Would you want Shane Flanagan as coach of your club?

If the Eels weren't so wedded to that perennial excuse generator Arthur they'd snap Flanagan up. Whatever his failings, and there are plenty, nobody could suggest that he is not a good coach. He achieved what no one had managed before at Cronulla. When you consider those that had tried to win anything there prior to him and failed, it's a pretty impressive list. Gibson, Stuart, Provan, Beetson and Lang, all there and no result. His uncompromising approach may be just what they need

I'll stick with Craig Bellamy thanks :thumbup:

I would never quote a paper of any kind, unless it’s backed up, as it’s heresy otherwise. The quoting (which I reference in the comment/s) isn’t the story itself, it is publishing of Supreme Court rulings/findings that is in that article. Regarding the defamation suit related to the subject. If my quote was just a copy and paste of the findings, I would have been asked to provide proof. Hence the link provided was only to highlight court findings that have been published in the media (to my knowledge you aren’t allowed to falsify court findings in print). It was also to ensure anyone reading the discussion wouldn’t think those are my direct words. Given the whole nature of the discussion between souvalis and myself was regarding the questioning what “evidence” was out there. I was just providing information, which is freely and easily accessible. For the record I don’t want to be right about any of this, as I wish the whole 2011 saga never happened. If only 1 person was affected by this situation then that’s way too many, there seems to be more than 1 though. I do however feel that if there was ever a side to be on, it’s got to be the side saying it’s NOT ok to treat humans under your care as pin cushions. I’ll happily defend why I think someone who hasn’t taken responsibility for that, shouldn’t be allowed to oversee the care of 36 players in future. We wouldn’t let a bank robber suddenly become the security of a bank!

O.S. You do not add authority to your comments by quoting any article from the Daily Terror. In fact quite the opposite.

He was supposed to be permanently de-registered for breaking his suspension . So to actually pay for his mistakes, he’d have to ‘Not’ be able to coach at any level again. That’s paying for his mistakes. I wonder how much Bronson Xerri was influenced by Flanagan’s time at Cronulla ? If it’s alright for those players then, it’s alright for me! To me it also places a huge question mark over any new star players that come out of Cronulla. Is their outstanding strength & speed just due to natural ability & training? As Cronulla have recently said that should be be challenging for premierships every year. Makes you wonder what lengths that they’d go to , to achieve just that? The answer to that question... Any length , including taking Flanagan back on to coach first grade & anything else that’s required. As recent history has shown us all.

He's won a premiership in the modern game which isn't an easy thing to achieve. There are only a handful of good coaches in the NRL so you would be mad not to consider employing him.

I personally do not like it when Flannigan is on Fox, cannot figure out why they thought it was a good idea. But it's their money so their choice. I don't think anyone should be banned for life for anything, people need to be given the opportunity to change and improve. But I do think the penalty applied to the sharks was insufficient, especially when compared to Essendon. For me should have been a year, standard WADA 2 years, with 50% off for co-operating. The whole backdating thing smelt like money talking to me. As for Flannigan individually, it didn't sit right for me that he copped a lighter penalty than Sandor Earl (he got 4 years - I was happy for him when Melbourne gave him a shot). I get that it comes down to evidence etc (and so it should - we cannot penalise people on "feelings/hunches"). But for me what Flannigan was accused of (overseeing an WADA-banned supplements program) was was on par with - or slightly worse than - what Sandor did (supplying WADA-banned supplements). If the doggies picked him up, I wouldn't like it. But I wouldn't be changing clubs or any other such melodrama. Cannot change a lifetime allegiance based on them employing someone I am not fond of for a bit, there's been the odd player I wasn't fond of over the years.

I wouldn’t want him at the club as his reputation has been well and truly tarnished. However just how fairly it was tarnished is another matter. Every 2nd comment is that he was complicit in both doping and salary cap breach. Looking at the doping, there are several arguments about what actually happened and who knew. This includes the argument that he was initially unaware of any wrong doings and immediately shut down the program when he was made aware. If this is the true version of events he has actually done the right thing. The reality is none of us know the truth of his involvement. I think if there was any evidence of it, there would be no way the NRL would consider reinstating him. Likewise we don’t know if he had any involvement in the salary cap breaches. It seems we are willing to accept that Folkes, Bellamey and Arthur were ignorant of their clubs breaches but not so Flannagan. This stance does not really make sense to me. The only thing we know Flannagan to be guilty of is corresponding with the Sharks when his ban stated he was not to. Not good but not really the worst crime. Despite this, I still would not like him at the Tigers. Rightly or wrongly there is too much stink around him and I think his inclusion would not be a good look for any club.

I dont see how they can be stripped of their title. Everything i've read says they we're compliant in 2016. Now i fully appreciate that being over the cap in 2015 and 2017 but compliant in 2016 is very questionable to say the least but if they were compliant in 2016 what can be done? Additionally, it is reported that Sharks infringements from as far back as 2013 totaled about 750K. It is difficult to find any conclusive information on just how much they were in breach of and when, particularly as any numbers found relies on the questionable accuracy of the various publications reporting them. But, it is reported that the bulk of these breaches were done in 2017 and 2018 as they tried to keep their premiership side together. So whilst i'm not actually trying to defend the Sharks, I ask, why are we comparing the non-stripping of their title for a season they were reportedly not in breach of their cap, when the majority of their total 750K breaches came after the title, to The Storm's titles being stripped, who's cap breaches totaled about 3.75million (only 3 mil more than the Sharks), including being over the cap in the stripped premiership years.

