The Bulldogs have sought legal advice over website allegations made about the betting scandal that is currently the talk of the NRL, on Crickey.com

Over the past week or so i have witnessed plenty of people name the supposed 6 high profile players that involved in the current blight on the game (thankfully the online moderators were quick to step in). 

I think we should all remember that although it may seem harmless at the time to write someone's name on this forum and claim to have inside knowledge of them being involved match fixing and/or other things that interest them ,but be aware that until it is proven in a court of law, it can only be regarded as hear-say, and could result in a lawsuit against this great site, and against Phil as the owner/creator.

Be careful who you point fingers, they may seem like harmless rumours at the time, but could have dire consequences for persons and/or groups involved!

Bulldogs seek legal advice over website's bettig allegation slur

September 24, 2010

Canterbury-Bankstown Bulldogs will seek legal advice after a website posted an item alleging six of the club's players were involved in the NRL's match-fixing scandal and two of them faced the sack at the end of the season.

Police are currently investigating claims of irregular betting involving players and player managers, on a North Queensland Cowboys-Bulldogs match last month. 

An item in website Crikey.com's Tips and Rumours section claimed "six Bulldogs players and two managers are caught up in the NRL's betting scandal. Two players face the sack at the end of the season." 

Bulldogs chief executive Todd Greenberg was quick to dismiss the rumour and said he would consult the club's lawyers about having it removed. 

"We'll provide that information to the club's lawyers and we'll seek their advice," Greenberg said. 
"There's no substance to it. 

"The Bulldogs don't deal in innuendo or speculation. We only deal in fact and that story is not fact and until such time as the police investigation is concluded we won't be making any further comment." 

It has been a damaging week for the code as a text message in circulation names a player manager, two former players, a Bulldog and three Cowboys as allegedly being involved in the failed fix attempt. 

The Cowboys refused to comment about the inflammatory text message when contacted on Wednesday. 

Bookmakers suspended markets on the first scoring play option in the game - traditionally a novelty betting market - after an unusually large amount of money was placed on a Cowboys penalty goal in Townsville. 

Bulldogs forward Ryan Tandy lost possession and gave away a penalty in the opening minute of the game, but the Cowboys chose to take a quick tap resulting in a try to Anthony Watts. 

Tandy has vehemently denied any involvement in match-fixing. 

The NRL enlisted the help of NSW chief racing steward Ray Murrihy detected several unusual betting trends before the matter was referred to police. 

It has been reported that a player manager and a former player have been captured on CCTV security footage placing bets on a Cowboys penalty goal as the first scoring play at separate venues, although neither could face sanction from the league. 

The NRL has also been forced to deny rumours it is sitting on a report and is ready to take action against the culprits involved after the grand final. 

Greenberg, who said he had received the anonymous text message from a few different sources this week, said the latest rumour involving the club was further evidence that there needed to be a quick resolution to the matter. 

"I've heard a rumour a day for the last two weeks," he said.

Source Sydney Morning Herald:September 24th 2010


The last line......"I've heard a rumour a day for the last two weeks".......maybe Greenberg should come to this site and he can experience  10 rumours a day for the last 22 weeks!

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • Blame the NRL! They should release the information as it happens and than rumors will be avoided.
  • I am pretty sure in a defamation case it is only if you present the information as undisputed fact. If you make sure u include words like suspicion, alleged, rumours. then your fine.
    Also it is only if the creator of this site was to publish something in an official capacity and present the information as fact would phil be liable for defamation.
    If i write right now those player's names Phil isn't liable at all becuase he isnt held responsible for what people write on his site.

    Lets use facebook as an example: If I create a facebook page devoted to naming these player's names and presenting it as fact then i would be liable for defamation.
    However if I write on someone's facebook page whose purpose is to talk entirely about footy in general regarding naming names then nothing happens.
    Internet law is tricky and i understand why Phil and the mods wanna be safe. Just saying though its not as risky as you may think.
  • What if I were to say that David Gallop is a moron for dragging this out for so long. is that defamation? Or just an opinion?
    • an opinion.
      we have said so much shit about people on this site before.we should all be locked up!
      • I can see the difference :)
        • lol ah were u being sarcastic? sorry mate i am a bit slow today.
          • Not at all, just wanting to know the definition of defamation. It seems slagging someone off seems fine, but making false accusations is serious.
            • like i said only if your the creator.publisher. I legally i believe i am allowed to name as many players as i want. Defamation has mroe to do with the media. Journos cannot publish in a newspaper those names. But becuase websites are media too PHIL cannot publish an article naming names.
              But i am not within the media i can say whatevr the hell i want. ESPECIALLY i present it as hear-say. and only a rumour.
              Tho like i said i understand Phil's position and am only arguing it to play devil's advocate.
              • Yeah, it's easier to sue a website than an individual in this case.
              • But the website or phil cannot be sued for osmething i say even if i write a blog about it.
This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Longfin Eel replied to Roy tannous's discussion Ouch
"Russell has a few young players breathing down his neck. It really depends on injuries and form of these guys. A great opportunity for a young bloke to cement a first grade spot."
35 minutes ago
The Badger replied to Roy tannous's discussion Ouch
"In another blog, EA stated him/her/them is in India"
2 hours ago
Poppa replied to Poppa's discussion Two Old Men on A Jetty
"Thats actually Shorncliffe Christi, which is probably 3 klms north in a boat from Nudgee Beach.
I think I called it a grubby little spot in my blog and that sums it pretty well. The beauty of it is I can hop in the car and be there in 20 minutes, I…"
2 hours ago
Hell On Eels replied to Poppa's discussion Two Old Men on A Jetty
"Frankie, perhaps when you are all out fishing you might catch some of Poppa’s central message. He is a good person, and so are you.
It is not just Ahmed el Ahmed, the Brave, the devout Middle Eastern Muslim. Almost all Muslims, out of roughly 2.2…"
3 hours ago
More…