Ulster Rugby 2017-18

First topic message reminder :

I was thinkung similar McCloskey for me has been better than Arnold and Farrell and just isnt being picked. Hopefully a resurgent Ulster will make it all better

In fairness Farrell started with Marshall when Anscombe first came in. I recall us beating munster the day before tragedy struck and Nevin was lost and i think those two had started the first three games. i think injuries did for Farrell that season. The only way i can see the IRFU getting shot of Paddy and Stuart (based on whatsapps) is if Gilroy is gone too.

Bryn is not going to say a new player coming is squad cover but if everyone fit I cant see him starting.
He is a very useful addition and a good signing though.
Agree Cave is cover but experience is useful to have

As for Peel the word is his days may well be numbered - he has not impressed.
Suspect the new coach will decide his fate

Patterson was only ever signed because of the lack of centre cover.
We have a number of backs on the books for that reason alone - Busby, Owens, Cairns come to mind.
I suspect these guys will be offloaded as the likes of Curtis and Hume mature

Agree totally re the poor coaching at school level is a big inhibitor to player development.
We seem to have cracked that in the forwards with Willie Anderson - now need someone to do the same to the backs
The young forwards against Bedford were excellent - as good a forward display as I have seen at that level in years.
Sadly the backs were a dogs breakfast in terms of availability and Shanahan is an inadequate 9 and Nelson never a 10.
They killed our chances of winning

Standulstermen wrote: The only way i can see the IRFU getting shot of Paddy and Stuart (based on whatsapps) is if Gilroy is gone too.

It will be the IRFU imagine that will determining things not facts.
The irony is McIlroy and Gilroy were the ones with the worst postings but it will be Jackson and Olding who will take the wrap
Headline in the paper today the young lady will sue the players.
Then again it is the Irish Daily Mail and therefore by definition little more use for anything other than bog paper

geoff999rugby wrote:Headline in the paper today the young lady will sue the players.
Then again it is the Irish Daily Mail and therefore by definition little more use for anything other than bog paper

To do that I'm pretty sure she has to out herself as the same protections don't exist in a civil case that do in a criminal one. The defence also can bring in evidence that wasn't available before, not to mention it'll probably change the narrative for some from poor victim to gold digger

So, no longer can CG hide behind his initials even if it was blatantly obvious.

Papers have now named Gilroy as one of the Whatsappers.

If, the UR/IRFU disciplinary stuff based on contractual agreements is about conduct, and not the claims of r***, then surely Gilroy can no longer escape.

Unless the contract talks about alcohol levels or multiple partners?

I feel most say teh problem was their derogatory language in the texts. If this is true, and that's what UR/IRFU are expected to act upon, then they have to surely also now act against Craig Gilroy in a disciplinary manner.

Can UR/IRFU claim that Olding/Jackson brought the club into disrepute, but not acknowledge that Gilroy asking “Any sluts get f***ed?”, doesn't also?

It will not be about the text though.
They were private messages that had to be made public because of other events.
Gilroy did nothing during work or in the public domain to warrant any disciplinary action.
His words did not break the law in any way.
They may well be distasteful to most of us but that is not the point.
If any action is taken against him he could take them to the cleaners - and I have to say rightly so.
He has done nothing to warrant disciplinary action, if his contract says otherwise it would not stand up in court
Also remember Clive it was the young lady herself who first used the word 'slutty' in WhatsApp text not the players

Any action by the IRFU will be about the trial and the publicity surrounding it.
Look at Murray and Zebo, they behaved in a reprehensible manner but no court case, no publicity, no action.
It is about what makes the IRFU look bad not right/wrong, not illegal/legal

I spent a fair bit of time last week arguing that the boys couldn’t be discriminated against by their employers based on the trial as the verdict legally protects them.

The argument in return was that it was their other actions, whether that me the excessive alcohol, the multiple sexual relationship Rayners, the foul language, the derogatory words... that these things were in breach of some sort of morality clause, or have brought the club into disrepute.

My only claim is how has Gilroys text which is now public not similarly damning??

I’m pretty sure the club can’t take action based on the trial because the outcome protects them. Breach of contract is the ONLY grounds Ulster or IRFU will have unless they want sued.

geoff999rugby wrote:
Any action by the IRFU will be about the trial and the publicity surrounding it.
Look at Murray and Zebo, they behaved in a reprehensible manner but no court case, no publicity, no action.
It is about what makes the IRFU look bad not right/wrong, not illegal/legal

It's all irrelevant though, you can't hold individuals responsible for a circus that was created by someone else.

clivemcl wrote:I’m pretty sure the club can’t take action based on the trial because the outcome protects them. Breach of contract is the ONLY grounds Ulster or IRFU will have unless they want sued.

