Gleeson

Got a hot rumour from a source inside the club, or just something you heard down the pub? Then what are you waiting for, post it on The Rumour Mill.
Sutty
Posts: 2336
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:37 pm

Re: Gleeson

Post by Sutty »

Obviously I'm not going to go in to too much detail on here, but I heard a rumour about Gleeson owing a lot of money to people, also that a couple of transit vans full of heavies turned up at training to sort him out. Sounds a bit far fetched to me, but you never know


TonyH
Posts: 1024
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 11:22 am

Re: Gleeson

Post by TonyH »

Exiled Wiganer wrote:I suppose I am simply saying that I expect my club to weigh everything up rather than taking any moral high ground out of principle. The effect on the squad may in itself be sufficient justification for sacking him, and I have complete confidence in the judgement of MM and IL. Sports clubs need to tread carefully when it comes to morality. Is a drink problem worse than being a serial philanderer, a liar or a betting addict?
In Gleeson's case I would argue that the club has left itself exposed by not having sufficient cover in the centres (while we have too much in the 2nd row). It was predictable that Gleeson would self destruct at some point, and we have left ourselves without a senior like for like replacement. For that reason alone we should treat Gleeson less harshly than we would say O'Carroll were he in similar trouble.
It's way beyond drink mate let me just say that
Up The Mont!
weststand-rich
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sat Nov 18, 2006 12:35 am

Re: Gleeson

Post by weststand-rich »

Exiled Wiganer wrote:I may be in a minority here, but I would hesitate before sacking a player who scored 2 tries in the Grand Final, and for whom we have little cover. I would rather the club was pragmatic than principled. Many are looking forward to Hock coming back. He still knocks around with many of the same crew but has the potential to be a great player. If he had been as talented as David Allen the club would have turned its back on him.
Flip your thinking on it's head.

How bad would the cumulative effect of his misdemeanours have to actually be to get rid of him. As you say, he's scored 2 GF tries and we have little cover in that position. So how much hassle and sh*te must he have caused to make the club get shut?
No straw damn us
Posts: 2092
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 11:12 am

Re: Gleeson

Post by No straw damn us »

In any other industry you get a verbal warning, a written warning and then you're out. If it's major incident then out you go. This is no different, take away our club loyalties and get into the real world, Gleesons had his chance and has screwed up.
Kittwazzer
Posts: 11308
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 12:31 pm

Re: Gleeson

Post by Kittwazzer »

Second Row wrote:exactly the sentiments of people who do live near to him, I can assure you.
I am sure some of the events will eventually come into the public domain but not from me , I believe a lot of peoples best interest will be served by leaving this issue to the club and let them deal with the situation as they see fot
You obviously live,or have friends/family living off Gathurst Road. I live about a mile away.
MEN story revealed he is involved with some dangerous people. Now just suppose they were to turn up and hurt another player, just to make their point. How would all those people treading the moral high ground feel then?
The club has responsibilities to more than one person who has behaved like a total idiot!
GeoffN
Posts: 12559
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 1:40 pm

Re: Gleeson

Post by GeoffN »

No straw damn us wrote:In any other industry you get a verbal warning, a written warning and then you're out. If it's major incident then out you go. This is no different, take away our club loyalties and get into the real world, Gleesons had his chance and has screwed up.
Exactly right. Though I'd have said "chances", plural.
cpwigan
Posts: 31247
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:03 pm

Re: Gleeson

Post by cpwigan »

As others have said; Gleeson was not simply sacked for what happened on the Tuesday. He had previous disciplinary warnings for multiple disciplinary breaches. Tuesday was the final breach in a cumulative process.

N.B Both Madge and Waney like a drink. Both Madge and Waney follow exactly the same rules they ask the players to follow. They don't have to BUT THEY DO to set an example. Wigan have clear rules depending on when a match is, when training is as to when a player can and cannot consume alcohol. Wigan players get opportunities to drink alcohol if they so wish so it is not difficult IMO to stick to the rules laid down.
cpwigan
Posts: 31247
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:03 pm

Re: Gleeson

Post by cpwigan »

I honestly do not know what will happen with Gleeson. To my knowledge he was not the person who initially went to the police. IMO it may have made things worse hence why Gleeson withdrew any allegation. Glees has 2 dangerous habits and he has become embroiled with criminals at a level where people get seriously hurt or killed. Can he / will he play Rl again who know. I know he will spend the rest of his life looking over his shoulder and fearing for his & his families safety.

Gleeson's salary may be a barrier too. IIRC his contract was weighted so that initially he got paid relatively little on the basis that thereafter he got paid a lot more. So most clubs would struggle to fit him under a cap. It may give Wigan options though.
bayroller
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 9:25 am

Re: Gleeson

Post by bayroller »

I agree with HG and all the others who believe that Madge and Ian Leneghan are more than capable of dealing with the situation. Wigan were by far the fittest team at the start of last season and Gleeson had to be the fittest he has been for years. If it is the right thing to rehabiliate Gleeson, they will do it. If not they will let him go. I also agree that his Grand Final perfromance was worth MOM
thegimble
Posts: 5970
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 10:09 am

Re: Gleeson

Post by thegimble »

cpwigan wrote:I honestly do not know what will happen with Gleeson. To my knowledge he was not the person who initially went to the police. IMO it may have made things worse hence why Gleeson withdrew any allegation. Glees has 2 dangerous habits and he has become embroiled with criminals at a level where people get seriously hurt or killed. Can he / will he play Rl again who know. I know he will spend the rest of his life looking over his shoulder and fearing for his & his families safety.

Gleeson's salary may be a barrier too. IIRC his contract was weighted so that initially he got paid relatively little on the basis that thereafter he got paid a lot more. So most clubs would struggle to fit him under a cap. It may give Wigan options though.
If they have sacked Gleeson for any serious breach of disciplinary issues then he wont get paid anything past the date where his contract was terminated. Therefore he wont cost a penny on the cap for us after that date. His rumored turning up drunk and in no fit state to train after been given 2-3 warnings would be serious enough to terminate his contract. Wether anything more serious has happened only time will tell.
Post Reply