Jump to content

Anthony Gelling


Recommended Posts


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

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

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

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

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. 

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

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

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

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

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,

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

"The history of the world is the history of the triumph of the heartless over the mindless." — Sir Humphrey Appleby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just heard his departure has been confirmed tonight so I expect there will be more meat on the bones of this story by tomorrow.

 

Sky Sports Jenna Brooks to Jake Connor regarding England selection : "Shaun Wane has said that he's spoken to you about why you were left out, he's also said he's told you what you needed to do more of, I'm interested, what do you need to do more of and did you do it tonight?"

Jake Connor : "I don't know, to be honest I haven't spoken to him."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

On 27/11/2020 at 10:12, Spidey said:

Innocent until proved guilty?

Those were the days, eh?

2 warning points:kolobok_dirol:

#CorbynwasrightandFordesaidso!  Trusssomewhereovertherainbow v Keithcrisisstickingplaster a moral and ethical choice.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 Rugby Champions

Saints Men's team - Triple Champions & Double Winners ; Saints Women's team - Treble Winners ; Thatto Heath - National Conference Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Like 1

Sky Sports Jenna Brooks to Jake Connor regarding England selection : "Shaun Wane has said that he's spoken to you about why you were left out, he's also said he's told you what you needed to do more of, I'm interested, what do you need to do more of and did you do it tonight?"

Jake Connor : "I don't know, to be honest I haven't spoken to him."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...