They can't based off the outcome of the trial but will be able to off the testimony provided. That's a matter of public record now.

I suspect they'll be picking through what Jackson said and comparing it to what he told Ulster/IRFU when this kicked off. I'm fairly sure he signed a contract extension while this was hanging over him. If he's lied to the IRFU on anything material then they may have a somewhat of a case for cancelling that. You have to remember that in court he said he hadn't had sex with the complainant. That's been called into question given what he himself implied in the WhatsApp messages, testimony from the key witness and testimony from his own friends. That's not a good look.

Olding might be different if the contract was signed pre-arrest.

The two lads behaviour was actually promiscuous - a long way from the family values of what the IRFU espouse to. Gilroy was only talk, he wasn't involved in a threesome. I think all players will be reprimanded though to be careful of what they say, but Gilroy's behavour isn't in an asses roar of the activities of PJ & Olding.

Neil Francis has a good article on it. https://www.independent.ie/sport/columnists/neil-francis-my-view-is-that-the-irfu-and-ulster-review-will-not-go-well-for-jackson-and-olding-36762703.html

I keep hearing so many talk about how unlikely the lads are to play for Ulster/Ireland. But the reasons people give for why they will be cut loose differ greatly.

Some say it’s a breach of contract like public conduct or a morality clause. Some say it’s bringing the sport into disrepute. Redman says it’s because to get a contract renewal Jackson probably lied about events. And here’s Sin saying the IRFU have grounds to scrap contracts based simply on having sex without being in a committed relationship.

What a steaming pile of horse sh*t.

So much nonsense flying around.

For me, they can’t be sacked based on allegations as they were cleared and would be sued.
That leaves breaching contract either by
- excessive drinking (how many players haven’t)
- promiscuous sex (I doubt contracts refer to this)
- derogatory/demeaning language towards women (Gilroy equally as bad as Jackson or Olding)

Or some general bringing sport into disrepute. But even then, they will surely have to explain the detail of just what it was that brought it into disrepute. Again, Gilroy surely cannot escape.

Agree with everything you've said there clive, lying during a contract negotiation is a given. Unless something is stated in a contract it's all just gaga as a contract is a contract and it takes a breach of it, to get it terminated.

Even a breach of the code of conduct would require some pretty serious breaches to get someone sacked. If Ulster have allowed others to breach it, without sacking them, then it's an up hill battle to do it now.

Not to mention Ulster were well aware of the facts of the case from early on and didn't suspend them.

clivemcl wrote:And here’s Sin saying the IRFU have grounds to scrap contracts based simply on having sex without being in a committed relationship..

I didn't say that. Two lads and one woman (a teenager) is completely different to a one night stand, particularly when this particular social scene ended up in a nine week court case.

Its about bringing the sport into disrepute. People love and respect people like Rory Best and Paul O'Connell because they are obviously, decent family men and values that most people will identify with or at least want to identify with. PJ and Olding are the complete opposite of that. Just think of it, they went up to a bedroom and shared a teenager.

Brendan Fanning on the subject also worth reading: https://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/brendan-fanning-irfu-have-little-choice-but-to-sever-ties-with-talented-ulster-duo-36762701.html

Sin é wrote:

clivemcl wrote:And here’s Sin saying the IRFU have grounds to scrap contracts based simply on having sex without being in a committed relationship..

I didn't say that. Two lads and one woman (a teenager) is completely different to a one night stand, particularly when this particular social scene ended up in a nine week court case.

Its about bringing the sport into disrepute. People love and respect people like Rory Best and Paul O'Connell because they are obviously, decent family men and values that most people will identify with or at least want to identify with. PJ and Olding are the complete opposite of that. Just think of it, they went up to a bedroom and shared a teenager.

You did say that Sin e. You said ‘promiscuous’ I responded back with the definition of that word. It’s far from what I personally believe is correct and best behaviour, but that’s irrelevant.

You say 'teenager' rather than adult because you are trying to twist it. You say 'they went up to a bedroom with a teenager' when Jackson when up and she followed uninvited. You say 'particularly when this lead to a court case' when the case or claimant can have no bearing in the URFU decision because the verdict protects them from that legally. So much bias and twisting in your comments it’s beginning to annoy me.

