Official Cronulla Sharks Board + Management

[slide rule]

I didn't say they had not promised it, my point is that 90% of voters couldn't care less about the sacked four. Certainly didn't make a difference to my vote

I reckon 90% of the voters wouldn't have turned up to vote in the first place, if it weren't for the sacked 4 and the other events of that time.

 

[samshark]

I'm happy enough to give these guys a crack at it, I have some concerns about how they got themselves into power but they are there now so let's hope they deliver.

I won't cop their minions taking pot shots at Douglas, Irvine & co unfairly though. There's a few social media henchmen out there, they will ultimately do their mates on the new board more harm than good.

The really unfortunate thing is the timing of the election and the outdated constitutional rules that allow for complete replacement of a board in one go. Sadly, Douglas had done a mountain of work on constitutional reform, that was to have been rolled out this year, now that the development had been passed.

As for electioneering on the 'Reinstatement of The 4'...come on you lot, it was as clear as day they were using that as a PROMISE, a CORE promise and it bloody well worked. I know 'the fine print' was that they promised 'a legal review' but that's not what the pissed-up masses on the hill heard. It's not what very good mates of 'The 4' were telling people from one end of the shire to the other. The punters didn't give a **** about the fine print, they never do. So, I'm happy for your boys to enjoy their moment in the sun and I'll eat my words if they come good and do a better job than the last board, but don't insult our collective intelligence by suggesting they haven't broken a promise, morally at least, by not reinstating the sacked blokes.

Douglas and Coleman could have stayed. They chose not to.

 

[SharkLabelSociety]

Well they've stood pretty strong through the hardest days the club has seen. And we are still in the comp. and we have no players suspended. And they are still bringing in minor and possible major sponsors even though we have the most tarnished name in the league.

So we're just forgetting that in 2009 we were neck deep in the red and had the bank set to close our doors and the removal vans ready for Perth/Central Coast?Not to mention the team was terrible and there was all the 4 Corners stuff throwing mud on the club's name

Compared to that the ASADA stuff is a couple drops of piss in a bucket.

Course, most fans have memories as short as yours so I'm not surprised by this.

 

[JimBob]

So we're just forgetting that in 2009 we were neck deep in the red and had the bank set to close our doors and the removal vans ready for Perth/Central Coast?Not to mention the team was terrible and there was all the 4 Corners stuff throwing mud on the club's name

Compared to that the ASADA stuff is a couple drops of piss in a bucket.

Course, most fans have memories as short as yours so I'm not surprised by this.

A lot of people really underestimated the impact the ASADA investigation could of had if players had been found to be using illegal peptides.

Players being suspended would have been the least of the Sharks concerns.

I'm not trying to argue that the ASADA investigation was darker than our 2009, but I don't think you're taking the investigation as seriously as it could have been.

 

[SF]

I reckon 90% of the voters wouldn't have turned up to vote in the first place, if it weren't for the sacked 4 and the other events of that time.

My personal opinion based on no research or statistically valid polling and with significant margin for error is that the "other events of the time" (talk of players being banned, club being banned, club being relocated, players/coach feuding with board etc), whether valid concerns or media beatups, were more important to most voters than whether a trainer was reinstated or not.

 

[SharkLabelSociety]

And what's the worst that could have happened? I fail to see even at the peak of the ASADA investigation what could have happened other than a couple player suspensions and maybe a fine for the club/enforced management changes, and we got new management anyway. There is no way we were going to fold - in fact, I don't remember anyone other than a few forum doomsayers saying it.

If you seriously believe that we were going under because of ASADA and the white horse Unity mob saved us you're even dumber than I thought.

 

[SharkLabelSociety]

My personal opinion based on no research or statistically valid polling and with significant margin for error is that the "other events of the time" (talk of players being banned, club being banned, club being relocated, players/coach feuding with board etc), whether valid concerns or media beatups, were more important to most voters than whether a trainer was reinstated or not.

I have to disagree here. Rothfield and his mouthbreather gang got everyone well and truly fired up about the 4 and made them look like martyrs as DI and co ran to save themselves. Then came the Unity mob claiming that these guys had been scapegoated and that "we will bring them back". I don't have any evidence other than conversations I've heard, but I think it was a big thing that this mob were seen to be getting some justice for these guys.

 

[JimBob]

And what's the worst that could have happened? I fail to see even at the peak of the ASADA investigation what could have happened other than a couple player suspensions and maybe a fine for the club.

If you seriously believe that we were going under because of ASADA and the white horse Unity mob saved us you're even dumber than I thought.

You've just shown that you highly underestimated how serious it could have become.

It wasn't actually ASADA I was worried about in regards to punishment, I was more concerned about what WADA would have done.

If ASADA found evidence of at least two players using peptides in 2011, WADA would have suspended the club for two years. If the rumours were correct and it was 12 players, WADA would have suspended the club indefinitely.

 

[BackRowMadness]

And what's the worst that could have happened? I fail to see even at the peak of the ASADA investigation what could have happened other than a couple player suspensions and maybe a fine for the club/enforced management changes, and we got new management anyway. There is no way we were going to fold - in fact, I don't remember anyone other than a few forum doomsayers saying it.

If you seriously believe that we were going under because of ASADA and the white horse Unity mob saved us you're even dumber than I thought.

According to many posters on here who are critical of the new board the very existence of the club is at stake because of the
ASADA issue. Hardly a drop in the bucket really isn't it? You can't select different points of view to support an obviously
agenda driven argument. It just makes people look cynical, jealous and bitter. Get on with life and support the club guys.

