Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:46 am  

SBR wrote:

Well I think that's the first time I've heard Super League and certainly (table toppers) Wakefield get mentioned on the BBC Breakfast show.

Still managed a minor error though, apparently he has played in both of our games this season.

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 7:50 am  

TRB wrote:

Thread Cleaned Up!

No one has been found guilty of anything - yet.

Not any player or any club. This board will not become a kangaroo court for any individual or for any club.

Any posts which could, in any circumstances, be deemed to cross this line, will be removed - and the poster either warned or banned themselves.

No leniency!

Correct. No one on here knows the facts so its not worthy of speculation.

Does anyone know when the RFL Inquiry is being held ?

[Wildthing]

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:29 am  

Head High Tackle wrote:

Of course it was an alternative detrimental view. It didn't fit with what you lot want to think as it was detrimental. Thus, alternative and detrimental.

Quite feasible too and you know it oh sensitive one.

Nah, you were trolling - as always.

You know it. Oh trolling one.

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:30 am  

debaser wrote: 24th November See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 520770.stm So no, he was not still with the Bulls. Newton had to leave the ‘’Audience with….’ early around that time, might've been for this test. My own personal thoughts are although the bad publicity is unwelcome for the club, they’re not responsible for individual players’ actions. Just as Wigan were not responsible for Hock, Bradford for Hudson etc. As for the ramifications to the playing side, well I have no affinity towards Newton and he is still relatively new to the club. The hooking role is a department were the club are fairly blessed with Latu and Obst plus young Davy for back up. Had it been Brough or a forward it may have been a struggle. The point about his recovery form injury is a good point, however, if this were the case I would’ve thought that Newton would’ve been given the benefit of the doubt without getting banned until conclusive evidence proved whether he was guilty or not.

debaser wrote: 24th November See here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 520770.stm So no, he was not still with the Bulls. Newton had to leave the ‘’Audience with….’ early around that time, might've been for this test. My own personal thoughts are although the bad publicity is unwelcome for the club, they’re not responsible for individual players’ actions. Just as Wigan were not responsible for Hock, Bradford for Hudson etc. As for the ramifications to the playing side, well I have no affinity towards Newton and he is still relatively new to the club. The hooking role is a department were the club are fairly blessed with Latu and Obst plus young Davy for back up. Had it been Brough or a forward it may have been a struggle. The point about his recovery form injury is a good point, however, if this were the case I would’ve thought that Newton would’ve been given the benefit of the doubt without getting banned until conclusive evidence proved whether he was guilty or not.

[Wildthing]

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:37 am  

Head High Tackle wrote:

If that were the case then you were the worst biter of them all.

No changes there.

Anyway, I'd love to play with you some more but we need to get back on topic.

FWIW I only care about those taking performance enhancing drugs. Those taking recreational stuff should be given a stern talking to, a fine but not banned for 2 years. That's excessive. Hock shouldnt have been banned and neither should Newton IF he's guilty of recreational only.

Unfortunately us '7 fingered neanderthal inbreds' as you so nicely put it on the Leeds board, have no desire
to discuss anything with you.

Off you troll.

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:39 am  

The reason I raised my concerns is that one week he is reported has having a possible season long injury...a torn bicep IIRC and misses a game

and the next we hear a radio interview on Saturday where it is stated he makes a "remarkable" recovery.




I do hope for the sake of the game as a whole the club are not culpable as well.

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:45 am  

DoubleAone wrote:

The reason I raised my concerns is that one week he is reported has having a possible season long injury...a torn bicep IIRC and misses a game

and the next we hear a radio interview on Saturday where it is stated he makes a "remarkable" recovery.




I do hope for the sake of the game as a whole the club are not culpable as well.

Didn’t Lunt from Huddersfield fear he had a broken arm and would be out for a few months, turns out it’s only ligament damage. Injuries are sometimes incorrectly diagnoised. People are looking far too much for conspiracy theories in this.

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:47 am  

underground wrote:

You may have a point...


depending on the type of drug, the timing of the first test and the sharing of this information with the club, the league and the player, the RFL by-Laws affecting this issue...

but as we know nothing of any of those issues... it's an irrelevant point based on pure conjecture and speculation...

90% of what is on the board is pure conjecture and speculation.

The RFL would not suspend a high profile player unless it believed it had reasonable grounds to do so - let's face it the sport is the big loser here

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:48 am  

Head High Tackle wrote:

That's just it though, I didn't so don't make things up to suit.

I said If found guilty then the club has to take some responsibility for failing to control its players.


I have.

What part of 'If found guilty then the club has to take some responsibility' don't you understand?

You also suggested that all Wakefield players should be tested to make sure this isn’t a club problem. If that’s not trolling I don’t know what is.

Re: Terry Newton has been provisionally suspended : Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:51 am  

Head High Tackle wrote:

FWIW I only care about those taking performance enhancing drugs. Those taking recreational stuff should be given a stern talking to, a fine but not banned for 2 years. That's excessive. Hock shouldnt have been banned and neither should Newton IF he's guilty of recreational only.

Are you serious? You really think that players who are caught taking recreational drugs should face no sanction at all?