But all is irrelevant because I still don’t think the IRFU as an organisation make any demands on players sexual activities.

clivemcl wrote:

Sin é wrote:

clivemcl wrote:And here’s Sin saying the IRFU have grounds to scrap contracts based simply on having sex without being in a committed relationship..

I didn't say that. Two lads and one woman (a teenager) is completely different to a one night stand, particularly when this particular social scene ended up in a nine week court case.

Its about bringing the sport into disrepute. People love and respect people like Rory Best and Paul O'Connell because they are obviously, decent family men and values that most people will identify with or at least want to identify with. PJ and Olding are the complete opposite of that. Just think of it, they went up to a bedroom and shared a teenager.

You did say that Sin e. You said ‘promiscuous’ I responded back with the definition of that word. It’s far from what I personally believe is correct and best behaviour, but that’s irrelevant.

You say teenager rather than adult because you are trying to twist it. You say they went up to a bedroom with a teenager when Jackson when up and she followed uninvited. You say particularly when this lead to a court case which can have no bearing in the URFU decision because of the verdict.. So much bias and twisting in your comments it’s beginning to annoy me.

But all is irrelevant because I still don’t think the IRFU as an organisation make any demands on players sexual activities.

Its quite simple really. While nothing is illegal, you need to set the bar a bit higher than inviting random women back to your house and ending up sharing them with your mate. And if that wasn't enough, they actually invited another woman to join in. That is promiscuous behaviour, completely different to a one night stand. Lets not forget that the woman left upset as well and all they could do is joke.

As for what Olding, PJ and others did not write in those text messages (think it was McIlroy wrote mainly). Have you ever heard the phrase of 'you will be judged by the company you keep' (or to put it another way, lie down with dogs, you'll pick up fleas).

Sin é wrote:Its quite simple really. While nothing is illegal, you need to set the bar a bit higher than inviting random women back to your house and ending up sharing them with your mate. And if that wasn't enough, they actually invited another woman to join in. That is promiscuous behaviour, completely different to a one night stand. Lets not forget that the woman left upset as well and all they could do is joke.

As for what Olding, PJ and others did not write in those text messages (think it was McIlroy wrote mainly). Have you ever heard the phrase of 'you will be judged by the company you keep' (or to put it another way, lie down with dogs, you'll pick up fleas).

Wait? 'THAT' is promiscuous behaviour? Has the dictionary been updated? I wasn't informed that One night stands had somehow graduated into being perfectly acceptable by all.

If we are talking about family values and definitions of promiscuity and morality, then every single supporter in Ireland draws the line in a different place.

There is no universal line for this, and as such I simply can't see the IRFU taking up the position of the Pope on a matter like this.

I'm pretty sure our modern society of liberals have only one view - 'as long as everyone's consenting and theirs no animals involved, you are as equally entitled to your activities as anyone else'.

I mean, you are going to have us wondering now...

What's the IRFU's position on S&M? Are our props allowed to enjoy wearing latex? Is it ok if our scrum-half likes it when his lady puts a finger up his.... nose.  


...you get the picture. I seriously doubt it's the IRFU's concern how any of their players choose to enjoy private sex lives.

To my mind a payoff will have to be involved if you are looking at offing Jackson and Olding and not Gilroy. I dont subscribe theory that the style or format of the consensual sex (i emphasise this because thats legally what transpired and it cant be used against them) can be used against them or that the amount of booze comes into specifically on their down time. Fanning is right about bringing the game into disrepute but the whole thing is an HR nightmare. they will be paid off

If the IRFU are going to start checking amounts of alcohol taken during down time or promiscuity levels I'd suggest they don't dig too deep or they may find themselves having to offload more than they'd like in years to come.

Promiscuity, drinking levels, private text - none of this outside of work has any relevance to their contracts.
If it did half of the professional rugby players, in the world, would be unemployed.
Lets get real here.
I would be absolute amazed if anything in their contract means they can be fired.

If they go it is because the IRFU decide they are damaging the brand and are not worth keeping - simply as.
If they go it will have nothing to do with the law - to requote myself

Any action by the IRFU will be about the trial and the publicity surrounding it.
Look at Murray and Zebo, they behaved in a reprehensible manner but no court case, no publicity, no action.
It is about what makes the IRFU look bad not right/wrong, not illegal/legal


Paying off of their last year of contract seems , by far, the most likely outcome

Sin é wrote:I didn't say that. Two lads and one woman (a teenager) is completely different to a one night stand, particularly when this particular social scene ended up in a nine week court case.

