--------------------------------------------------------------------
25th
June 2002
Manly Daily
26 Sydney Rd
MANLY NSW 2095
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing this in reply to a letter published in your newspaper on
Friday 14th of June written by Peter Peters and entitled “It's all
above board at Manly”.
Peter Peters has said a number of very unsavoury things about the North
Sydney Club in recent years including the notorious “Norths have no
tradition…Manly do”. I believe his letter continues this fine tradition
of spitefulness and bitterness.
Apart from taking personal swipes at Norths players and officials Peter
Peters maintains that Norths attacked Manly and that this led to the
Joint Venture collapsing.
If Norths were the attackers Manly were clearly the instigators. Manly
clearly went into the JV with a superior attitude appearing to believe
the following:
Norths are in Administration, we are not therefore we assert we are
superior.
We have won more premierships than Norths therefore again we assert we
are superior
Because we assert we are superior we demand more than a 50%
representation on the JV.
Norths were correctly following their fans mandate to demand a more
even representation in the JV. It was only when Manly aided strangely
enough by Geoff Bellew, refused to be moved that Norths had to step up
the argument.
Peter Peters‘ letter contains many passages which would make Bears fans
from all over angry. Here are a few examples followed by my reply;
“Bellew, the highly respected Sydney barrister and a North Sydney
appointment on the original joint venture board, refused to administer
along party lines”
If Geoff Bellew was the only thing holding the JV together then the JV
was clearly on shaky ground already. As Peter Peters implies Geoff Bell
was not supported by a majority of the JV board and stood in the way of
attempts by Norths to argue on a 50/50 relationship on the JV under the
clear mandate from their fans and a wider Rugby League public that
clearly agreed the JV was Manly dominated.
“Here was a club which had been highly successful on and off the field
and had met the criteria for inclusion in the NRL being harassed at
every turn by a club which was in effect dead in the water financially”
Norths too have “been highly successful on and off the field” in the
90s and may well have met the now illegal NRL criteria. But the NRL
wrongly judged Norths “insolvent” rather than in administration and
refused to consider Norths despite telling Norths members that a move
to the Central Coast would vitually secure a place in the competition.
Peter Peters calls it being harassed. Again Norths were simply doing
what the people wanted and arguing for a more even representation on
the JV. The dead in the water comment is irrelevant to the argument and
is typical of the superior attitude that Manly brought in to the JV.
“The cold hard facts are that Norths banked everything on Manly going
bust. It hasn't worked out the way they thought and they are like an
ageing Mike Tyson in his bout against Lennox Lewis last weekend
battered and humiliated to such an extent that no comeback is possible”
The Mike Tyson analogy is surely worthy of shakespeare but is totally
unrepresentative of the situation. “Cold hard facts”, “banked
everything”, why then do Norths still survive? Far from being “battered
and humiliated” Norths have aligned themselves with one of Australia’s
most successful businessmen and are now free of the Manly dominated JV
and free to argue a stand alone place in the NRL.
“When Manly wanted to discuss business plans and the future the Norths
representatives wanted to talk about a new name or a new jersey with
more black and red in it. The arrogance even spread to some of the
players who came from Norths to the joint venture.
They walked and talked like they had won a multitude of premierships.
For a mob that celebrated if they won the toss to run with the wind, I
found the attitude most strange”
I would have thought that a new name and jersey were related to the
business and the future. Again I repeat Norths had public support for
their argument. Regarding the comment about the players Peter Peters
does not actually say what they have done wrong but if we are to assume
that they were complaining about a jersey that was mainly maroon with
the Norths red and black under their armpits I think they had every
right to complain. The use of the word arrogance in the context of this
letter is ironic and laughable. In the last decade Norths had far more
to celebrate than the toss.
“And I will sleep well at night knowing that if the boot had been on
the other foot and Norths were in a position of strength none of us. .
. not even Steve Menzies... would have got a start.”
The suggestion that if Norths had the chance no one in Manly would get
a start is totally without merit. There is no such evidence that this
would be the case and it is purely hypothetical anyway. I wish to say
that I and many Norths supporters have a high regard for Steve Menzies
as a player and person (he is one of the good guys at Manly). If we are
talking about a position of strength I would suggest that the club has
shown a lot of internal strength to have survived to this point.
In closing I would like to say how disappointed I am that while there
are people at the Manly club who are sympathetic to a Central Coast
Bears Peter Peters and Ken Arthurson appear to be mounting a campaign
against a central coast team. The JV is now over and now it is time to
forget the bitterness and work together for what both sides want to see
the Bears V the Sea Eagles in the NRL again.
Sincerely,
Big-Steve
Member
North Sydney District Rugby League
Football Club
--------------------------------------------------------------------