Ulster squad additions

First topic message reminder :

You did not imagine that - it was said. A few weeks ago too.

Rava wrote:Is this a potential get out clause Geoff. A save face situation if McLaughlin does the business at the weekend.

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:He has said he knows who sent it not that he knows someone who he thinks sent it - an important distinction.

My point is that if he says that he knows 'X' did it, then unless he has evidential proof then that individual will absolutely sue Anscombe for defamation unless he has solid proof. Even if Anscombe proves his case on the balance of probabilities then it could be a long process for him.

Lam could sue Anscombe and there will Anscombe be.

As clive said if the "friend' concerned has any decency they will come clean and get him off the hook.

If Anscombe has any balls he will go to Lam in person and apologise

Geoff do you have an links to any of this? Is it in the media or is this all on the QT?

Rodders my man, absolutely fine with me. I wouldn't be a true Ulsterman if I wasn't arguing with someone!

Just google it Rodders!

Heres video of pat lam having a go at media turning up at his house.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/rugby/super-rugby/6939828/Pat-Lam-slams-media-late-night-door-knock

Gareth was at training anyway. That must be awkward!

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:Rodders my man, absolutely fine with me. I wouldn't be a true Ulsterman if I wasn't arguing with someone!

On that note, is everyone still ok with me? Any bridges burnt? Or just singed?

http://www.3news.co.nz/Racist-text-to-Pat-Lam-confirmed/tabid/415/articleID/254662/Default.aspx

http://tvnz.co.nz/rugby-news/pat-lam-receives-race-hate-text-message-4891899

Been told that the substance of these articles are true

geoff998rugby wrote:

Hookisms and Hyperbole wrote:

geoff998rugby wrote:He has said he knows who sent it not that he knows someone who he thinks sent it - an important distinction.

My point is that if he says that he knows 'X' did it, then unless he has evidential proof then that individual will absolutely sue Anscombe for defamation unless he has solid proof. Even if Anscombe proves his case on the balance of probabilities then it could be a long process for him.

Lam could sue Anscombe and there will Anscombe be.

As clive said if the "friend' concerned has any decency they will come clean and get him off the hook.

If Anscombe has any balls he will go to Lam in person and apologise

Indeed Geoff, I didn't think of it on those lines. I'm not an expert, but could Lam sue Anscombe? On what grounds would it be? He certainly could complain to the police who could launch criminal proceedings, but I'm not sure if Lam personally has a course of action. Maybe there's a solicitor amongst us who could answer that.

I totally agree, I am deeply disappointed that he hasn't at least rang Lam. If I was in this position I would be personally affronted that someone thought I would make such a comment and I would at least ring him and explain and apologise for it, and add that if Lam wanted to take it further that I would help him in every conceivable fashion.

Hook

Hook for all we know hes trying to get whoever is responsible to go public first, would you want to apologise while only being able to put forward half the story?

My understanding is it is like being owner of a car.

If you get caught on camera speeding - saying you weren't driving isn't a defence. You either name the driver or take the wrap.

I believe it is the same here he would either have to name the individual or take the consequences.

marty2086 wrote:Hook for all we know hes trying to get whoever is responsible to go public first, would you want to apologise while only being able to put forward half the story?

Then he should go to Lam apologise and explain the situation in full - he owes Lam that

geoff998rugby wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Hook for all we know hes trying to get whoever is responsible to go public first, would you want to apologise while only being able to put forward half the story?

Then he should go to Lam apologise and explain the situation in full - he owes Lam that

geoff we don't know the full story if he goes and points the finger and those responsible deny it then he looks like a liar and racist for all we know he is but then again he could be an innocent victim being screwed over

I don't think so Geoff. Too many hypotheticals.

We don't know if it is even an adult that sent the text. Anscombe has said he dealt with it but then againni do agree a more formal apology is required and Humphreys/Logan are right to be looking at it closely. That being said I can't see anscombe having worked with so many people of Polynesian or Maori descent would be prone to these views and he shouldn't be punished for someone else's actions.

Doesn't he have a younger kid. Sounds like a massively immature thing to do so I wouldn't rule anything out.

Geoff, it's hard to judge what he should and shouldn't do through the lens of the media on the other side of the world.

I'm sure all parties want this in the media as little as possible after all, including any kind of resolution to the situation.

I think we could get the moral and legal implications here mixed up in what he is required to do and what he should do. I'm with you Geoff 100%. Marty also makes a good point and this story has just broken, and maybe this time next week we will know the full story and thing will be put to bed. Whether you agree with the decision to dump McLaughlin or not, the pressure on Anscombe is massive and he hasn't even set foot here yet. This certainly doesn't help him.

Hmm.. that text is pretty bad. This whole situation is very unprofessional.

