Sandor Earl interview

 

 

 

Why does everybody just suddenly take Earle's statements as gospel? When did this guy morph into Mother Teresa? He could well be lieing his ■■■■ off to save it. Who knows. To suddenly hang everything on what this guy says is just stupid.

He seemed very sensible, credible and articulate in his interview. Far more than most people his age would.
Also, Dank was watching the interview with another 'sports journalist' present. He didn't deny any of it.
His only caveat was that Earl 'didn't have a gun pointed at his head.'
I'm not a fan of the 'he had to know something was wrong,' line.
Gordon Tallis put forward that as soon as his treatment included something he couldn't spell he should have had doubts.
If that's the case then Tallis should have had major doubts about playing in the NRL.

I can very easily accept that a guy would take advice from the club 'Sports Scientist' for rehab over that of the club doctor (or medic, with no disrespect meant to Doc Reid).
Penrith's problem was the same as Essendon's, and the AFL's was the same as the NRL's.
The clubs weren't as vehement about knowing what Dank was doing as they should have been, and the leagues had inappropriate measures in keeping tabs on what clubs were doing.
The fact is , whatever governance issues the clubs had, the leagues were far worse.
GOLD

Is Tallis suggesting Earl doesn't know how to spell CJC?

 

Guess it's easier to spell than ACDC

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4om5UT5iXY

i wont judge our club until i hear our side of the story.

 

should of taken it to court.

The theory goes that the true villain is the person who knows the most but cares the least. Only Dank fits that profile.

The theory goes that the true villain is the person who knows the most but cares the least. Only Dank fits that profile.

I don't think anyone has any doubt that Dank is the villain in all this.

it is just a question for me as to the extent of Robinson's involvement and knowledge.

But I have no problems (still) with the involvement of Hird, Thompson or Reid (no idea with Corcoran).

I accept that they all were maybe naïve and too trusing of Dank, but I don't think any of them were complicit.

I also think it is easy with hindsight to say what they should have done differently.