Shane Webcke orders tell-all rugby league book pulped

[Coxy]

Hmm yeah I forgot he hadn't been there. So either someone's gotten in his ear and said his return won't be a welcome one, or he's assuming that the reaction will be negative without really giving it a chance to be otherwise.

And given he originally wanted to pulp the book because of that reason (or so he says)...maybe we're giving Webbie too much credit? Maybe HE's the one that's being a sook and wanting to avoid unpleasantness?

 

[ronnyd]

Hmm yeah I forgot he hadn't been there. So either someone's gotten in his ear and said his return won't be a welcome one, or he's assuming that the reaction will be negative without really giving it a chance to be otherwise.

And given he originally wanted to pulp the book because of that reason (or so he says)...maybe we're giving Webbie too much credit? Maybe HE's the one that's being a sook and wanting to avoid unpleasantness?

Now all we need is some of webbie's 'unnamed friends' to confirm it and we've got ourselves a concrete theory!!

 

[Flutterby]

Yep, they're a bunch of prima donna sooks that can't be told how it is.

If that's the case, and K in particular has had a cry about the book, seriously, sign his release now.

Yeah if K suddenly re-signs in the next week or 2, I'll choose to believe he gave the club some kind of ultimatum.

This sucks - Webbie is what the club needs this season with such a raw forward pack and Henjak in his first year in the top job. That statement makes out that Webbie is the one who did something wrong. He is one person who can hold his head high in the midst of all this.

 

[Kaz]

I am now wondering why Gee Gee quit.

I can think of so many conspiracy theories. [icon_evillaugh

 

[Flutterby]

It doesn't surprise me he has quit, the players wouldn't have wanted to work with him, as I think they would think it was a betrayal.

Sam is the only player involved that would have had to work with him (being a forwards coach) and I think he has really taken steps to re-build his image etc after the incident, I don't think he would have had a sook.

 

[Russo]

Shane is a man of high morals as we all know and I would say he himself has felt he won't be able to face some of the players after the book release. all he did was write what 85% of us thought and for that he shouldn't be regretful and the players and coaching staff should have HTFU and got back to playing football.

Must say I am not surprised Webcke took this out but am disappointed. No doubt we will have a world exclusive on Channel 7 over the next few days.

 

[ronnyd]

It doesn't surprise me he has quit, the players wouldn't have wanted to work with him, as I think they would think it was a betrayal.

Sam is the only player involved that would have had to work with him (being a forwards coach) and I think he has really taken steps to re-build his image etc after the incident, I don't think he would have had a sook.

So your leveling the blame solely at K??

 

[Coxy]

It doesn't surprise me he has quit, the players wouldn't have wanted to work with him, as I think they would think it was a betrayal.

Sam is the only player involved that would have had to work with him (being a forwards coach) and I think he has really taken steps to re-build his image etc after the incident, I don't think he would have had a sook.

So your leveling the blame solely at K??

If we're to believe half the crap being attributed to him lately ("He wants a life and he's over the NRL" etc), then that'd be a fair assumption.

 

[Kaz]

No doubt we will have a world exclusive on Channel 7 over the next few days.

We all know that Danny Weilder will have unnamed sources saying what really happened & it will be on Channel 9 tonight.

 

[Flutterby]

It doesn't surprise me he has quit, the players wouldn't have wanted to work with him, as I think they would think it was a betrayal.

Sam is the only player involved that would have had to work with him (being a forwards coach) and I think he has really taken steps to re-build his image etc after the incident, I don't think he would have had a sook.

So your leveling the blame solely at K??

I'm not leveling blame at anyone at the moment. I was simply pointing out that saying the players wouldn't have wanted to work with him doesn't seem to be a reason as of the players involved Sam is the only one who would have to work with him and he doesn't seem to have an issue.

In my earlier post I was saying that if K suddenly does re-sign in the next week or 2, then yeah I probably will be very suspicious as to if he had anything to do with Webbie leaving.

