealt
with ..Test have been done after the incident and nothing found so the problem has been sorted UKDA
have done their job

The biggest problem with them is that they are a diuretic and can mask other more serious drugs hence the reason they were banned from 2010.

Hundreds of over the counters on the banned lists.

Players aware of what they can and cant take and they should have to run everything past the conditioners/physios/team doctors etc etc,

even down t cold remedies and headache tablets

they all have to access the UKDA website and update locations were they are as drug testers can strike anytime, and often knowon to do so at 0600 hours and the likes

no excuses

So why risk at least 3 careers over it? If you were Rule would you have put your career into the hands of Long and Gleeson? Maybe it was an act of desperation on someone's part but it's inconceivable to believe that only the four named knew what was going on. There has to be more to it or Rule was being told what to do. The whole thing has unravelled once AP came in with his regime change and there was no longer any reason for the accused to continue to play the game. As with many things with the old BOD there seems to be no logic , like for example why they kept Agar when every man and his dog could see he was damaging the club. It makes you wonder who knew what about who.

Ah right, if everyone's doing it that's ok then...

You surely can't be serious? If this had been a case of Gleeson took the tablet without knowing the facts about it, and without consulting with the conditioner, then it wouldn't be half as bad. It is the fact that our then CEO, a person with a lot of responsibility at the club, sat down with Cooper and Gleeson and fabricated some statements for each to give. These were both withdrawn by each at a later date and a more truthful account given. To me, and correct me if I am wrong, but that means the statements previous were lies. They may have been trying to protect people, but they were lies given as evidence to the national anti-doping organisation.

As a club we are made to take this upon us, and have to suffer the consequences, which for arguments sake, and for the sake of our sport, I hope are severe. It's disgusting.

Thats not my point, in my opinion i think it could be a can of worms for the RFL if they dig to much into it thats all.

I think our club been court out for its wrongs is a good thing in respect it shows whats been going on behind the scenes but i'm sure there are plenty of examples that have never come out not only from Hull Fc but all the teams but the RFL don't exactly help themselves with the way they run things, the punishments they hand out (Rule should be banned for life imo) and the amount of loop holes etc.

I'll take what ever punishment they see fit for the good of the game and no doubt take the at various grounds for it in the near future.

We can argue the toss all day about the details of the individual cock-ups and instances of bad judgement, but there's no denying there's a fair old list of examples of mismanagement. For whatever reason though, the prevailing opinion on here always seemed to be that whenever something good happened at the club, it was down to good old Jim, while if he did something that the fans didn't like, it must have been because Kath made him do it. I could never understand why he was given so much benefit of the doubt by most fans, especially since nobody could really say what his job description actually entailed!

So now we've got a situation where there are two instances of him being a proven liar, and he's banned from the game in disgrace, yet some fans still want to claim that, on the whole he did a good job, it's absolutely ludicrous!

Those who defend(ed) him were just those who were taken in by his spin

See Gleeson has been speaking to Max Cliffords people, looks like he's going to try and pin this all on the others, or FC.

Good job nobody is denying it then. The worst one - by far - was the appointment and retention of Agar. How much of that was down to Rule is open to question of course.


Rule was given credit for those aspects of the day-to-day running of the club that it could be reasonably assumed fell under his direct control - in particular marketing activities as that was his original function and background. He was cut slack on those aspects that were unlikely to have been under his sole control, such as hirings and firings etc. He was given so much benefit of the doubt precisely because there was uncertainty about how far his authority went - that's pretty much what benefit of the doubt is all about.


People are simply saying that regardless of how badly he performed in certain areas - and nobody has defended him when he has been proven to have fouled up - that doesn't change the fact that he did [isome[/i things right during his tenure. I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say that the balance is positive mind.

I'm not sure how he thinks he's going to manage that given the personal responsibility for checking the banned substances list that's enshrined in all anti-doping rules. My guess would be he's just after a payday from the press stories rather than attempting any legal action.