I would much prefer him as coach compared to the recruitment debacle at the dragons..none of them are suited to the six again rule. Got rid of dufty and replacing him with garden gnomes. Doust had his knockers but this management group have no football noise

Flanno seems to be a favourite with Fox now (no surprise). Phil Rothfield even went in to bat for his son on 360 I believe. I am no fan at Trent Barret at this point in time, just hoping Gus will help, but any Bulldogs fan who has gone through the torture of watching their team this year, knows that Kyle was given many chances with no improvement shown.

If you understand football departments then you would know only one of 2 people can have enough trust from the players to convince them to do this. The big boss or the head of S&C, who the big boss employed. Which makes responsibility stop with the head of the football department. You and I can argue over knowledge all you like but to me that was his program that went askew. He either directed it to or let get there…… so responsibility stops at the person in charge.

Every premiership since Manly and the Roosters started buying them in the 70's has questions of legitimacy around them. The Sharks Premiership is as legitimate as any of them as far as I'm concerned. You don't win them unless you play the game the way the big boys play it. Simple as that. Cronulla played it straight for 50 years and got lots of runners up and thirds and fourths and then we won a Premiership.

Actually who did or knew what is the essence of this case.. and why we have Dank banned for life. Your whole premise is based around Flanagan knowingly leading the injection program. Step back and comprehend that it's unfounded. Please refrain from suggesting that I'm supporting the program, that's ridiculous. The Mannah family, by the way, are on record as being ropeable about that media story emphatically denying Jon ever injected.

A few questions I always ask about the peptides , legal or not . 1) If its all so innocent , why is it all so secret? You never hear clubs or players talking about it. Its always , sand dunes and military camps in pre season , never injecting a drug that our medical team say will enhance our strength , fittness and injury recovery. 2) If its all so innocent , why dont we have any peptide sponsers? Why dont we see The RU45ZYDX34 Peptide Penrith Panthers playing The TPX567ZQ Peptide Brisbane Broncos in The 678SHTZQX1 Peptide Premiership. 3) If its all so innocent , At what age do clubs start their teens on the program? At what age does The NRL set ? Is Suali allowed to inject or does he need mums approval ? How does that conversation go? If lil Johhny wants to play A grade he will have to partake in our performance enhancing drug program where he will get daily , weekly pills with monthly booster injections in his stomach. Its so cutting edge We dont really know whats in it or even what its called or the side affects but just sign here. 4) Where are they getting this gear , here , a Canadian website or imported in coffee tins? To say the coaches or players dont know is just bollocks . To say the NRL are turning a blind eye is spot on. The media is full of ex players but its never mentioned . Its the NRLs dirty little secret and thats why Flanno gets to coach again.

NO. lets see – oversees drug use & then ignores the conditions of his suspension. why do we / NRL continue to allow people who are de-registered to come back into the sport. They had their chance of earning bl00dy good coin in the NRL and blew it. Since when is working in RL their only choice of employment hence the argument of giving them a second, third, fifth chance? He can get a job, just not with the NRL.

I would never intentionally quote the telegraph or hooper for that matter. What I was attempting to quote was the Supreme Court Jury findings into the defamation case involving Dank in relation to Mannah. Findings printed in same paper being sued for the defamation, so pretty sure you can’t do that if you’re in the wrong given the sad events being accused. Sorry had to post the link and did so only to reference the source. If it was backed as a Supreme Court ruling then that’s the only way I would have referenced it. As they aren’t my words. Also drew attention to the fact 3 players settled out of court, perception would say due to harm caused to career and /or health. That’s part of an ABC timeline of events, again just referencing a source. Maybe someone can ask Isaac Gordon, Josh Cordoba or Broderick Wright if they felt he cared about them? The NDA would stop them answering but I bet they didn’t sue for nothing. For the record, I hate Mannah’s passing. If a court of law found even a small part of that story true then that’s a very sad situation for that club to have put themselves in. Doesn’t matter who did what or knew what, they were all under their care. If it’s only the 11 as you say and we know with some assurances 4 of them had health or career demise because of it and you want to defend that…… Then that’s not part of discussion I wish to continue. I wouldn’t accept 1 out of the 40 players and staff under my care, being adversely effected from my or a clubs decision.

Your citing of the Telegraph and gutter journalist James Hooper with a disgraceful, irresponsible 'maybe' story on Jon Mannah , well you're in Pitts Street. He doesn't care about his players ? Come on.. 17 may have got breach notices but only half of them serious enough to be offered a reduced sentence.. they had nothing on them and accepted to end it. He may be guilty, if there was any solid credible evidence he would've got dealt with harsher, inevitably people can think what they want to think.

he hasn't been allowed to coach that is why, and has yet been given approval to return

Isn't a pretty crime....