Feel good stories don't sell papers Bart.

TBH neither do stories about Rugby League good or bad. The only people bothered by this will be the RL community is general. The vast majority of people out there won't give this a second look, however it is still embarrassing and those involved should hang their heads in shame.

This story does at least shed some light on why Rule could have been complicit in a cover-up, when on the previous information it seemed virtually inexplicable.

However, when alledging that half the first team were taking the drug, some aspects of the story still seem confusing:

1. If the source of Gleeson's drugs was Bernard Long, via his son, does that mean that he was the source of the drugs anyone else was taking?

2. If others were taking the drug, did they also do it on the basis that Sean Long had told them it was OK, or had Cooper personally told all of them that it was OK?

3. If so, are half our first team squad as dim-witted as Long and Gleeson (proven dim-wits) in that not one of them had checked the drug out themselves? (when players these days have it hammered into them). The article mentions "international players" known to the Mail who took it. At Hull at the time, players who could be reasonably described as "international players" would consist of Briscoe, Yeamen, Horne, Fitzgibbon, O'Meley and Lauaki. Could any or some of them be so dim-witted?

4. Whatever the whole truth, Richard Agar deserves a share of the responsibility for recruiting Sean Long and Ben Cooper. And some people say his recruitment was his strong point!!

Bad stuff, snowballed from Ben Cooper and his lazy ways to this. No wonder the rfl wasn't going to take action

sounds like Cooper is to blame, with others at fault too obviously.
glad he, gleeson and long are all gone after reading that, tbh I always have thought there are bad eggs within the RFL.

Worth bearing in mind that:

1. This is Gleeson's side of the story and will therefore show him in the best possible light while throwing as much crap as possible at everyone else.

2. This is the Daily Mail, a paper not known for its high editorial standards or love of RL.

3. Pretty much everyone else involved gives a different view of events. I doubt we'll ever get the definitive version.

That said, there's likely enough truth in this story to at least shed some more light on the motivations of those involved. For one thing it explains why Rule thought a cover-up was worth attempting - he was trying to head off a wider investigation.

Someone else mentioned a 'root cause' analysis, and IMO the appointment of Cooper was the major factor. Gleeson was a dimwit for not doing his own checks, but Cooper was just plain incompetent. Everything else snowballed out from there with people making one bad decision after another. Most unedifying.

Bloody hell, what a mess.

So six or seven or seven or eight players where taking the substance and we went on to beat Warrington, Rovers and Salford, can you imagine how bad we'd of been without it, well we certainly would of got in the play offs?

Sounds like the club was in total disarray to me. An absolute shambles created by Hetherington, Rule, Agar, Cooper and Long. Shocking.

Surely Hetherington and Agar have to be questioned?

And if any fines are due she must pay them?

Actually it's the opposite, I think. It reads as though the supplement was already being taken when Gleeson arrived. Up to the derby we'd lost 7 from 10.

The RFL's side of the story will be in the League Express tomorrow. Will be interesting to see if it's entirely consistent.

As others have said a mess. Seems that the employment of Messrs Ben Cooper and to a slightly lesser extent Sean Long were probably two of the worst decisions made by the club in living memory. Rule has made a terrible misjudgement in this probably as a result of sheer panic but possibly being guided by someone else. I doubt we'll ever know the real truth.

Well, quite. Given most believed he couldn't go to the toilet without asking for her permission, it's inconceivable that she wasn't in on it, surely?

If the Rfls version of events were different to Gleesons wouldn't the rfl take him to court? There pretty big allegations.

The League Express didn't run Gleeson's story because he wanted paying.

You're quite right, but I suspect she's covered her tracks.

If found guilty her fine should be at least the profit she made from the sale of the club.

And the daily mail couldn't wait.