Loiner Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 7 minutes ago, Barry Badrinath said: https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/18675098.trial-date-set-warrington-wolves-anthony-gelling-facing-assault-charge/ Thanks for the link must have missed that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 6 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said: You obviously work for a company who doesn't give a s*** about the welfare of its employees then. Mine certainly would if I ever found myself in that situation and asked for help He is in court on a very very serious charge. The support the club offers shouldn't stretch as far as what is ultimately a public show of support for the accused. I work for a decent company who provide all sorts of support, but one of my senior managers absolutely wouldn't come and support me in court if I was facing GBH charges. If he needs mental or financial wellbeing support, there are things that should be done - that shouldn't be standing beside him in court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 11 minutes ago, Eddie said: The burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies. Sadly this is all too often forgotten in the era of social media kangaroo courts. You and others suggesting people are being judged in advance of his hearing need to provide links/quotes, because you are arguing a point nobody is making. Those going through the process will decide whether he is guilty or not, a sports club should stay out of that - being in court by his side doesn't feel impartial to me. They can support him as a person outside of that courtroom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 Just now, Dave T said: You and others suggesting people are being judged in advance of his hearing need to provide links/quotes, because you are arguing a point nobody is making. Those going through the process will decide whether he is guilty or not, a sports club should stay out of that - being in court by his side doesn't feel impartial to me. They can support him as a person outside of that courtroom. Many times on this forum I’ve read that Wire shouldn’t be playing Gelling because he’s waiting for a court case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 1 minute ago, Eddie said: Many times on this forum I’ve read that Wire shouldn’t be playing Gelling because he’s waiting for a court case. I haven't read it on this thread yet. But even suspending somebody pending investigation isn't branding somebody guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Dave T said: Why is a Warrington Wolves official in court with him? That's nothing to do with innocent until proven guilty. Supporting an employee through a stressful time. It’s not unheard of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 1 minute ago, Spidey said: Supporting an employee through a stressful time. It’s not unheard of I think we are playing a dangerous game doing that in court on these charges. Let the legal system do its job, support him as an employee through normal people processes, Warrington RLFC don't need to be in court to support him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 9 minutes ago, Dave T said: I haven't read it on this thread yet. But even suspending somebody pending investigation isn't branding somebody guilty. This is far from the first thread about Gelling, it has been said a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 5 minutes ago, Dave T said: I think we are playing a dangerous game doing that in court on these charges. Let the legal system do its job, support him as an employee through normal people processes, Warrington RLFC don't need to be in court to support him. They don’t need to be but what is your objection to them going with him? Is it any different to taking family or friends with you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spidey Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 3 minutes ago, Dave T said: I think we are playing a dangerous game doing that in court on these charges. Let the legal system do its job, support him as an employee through normal people processes, Warrington RLFC don't need to be in court to support him. It’s not like they’re getting their own solicitor to represent him (which goes on in other sports around the world) It could be that due to him living away from his home he doesn’t have family to support him that maybe you or I would have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 11 minutes ago, Eddie said: They don’t need to be but what is your objection to them going with him? Is it any different to taking family or friends with you? Warrington have said they will leave this to the legal system now, publicly supporting him in court oversteps that commitment in my eyes. Continuing to employ him, providing him employee welfare schemes etc. is one thing, actually supporting him with the unsavoury charges is another thing. I think it is sensible to keep a slight distance in cases like this. There is a lot of support that can be given behind the scenes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 12 minutes ago, Spidey said: It’s not like they’re getting their own solicitor to represent him (which goes on in other sports around the world) It could be that due to him living away from his home he doesn’t have family to support him that maybe you or I would have As per my last post, there is plenty of support that can be given, but he doesn't also have the right to club representatives in court, and Warrington don't have any obligation in the slightest to be there with him. Supporting him through employee welfare schemes behind the scenes is sensible while this is ongoing, I'm not convinced publicly supporting him in court is the right thing. However, I would say that there was a valid point that maybe the club want to keep a close eye on the case, as it is only the WG that stated he was being supported by Leuilei. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave T Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 17 minutes ago, Eddie said: This is far from the first thread about Gelling, it has been said a lot. And I assume that is addressed on those threads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunbar Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 Just now, Dave T said: Warrington have said they will leave this to the legal system now, publicly supporting him in court oversteps that commitment in my eyes. Continuing to employ him, providing him employee welfare schemes etc. is one thing, actually supporting him with the unsavoury charges is another thing. I think it is sensible to keep a slight distance in cases like this. There is a lot of support that can be given behind the scenes. On balance, I tend to agree with this. There is plenty an employer can do to support an employee in these circumstances and Warrington continuing to play him goes beyond what other industries may have done through either suspension of even dismissal (following an internal process). The problem I have with an official representative of the club being there is how this will reflect on their actions after a verdict has been delivered and in the event of that being guilty, "The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby. "If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove that they should value it? If someone doesn't value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic?" — Sam Harris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert Prince Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 2 minutes ago, Dunbar said: On balance, I tend to agree with this. There is plenty an employer can do to support an employee in these circumstances and Warrington continuing to play him goes beyond what other industries may have done through either suspension of even dismissal (following an internal process). The problem I have with an official representative of the club being there is how this will reflect on their actions after a verdict has been delivered and in the event of that being guilty, The support we are are talking about was was back in August. Whoever might have been there, outside of his solicitor, was there as "support". It could have been anyone, a friend or anyone. It does not mean they agree or not. They may indeed think one way or the other, but it does in fact not mean anything... any more than we know anything. But the reality is that Wire have been selecting him. They did not have to. Any player at any time can be dropped if his face does not fit. Such players still get paid. But Gelling was still selected. Does that not speak volumes? I seem to remember the Geoffrey Boycott affair, when he was in court. I think that was in South Africa (I'm not sure if the law got justice for anyone with that). He got some bad publicity but the BBC/SKY (?) in the end still employed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FearTheVee Posted November 27, 2020 Share Posted November 27, 2020 1 hour ago, Saint Toppy said: You obviously work for a company who doesn't give a s*** about the welfare of its employees then. Mine certainly would if I ever found myself in that situation and asked for help My employer is considered a leader for welfare, wellbeing and employee support matters - internally and externally. There is not a snowball's chance in hell that they would be present in court with me if I was charged with grevious bodily harm against my wife. They would certainly offer me support, but they would never be in Court. I find it really odd that you expect that any supportive employer would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Frightful Posted November 29, 2020 Author Share Posted November 29, 2020 Just heard his departure has been confirmed tonight so I expect there will be more meat on the bones of this story by tomorrow. Hull FC....The Sons of God... (Well, we are about to be crucified on Good Friday) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loiner Posted November 29, 2020 Share Posted November 29, 2020 On 27/11/2020 at 16:14, Rupert Prince said: The support we are are talking about was was back in August. Whoever might have been there, outside of his solicitor, was there as "support". It could have been anyone, a friend or anyone. It does not mean they agree or not. They may indeed think one way or the other, but it does in fact not mean anything... any more than we know anything. But the reality is that Wire have been selecting him. They did not have to. Any player at any time can be dropped if his face does not fit. Such players still get paid. But Gelling was still selected. Does that not speak volumes? I seem to remember the Geoffrey Boycott affair, when he was in court. I think that was in South Africa (I'm not sure if the law got justice for anyone with that). He got some bad publicity but the BBC/SKY (?) in the end still employed him. That's Sir Geoffrey if you please Rupert and it was France where they stitched him up. Can't trust them foreigners lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacksy Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 Hope he aint coming to us. Rugby Union the only game in the world were the spectators handle the ball more than the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poower Lad Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 On 27/11/2020 at 12:49, Jim Prendle said: Spot on. On another note what’s the view of him as a player . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poower Lad Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 On 27/11/2020 at 12:49, Jim Prendle said: Spot on. On another note what’s the view of him as a player . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poower Lad Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 On 27/11/2020 at 12:49, Jim Prendle said: Spot on. On another note what’s the view of him as a player . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxford Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 On 27/11/2020 at 10:12, Spidey said: Innocent until proved guilty? Those were the days, eh? 2 warning points Non-Political Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Toppy Posted November 30, 2020 Share Posted November 30, 2020 On 27/11/2020 at 16:54, FearTheVee said: My employer is considered a leader for welfare, wellbeing and employee support matters - internally and externally. There is not a snowball's chance in hell that they would be present in court with me if I was charged with grevious bodily harm against my wife. They would certainly offer me support, but they would never be in Court. I find it really odd that you expect that any supportive employer would be. It was a plea hearing, and he pleaded Not Guilty ! St.Helens - The Home of record breaking Rugby Champions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Frightful Posted November 30, 2020 Author Share Posted November 30, 2020 https://www.totalrl.com/gelling-leaves-warrington/ Hull FC....The Sons of God... (Well, we are about to be crucified on Good Friday) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.