 

[SharkLabelSociety]

Once again, we have no idea what they were using. There are thousands and thousands of peptides out there and plenty are legal under WADA.

None of us know what Dank was jabbing into those guys, but there's no way WADA/ASADA would have shut the club down until a full investigation was complete to reveal a systemic illegal doping program. Which may still be the case, but seems less likely by the day.

Even if 12 players had been suspended, given that none of the guys actually involved with the club would have been there at the time, I fail to see what under the WADA code would have led to us being punted.

 

[slide rule]

According to many posters on here who are critical of the new board the very existence of the club is at stake because of the
ASADA issue. Hardly a drop in the bucket really isn't it? You can't select different points of view to support an obviously
agenda driven argument. It just makes people look cynical, jealous and bitter. Get on with life and support the club guys.

I'll support them, but I'll also hold them to account for the claims and promises that they made during their campaign.

 

[snowman]

And what's the worst that could have happened? I fail to see even at the peak of the ASADA investigation what could have happened other than a couple player suspensions and maybe a fine for the club/enforced management changes, and we got new management anyway. There is no way we were going to fold - in fact, I don't remember anyone other than a few forum doomsayers saying it.

If you seriously believe that we were going under because of ASADA and the white horse Unity mob saved us you're even dumber than I thought.

if you seriously think the worst thing that could of happened is a couple of players suspended, then you're even dumber than i thought

just 2 players found guilty and wada could ban us.

 

[JimBob]

Once again, we have no idea what they were using. There are thousands and thousands of peptides out there and plenty are legal under WADA.

None of us know what Dank was jabbing into those guys, but there's no way WADA/ASADA would have shut the club down until a full investigation was complete to reveal a systemic illegal doping program. Which may still be the case, but seems less likely by the day.

Yeah I'm not saying that they were using illegal substances, I'm saying that the matter was incredibly serious and a lot of people thought the worse would just be player suspensions.

Even if 12 players had been suspended, given that none of the guys actually involved with the club would have been there at the time, I fail to see what under the WADA code would have led to us being punted.

So you are saying that there are no players in our squad from 2011?

Trust me, if WADA discovered that we had been systematically doping on an entire team level just a few years ago, they would have told the NRL "either the Sharks go, or Australia's rugby league team goes". WADA is incredibly strict.

 

[SharkLabelSociety]

According to many posters on here who are critical of the new board the very existence of the club is at stake because of the
ASADA issue. Hardly a drop in the bucket really isn't it? You can't select different points of view to support an obviously
agenda driven argument. It just makes people look cynical, jealous and bitter. Get on with life and support the club guys.

I have not heard anyone I know who knows more about the club's inner workings than I do claim we're in any kind of danger ever since the earliest days of the investigation.

For the record, my problem with the new board is simply that they've consistently broken promises and strung us along. I don't really care about Mooney/Noakes/Givney/Schultz, but they promised to re-hire those guys and haven't. That's a red flag to me.

They also made it sound like they had sponsors in the pipeline - I remember hearing we would have a major jersey or stadium sponsor by the Canberra game. Of course this wasn't a promise per se, but it goes to show they're pretty full of it.

 

[snowman]

Once again, we have no idea what they were using. There are thousands and thousands of peptides out there and plenty are legal under WADA.

None of us know what Dank was jabbing into those guys, but there's no way WADA/ASADA would have shut the club down until a full investigation was complete to reveal a systemic illegal doping program. Which may still be the case, but seems less likely by the day.

Even if 12 players had been suspended, given that none of the guys actually involved with the club would have been there at the time, I fail to see what under the WADA code would have led to us being punted.

oh dear... 2 players, here now or not here now and we were gone. just remember that

 

[BackRowMadness]

I'll support them, but I'll also hold them to account for the claims and promises that they made during their campaign.

That's reasonable.. Lets give them some time to achieve their objectives.

 

[snowman]

I have not heard anyone I know who knows more about the club's inner workings than I do claim we're in any kind of danger ever since the earliest days of the investigation.For the record, my problem with the new board is simply that they've consistently broken promises and strung us along. I don't really care about Mooney/Noakes/Givney/Schultz, but they promised to re-hire those guys and haven't. That's a red flag to me.

They also made it sound like they had sponsors in the pipeline - I remember hearing we would have a major jersey or stadium sponsor by the Canberra game. Of course this wasn't a promise per se, but it goes to show they're pretty full of it.

so, i have heard it from someone who is connected to the club and old chairman, and u probably can guess who that is.... what now

 

[SharkLabelSociety]

Yeah I'm not saying that they were using illegal substances, I'm saying that the matter was incredibly serious and a lot of people thought the worse would just be player suspensions.



So you are saying that there are no players in our squad from 2011?

Trust me, if WADA discovered that we had been systematically doping on an entire team level just a few years ago, they would have told the NRL "either the Sharks go, or Australia's rugby league team goes". WADA is incredibly strict.

Alright, I don't claim to know the entire WADA code, so against my better impulses I'll take your word for it.

What have the new board done to make sure that come the end of this investigation, we aren't going to be punted?

 

[snowman]

Alright, I don't claim to know the entire WADA code, so against my better impulses I'll take your word for it.

What have the new board done to make sure that come the end of this investigation, we aren't going to be punted?

what could they do? if we are proven to have cheated we are gone mate. they cant bribe there way out of it

 

[SharkLabelSociety]

so, i have heard it from someone who is connected to the club and old chairman, and u probably can guess who that is.... what now

If it's the person I'm thinking of, I haven't heard it, but you talk to him more than I do so I'll believe it.

My question to JimBob still applies. What have the new board done to make sure we won't get booted once the investigation ends?