 

[ronnyd]

It doesn't surprise me he has quit, the players wouldn't have wanted to work with him, as I think they would think it was a betrayal.

Sam is the only player involved that would have had to work with him (being a forwards coach) and I think he has really taken steps to re-build his image etc after the incident, I don't think he would have had a sook.

So your leveling the blame solely at K??

If we're to believe half the crap being attributed to him lately ("He wants a life and he's over the NRL" etc), then that'd be a fair assumption.

Why cos he hasn't signed a contract? One story is saying that he is only not signing as he doesn't want to push Lockyer out, another is saying that he is over the nrl. Its all hearsay, its just as likely that Thaiday or webcke is the one sooking (probably moreso seeing as they are the two who will be in direct contact).

 

[Kaz]

Webcke did mention the Locker incident as well.

Just because Webcke was only coaching the forwards doesn't mean it's just them that's annoyed with him.

 

[Dexter]

Wouldn't it have been better for Webkce to have aired all his feelings face to face with the club and players and left it at that. Criticism is always harder to hear when it comes from someone close via a third person or in this case a tell all book. It comes across like back stabbing.

I'm not saying Webcke is wrong but he should have been more aware of the implications to the club.

 

[Kaz]

There in no money involved if he spoke to them face to face about how he felt about it.

 

[Flutterby]

I'll think you find Webbie did air his opinions and feelings face to face with Bruno and wanted to speak with the players directly but was prevented from doing so given the club's "We're not going to talk about this at all" attitude at the time. He was also very vocal publicly with his views at the time. Which is all why I don't understand everyone being so upset about the book - he didn't write anything in the book that he hadn't said publicly plenty of times before - they all knew his feelings and opinions on the issue BEFORE the book came out, so just stop sooking and get on with it.

 

[Coxy]

It doesn't surprise me he has quit, the players wouldn't have wanted to work with him, as I think they would think it was a betrayal.

Sam is the only player involved that would have had to work with him (being a forwards coach) and I think he has really taken steps to re-build his image etc after the incident, I don't think he would have had a sook.

So your leveling the blame solely at K??

If we're to believe half the crap being attributed to him lately ("He wants a life and he's over the NRL" etc), then that'd be a fair assumption.

Why cos he hasn't signed a contract? One story is saying that he is only not signing as he doesn't want to push Lockyer out, another is saying that he is over the nrl. Its all hearsay, its just as likely that Thaiday or webcke is the one sooking (probably moreso seeing as they are the two who will be in direct contact).

It's the hearsay I'm talking about, and I clearly said that "If we're to believe half the crap being attributed to him lately". He's also "alleged" to have said he's sick of being under the microscope in Brisbane since Alhambragate.

If all of that is true (and note I said IF), then it would make sense he'd be upset by Webcke's book and bringing it all back and making him a target of the media again.

And +1 what Flutterby said.

 

[Dexter]

I'll think you find Webbie did air his opinions and feelings face to face with Bruno and wanted to speak with the players directly but was prevented from doing so given the club's "We're not going to talk about this at all" attitude at the time. He was also very vocal publicly with his views at the time. Which is all why I don't understand everyone being so upset about the book - he didn't write anything in the book that he hadn't said publicly plenty of times before - they all knew his feelings and opinions on the issue BEFORE the book came out, so just stop sooking and get on with it.

Maybe Webcke should have just got on with it. If he has made all these opinions public b4 then why dredge it up.

Since when does he need the clubs approval to talk face to face with the players?

So to what end has this been constructive in any way for the 2009 Broncos?

Its looking more and more like he is looking after his back pocket and he has plenty already.

 

[Coxy]

Since when does he need the clubs approval to talk face to face with the players?

Because last year he wasn't part of the coaching staff. He felt given the circumstances it'd be best to go through proper channels.

So to what end has this been constructive in any way for the 2009 Broncos?

It hasn't, and that's (judging by his statement) a big reason why he's quit. Although, forwards coach quitting after round 4 is hardly constructive either.