Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:03 pm  

Also wondering why the previous board were so quick to sell when Adam came a-knocking, when they'd been so reluctant in the past.

And, whether our former chief exec has perjured himself? Is evidence before this tribunal under oath?

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:04 pm  

fc baldy wrote:

Why?

Wigan wasnt docked points when Hock was on cocaine,Sts wasnt when Cunningham got done.

Neither was their official club conditioner involved, not their CEO complicit in a cover-up though. Nigel Wood has said we're guilty of bringing the game into disrepute. Not clear-cut one way or the other IMO.

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:05 pm  

kt170496 wrote:

Spot on Kosh we go to our Doctor's and we put our trust in them ..They give us Drug's and other medicine and we take it ..For some people to say about his depression there are signs and symptoms, you know what to look for when you have had first hand experience ..But till then people should know better then saying he didn't suffer with depression ..We never dealt with him on a day to day basic

Again I'll ask what evidence do you have other than hearsay and rumour to support Gleeson's alleged depression. People seem to be accepting this as a fact. Surely we should have learnt by now that many alleged facts on here and elsewhere turn out to be nothing of the sort.

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:05 pm  

steve_norton wrote:

You don't think the timing is a bit of a coincidence ?

I think it’s entirely possible that Rule used Gleeson’s existing condition to cover up the drugs thing. Given Gleeson’s history it’s not hard to believe that he had problems and has suffered from mental illness. Depression can make you do stupid and irrational things.

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:07 pm  

Very embarrassing for the club, despite the 3 guilty individuals no longer anything to do with us.

Just another example of what a complete shower of s**te the previous ownwers were. They continually tried to do things on the cheap, and and this instance, as in so many others, their cheap options (cheif exec and conditioner) just wernet up to the task.

Glad none of them are no longer with us, although I am dissapointed that Rule was allowed to take the easy option and resign, I would have much rather that he had been sacked for his part in this sorry affair.

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:08 pm  

Chris28 wrote:

Also wondering why the previous board were so quick to sell when Adam came a-knocking, when they'd been so reluctant in the past.

And, whether our former chief exec has perjured himself? Is evidence before this tribunal under oath?

As said already, given Rules's generous self-love, I'm surprised he'd risk it all for what amounted to a knackered player trying to lose some weight, hardly a cup final riding on it.

Next you'll be suggesting he never really intended to go after Paul Cooke for compensation despite declaring this intention at a public fans forum.

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:09 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Neither was their official club conditioner involved, not their CEO complicit in a cover-up though. Nigel Wood has said we're guilty of bringing the game into disrepute. Not clear-cut one way or the other IMO.

Not only us that has ever brought the game into diserupte...did sts get done when Long and Gleeson bet against them?...did sts get done when they rested a full team.

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:10 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Neither was their official club conditioner involved, not their CEO complicit in a cover-up though. Nigel Wood has said we're guilty of bringing the game into disrepute. Not clear-cut one way or the other IMO.

Just read the tribunal findings, tbh its Rule I'm most hacked off with.

Cooper seems to have been a prat that didn't check things properly, Long trusted his advice and told Gleeson the pills were Ok to take.

Gleeson was a prat and took them without checking with cooper (but would most likely have been told the same as Long).

But just what Rule hoped to achieve by messing about and trying to cover things up to a degree I really can't get my head round.

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:13 pm  

Mrs Barista wrote:

Next you'll be suggesting he never really intended to go after Paul Cooke for compensation despite declaring this intention at a public fans forum.

Was just coming to that...

Re: UKDA Confirm Hull FC bans - link : Thu Dec 29, 2011 6:16 pm  

Smiggs wrote:

Again I'll ask what evidence do you have other than hearsay and rumour to support Gleeson's alleged depression. People seem to be accepting this as a fact. Surely we should have learnt by now that many alleged facts on here and elsewhere turn out to be nothing of the sort.

Did you deal with him on a day to day basic to know if it was true or fault If I had that contract with him I might have known one way or another ..I have been through depression with somebody but I was with them every day to see it also I took in what the Doctor said