Ok lets say hit is a 15 year old there is nothing stopping him going to Lam and explaining the situation in full. I did not say he should name the individual to Lam I did say he should explain the situation to Lam.

The alternative could be Lam takes it further. Better to take the bull by the horns and explain to Lam the circumstances.

Standulstermen wrote:I don't think so Geoff. Too many hypotheticals.

We don't know if it is even an adult that sent the text. Anscombe has said he dealt with it but then againni do agree a more formal apology is required and Humphreys/Logan are right to be looking at it closely. That being said I can't see anscombe having worked with so many people of Polynesian or Maori descent would be prone to these views and he shouldn't be punished for someone else's actions.

Doesn't he have a younger kid. Sounds like a massively immature thing to do so I wouldn't rule anything out.

He mentioned there were a few guys round for beers Stand. So i assume he was saying it was one of these guys. Unless there was underage drinking???

Is this a public crime? As in is it a crime just to have said it? Or is it seen as a crime towards Pat Lam. In which case would he need to 'press charges'. Is it possible that it would still go to courts or something even if all parties came together amicably?

Also, how is it in the public domain? Did Pat Lam take it to the media?? And was this before or after ANscombe text him to explain?

geoff998rugby wrote:Ok lets say hit is a 15 year old there is nothing stopping him going to Lam and explaining the situation in full. I did not say he should name the individual to Lam I did say he should explain the situation to Lam.

The alternative could be Lam takes it further. Better to take the bull by the horns and explain to Lam the circumstances.

Beyond Anscombes initial admission that he text Lam immediately theres been no further comment so he could well have and it could all be put to bed. The point I was trying to make was that if Anscombes innocent he might be going to Lam saying it wasn't me someone else did it cant say who which doesnt look good nor does saying x did it then x saying they didnt. Better hes able to give a full account which he might not be able to do at the minute

geoff998rugby wrote:Ok lets say hit is a 15 year old there is nothing stopping him going to Lam and explaining the situation in full. I did not say he should name the individual to Lam I did say he should explain the situation to Lam.

The alternative could be Lam takes it further. Better to take the bull by the horns and explain to Lam the circumstances.

Hypothetically speaking, this could easily have happened though. We don't know whats happened, just the parts of the story that made it into the media. It's embarrassing for Anscombe but let's not turn it into a witchhunt. And let's not say we all have a right to know about the ins and outs of the situation. The people involved have a right to know, and Ulster do as his future employer. I agree he needs to provide an adequate explanation to Pat Lam, his son and Ulster over how this unacceptable text was sent from is phone but he owes the media nothing.

Right now, it just sounds like a drunken prank gone horribly wrong to be honest.

Actually, as supporters and followers of Ulster rugby, I would say we do have a right to know. That text is pretty bad.

I am not defending Anscombe as I agree he needs to do the honourable thing, but the report in the Irish Times plays a bit fast and loose with the timeline of events regarding Lam. From what I understand, Lam and the players have been heaped with abuse all season and it has taken a toll on Lam. This is just one more nasty incident in a long running pattern of abuse.

It is a popular misconception that drinking by children is illegal in a private house.

The UK is the only country in the world that has an age based law regarding drinking at home and that age limit is 5 years old.

I think it became public because Lam broke down during a press interview about the pressures he was under and a couple of incidence had made it worse of which this was one. I think the other was reporters banging on his door at 3am in the morning.

geoff998rugby wrote:http://www.3news.co.nz/Racist-text-to-Pat-Lam-confirmed/tabid/415/articleID/254662/Default.aspx

http://tvnz.co.nz/rugby-news/pat-lam-receives-race-hate-text-message-4891899

Been told that the substance of these articles are true

fiec thats all we need a few days before the Heino final!

On the face of it my view would be that if Anscombe can't clear his name then his contract must be in serious doubt.

Maybe he is innocent but this isn't the kind of thing Ulster want to have any association with. The press will have a field day here with this one.

At the very least Anscombe has been extremely naive to leave his phone with some pretty nasty and immature people, who he had in his home and at worst he's a liar and rascist himself.

Flip what a mess!

Rory_Gallagher wrote:Actually, as supporters and followers of Ulster rugby, I would say we do have a right to know. That text is pretty bad.

I'd say there's going to have to be some damage limitation PR put in place now the cat is out of the bag, but this issue is between Lam, Anscombe and the mysterious drunken third-party prankster.

I guess you could argue Anscombe is a rolemodel because of his job and needs to clear his name. Thats probably true. But so long as he does the right thing by Pat Lam, and clears up any misunderstanding I'm not concerned. It's not us he owes an apology to. Its Pat Lam. And, of course, this is giving him the benefit of the doubt re. the texts origin.

I imagine he will want to clear his name in any event. It's not exactly going to be good for his career.

