Re: Rob Worrincy : Mon Sep 08, 2014 4:54 pm  

FoxyDread wrote:

Betting on games does not equate to corruption.

Even betting on your own games (for small stakes) does not equate to corruption. The government making bodies responsible for preventing corruption does not make betting on the sport without the match fixing element a criminal offence.

Call it what you want. Doesn't matter - the current regs are that if you get caught betting, you're banned. Bye bye, pay packet.

It's just not worth it. Betting for small stakes at the risk of losing even a well-paid part time job - let alone a full time one ? Come on ...

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:34 pm  

I'm not contesting the original punishment. I stated that he would not be a threat to the integrity of games at Hull RU's level as there is no betting. Which there isn't.

My other point is that RW has broken no law, which he hasn't, he has broken rules.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:12 pm  

FoxyDread wrote:

I'm not contesting the original punishment. I stated that he would not be a threat to the integrity of games at Hull RU's level as there is no betting. Which there isn't.

My other point is that RW has broken no law, which he hasn't, he has broken rules.

Let me first of all say I would be happy to see Rob in Fax colours again, all this tom tit "he should never wear a Fax shirt again" because he bet on Fax losing to me is simply silly.
BUT, no it was not illegal, but, he broke the rules.
Break the rules of your employer and you face the consequences.
Which I think he has.
Me? punishment enough out of the game all season, let him get back to plying his trade.
Let him without blame cast the first stone.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Sep 11, 2014 7:29 pm  

I'm afraid his integrity is permanently damaged. When he knocks on over the line in the dying seconds what will people's reaction be? Wasn't the real nature of the offence also revealed to be much worse after we appealed? That brings the question of trust and lack of full disclosure, which embarrassed the club at the appeal.

Perhaps time (and a new coach) may heal the damage done but fans will have longer memories.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Thu Sep 11, 2014 9:12 pm  

With Alex Brown supposedly a done deal, is this one of the 7 in's and out's?

Re: Rob Worrincy : Fri Sep 12, 2014 10:41 am  

FoxyDread wrote:

My other point is that RW has broken no law, which he hasn't, he has broken rules.

And the rules say that if he breaks them, he gets a ban.

It's clear enough and he's not the first - nor, probably, will he be the last.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Fri Sep 12, 2014 10:31 pm  

griff1998 wrote:

And the rules say that if he breaks them, he gets a ban.

It's clear enough and he's not the first - nor, probably, will he be the last.

yet other thread says different, break rules and get nothing.
RFL clueless.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Sat Sep 13, 2014 9:17 am  

I used to like Worrincy but a few things put me off. Obviously this is the biggy and I do not think you can have anyone in your team betting against you no matter how small but also Rob knew what the problems were in his game but by the sounds of it was not willing to put in the extra time and effort to improve in those areas. If he had shown that dedication Im 100% sure that he could have made a good go of it in SL.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Sat Sep 13, 2014 9:39 am  

swifty62 wrote:

yet other thread says different, break rules and get nothing.
RFL clueless.

Did the RFL say that ? Or some Independent Appeal Tribunal ?

Blaming the wrong people here.

Re: Rob Worrincy : Sat Sep 13, 2014 9:41 am  

Greg Florimos Boots wrote:

I used to like Worrincy but a few things put me off.

I like Rob. I won't be holding this against him for the rest of his life but he's made a mistake and been caught.