Other than a short life of hard-graft in the lower leagues from the 2013 season, it's difficult to see where else he's gonna get a payday

He could work on Sean Longs dads market stall

Now the dust has settled (slightly), do we think there will be sanctions against the club?

In our favour I see:
None of the convicted are at the club, and neither are others who may be involved (Hetherington, Agar, Long)
Follow-up tests in the last 6 months have all been negative
Further action would see potentially a legal case between someone who's just put a few mill into one the comp's best supported clubs and the Hetheringtons who seem beloved by the RFL - not sure they'd want a public bunfight over it.
When Keiron Cunningham got done for HCG, he escaped punishment because a Saints conditioner had administered it to him without his knowledge. IMO this is more evidence of a club's complicity in a drugs culture than what has transpired at FC, and AFAIK Saints weren't punished as a club? Maybe someone can correct me on this?

Against us:
Club CEO orchestrated cover-up
We employed an incompetent conditioner who didn't exercise the right level of control
There's been shedloads of bad PR for the game.

Thoughts?

As I said before: no further action. It's a dark & deep cupboard that the RFL will not want to delve too deepy into, there could be more skeletons than they can handle in there.

Someone should also have a quiet word in Gleeson's shell-like and convince him that he'd be far better off sucking the mop and going away quietly. He might possibly get a book deal out of it, although I'd struggle to think of who just might buy it.

From Wakefield Forum
Just want to point a couple of things out to peeps here and there seems to be some stuff lost in all the gunsmoke.
Firstly the old regime at hull were not allowed to divulge any information about the pending and ongoing investigation by UKADA as per their rules wich the RFL sign up to, this is why the new owners knew nothing about this until they had taken over the club, not a cover up to gain a better price for the club.
Secondly, this "Cold/dietry" supplememnt is also a stimulant and if you look in to what its effects can be if taken in certain doses, it is a performance enhancing drug, giving the taker of it greater focus and sharpness on the field, this is why the substance is allowed in the off season as there is no on field advantage then

FWIW IMO Gleeson is guilty of being stupid, Cooper is guilty of agreeing to deceive and Rule is the ringmaster, I don't think his ban goes quite far enough where the others seem pretty fair on reflection, however as the RFL have stated in their statement, Hull FC have brought the game in to disrepute and I would not be surprised if they get a fine at the very least Afterall didn't Cas get stung by £40k for doing the same

There is no way the club should face any sanctions, none of the protagonists are involved with the club, it would be interesting to know what Agar knew about what was going on, but only "interesting" from the point of view of if he knew anything at all, I doubt he did as UKADA would have charged him at the same time.

Cooper should never work in professional sport again (for two reasons, firstly for doing it and secondly trying to take shortcuts to weight loss, hardly the actions of a "sports scientist"icon_wink.gif, Gleeson was just dumb (but we knew that anyway), Rule is the biggest surprise, he's binned a promising career.

Didn't know Kath or Agar had an account on here.



I'd suggest AP did know about it, but not the full extent of it as the official club statement says "The new owner was not made aware of the [ufull[/u UKAD investigation until completing the takeover of the club".

This shake up included a complete restructuring of the Black and Whites’ management hierarchy, which included the departure of the previous Board of Directors, led by Chairwoman Kath Hetherington and CEO Rule, as well as their Performance Department, including Cooper.

The new owner was not made aware of the full UKAD investigation until completing the takeover of the club, but once the new management team were briefed on the investigation they cooperated fully with UKAD and the RFL and understand the stance both organisations have been forced to take.

The new board are extremely disappointed at the handling of the entire process by the former Chairwoman, CEO and board and of course the player for taking a banned substance in the first instance.


I'd love to see the old hag Hatherington in the dock, but she'll never be held to account.

Well, quite, but peversely the RFL love affair with the Hetheringtons may be a reason for no further action.