“I don’t think they realised . I think they thought it was sending to someone else. They were quite embarrassed over what they had done and where it went,” added Anscombe.

I find this unsettling...is he saying that it would have been OK if it hadn't been sent to Lam?

If his 'friend' new that his new job contract was in danger, surely he would come to the public?

humphstheman wrote:“I don’t think they realised . I think they thought it was sending to someone else. They were quite embarrassed over what they had done and where it went,” added Anscombe.

I find this unsettling...is he saying that it would have been OK if it hadn't been sent to Lam?

I agree! I thought the same when I read this.

Don't you think you're all getting a bit carried away?

It's not nice at all what happened. It's not acceptable on any level. But there's not any evidence linking it back to Anscombe. I would not be surprised if he doesn't know what to do. He's a coach, not a PR man.

We certainly shouldn't jump to conclusions out of hand. Wait and see how the story unfolds.

What is so depressing is it follows on from the McCullough, Brew and Brennan incidents and sometimes mud sticks.

Now I happened to be close to both of the last of those 3 incidents and know that both Brew and Brennan were talking rubbish but others will not be so aware. McCullough gave a logical response, and the only racists comments I heard at that particular match, were from the opposition supporters, but it all adds up and is not good for the club.

Notch wrote:Don't you think you're all getting a bit carried away?

It's not nice at all what happened. It's not acceptable on any level. But there's not any evidence linking it back to Anscombe.

It was his phone!!

This reminds me of the time I called my boss a g*mp on MSN messenger and then sent it to him by mistake! .... man that was a tough one to get out off.....

I think we are all talking ourselves into disagreeing. A common sense approach and making sure that anscombe explains and apolgises to lam is all that is required.

At the same time we can't go into a witch hunt and essentially tar anscombe with a label he doesn't deserve. My friends have done some stupid things in the past. Doesn't mean I should be held accountable for them (and vice versa)

rodders wrote:

Notch wrote:Don't you think you're all getting a bit carried away?

It's not nice at all what happened. It's not acceptable on any level. But there's not any evidence linking it back to Anscombe.

It was his phone!!

This reminds me of the time I called my boss a g*mp on MSN messenger and then sent it to him by mistake! .... man that was a tough one to get out off.....

You didn't really, did you?

Is he still your boss?

I want to wait before I decide about this incident until,

(1) We have all the info available (if that happens)

and,

(2) Till AFTER SATURDAY!!!!!!!!!

Yes I did Mrs P ..... and no I'm not with that company now.... athough I did stay for a couple of years after the "g*mpgate" incident.......

Massively unpleasant.

And the explanation's all a bit "a bad boy done it and run away" for me - I share others' misgivings about the "but it wasn't meant to go to Lam" part of the explanation.

Pretty sour taste in the mouth.

Don't think speculation is healthy on this. Innocent until proven guilty etc.

The Great Aukster wrote:Don't think speculation is healthy on this. Innocent until proven guilty etc.

This, I hope a good explanation will be provided in the coming days. I'm just holding my judgement.

Someone reporting on UAFC that our new back-rower may be a South Sea Islander. (Please tell me that's an acceptable term...)

Geoff, heard anything?

My contact with my contacts hasn't been great in the last couple of weeks. So the answer is no over above a conviction its NOC for 10 and a NIE backrower I have heard nothing more - sorry.

Will see a few people tomorrow; if I hear anything, and after the celebrations can remember what was said to me, I'll report back.

The remembering bit could be the tricky bit

More evidence of Ulster inroads being made into Cavan and Monaghan

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18111089

Yea they just did a piece on it on Good Morning Ulster!

Geoff, any news on what hotel the lads are staying at?

Unfortunately no,t as I say I did not meet up with anyone yesterday - sorry

I will keep trying to find out

Don Alfonso wrote:Someone reporting on UAFC that our new back-rower may be a South Sea Islander. (Please tell me that's an acceptable term...)

Geoff, heard anything?

Whats a south sea islander anyway? is that Fiji and Samoa and Tonga?

These players could be scattered in leagues far and wide. Pretty much impossible to guess any names!

Pacific Islanders is the right term I think Don

Maybe theres a few more Tuilagi brothers knocking about. As long as we dont get the one that wears a dress!

Any chance of signing the big Georgian bloke from Montpellier, Gorgonzilla?..... .....

This guy been release by Sale

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asaeli_Boko

Clive you're in Portrush right? I think Ryanair put on a second plane from City of Derry to Standsted tomorrow morning and I think the flights were reasonably cheap. Might save you that Ferry journey?

Really? Ah well, think the ferry might be an epic memory to look back on! I'll have a look anyway though.

Also I heard Ryanair were closing their website down for maintainance at some point today! Anyone needed to print boarding passes should do it now!