Its about bringing the sport into disrepute. People love and respect people like Rory Best and Paul O'Connell because they are obviously, decent family men and values that most people will identify with or at least want to identify with. PJ and Olding are the complete opposite of that. Just think of it, they went up to a bedroom and shared a teenager.

Brendan Fanning on the subject also worth reading:  https://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/brendan-fanning-irfu-have-little-choice-but-to-sever-ties-with-talented-ulster-duo-36762701.html

As I mentioned previously, Sin é has no credibility. He was posting false rumours about the girl involved in the Murray/Zebo incident as if they were fact.

Now he's referencing Brendan Fanning and Neil Francis as contributing worthwhile commentary on the futures of Jackson & Olding....

The Great Aukster wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:We should see if we can get a double discount if we sign cipriani and hask from Wasps

Cipriani is a diva and not worth the hassle, Haskells staying in England to fight for a place in the RWC squad

Weir is being replaced at Edinburgh by an IQ player so might have been a good idea to sign him, Bristol have signed two IQ players in Muldowney and Heenan, pretty sure Macken at Wasps is out of contract at the end of the season. So there are IQ players out there it just seems we aren't signing them

Muldowney ceased to be IQ when he moved to Grenoble, and Heenan will also lose his residency qualification when he moves to Bristol. Ulster are crying out for players like Heenan, and being a reformed wild boy he might have been what Ulster needed off the pitch as well! Can't blame Heenan wanting to go where he'll get a bit more appreciation from Lam.

Muldowney is still IQ. Was IQ when he arrived and IQ when he left. Nothing has changed there.

I suspect Heenan went to Bristol for the simple reason they are paying new players more money than anyone else

If J&Os' contracts are terminated - how much should they get as a payoff?
The termination could effectively be career ending, because if they are toxic in Ireland then they will be toxic anywhere. Career ending events can be worth several millions from insurance policies so would they not be entitled to that?

Have the IRFU considered that by cutting ties with them they would be setting a precedent that might open them up to future risk? Imagine the scenario where a young lady actively targets a player and claims to have been assaulted, would the IRFU then have to maintain their stance and let the player go even if he was proven innocent?

The Great Aukster wrote:If J&Os' contracts are terminated - how much should they get as a payoff?
The termination could effectively be career ending, because if they are toxic in Ireland then they will be toxic anywhere. Career ending events can be worth several millions from insurance policies so would they not be entitled to that?

Have the IRFU considered that by cutting ties with them they would be setting a precedent that might open them up to future risk? Imagine the scenario where a young lady actively targets a player and claims to have been assaulted, would the IRFU then have to maintain their stance and let the player go even if he was proven innocent?

It's what the hashtag bakebook squad will demand and what the weak willed will give into.
Trial by the opinion of the few.

The IRFU lawyers will look into it.
If they consider it too risky they will simply pay them up to the end of their existing contracts and not renew.
There is nothing that requires them to offer the players new contracts beyond 2019.
I also think they will get new contracts elsewhere - clubs are always looking for good players, not least in France

How does the paying off work though? They get paid and see out contract but are not at training or selected for any team? Or they get paid and allowed to leave. I assume the latter.

But bringing me back to an earlier point, this possiblity only suits if the boys are in agreement.

If the boys insists on staying, and resent the clubs lack of support, the club needs to be careful what it says and how it words things. If I were the boys I’d be recording every meeting and phone call.

Pete330v2 wrote:If the IRFU are going to start checking amounts of alcohol taken during down time or promiscuity levels I'd suggest they don't dig too deep or they may find themselves having to offload more than they'd like in years to come.

I think you are wrong there with regard to Munster & Leinster professional players anyway. Pretty much all of them are in settled relationships and have been from a young age. Zebo was probably the exception, but at this stage he is well settled down with two kids. From what I can see of the Leinster players, they seem fairly settled. For instance, Henshaw moved to Leinster because his girlfriend was studying there.

UlsterinKildare wrote:

Sin é wrote:I didn't say that. Two lads and one woman (a teenager) is completely different to a one night stand, particularly when this particular social scene ended up in a nine week court case.

Its about bringing the sport into disrepute. People love and respect people like Rory Best and Paul O'Connell because they are obviously, decent family men and values that most people will identify with or at least want to identify with. PJ and Olding are the complete opposite of that. Just think of it, they went up to a bedroom and shared a teenager.

Brendan Fanning on the subject also worth reading:  https://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/brendan-fanning-irfu-have-little-choice-but-to-sever-ties-with-talented-ulster-duo-36762701.html

As I mentioned previously, Sin é has no credibility. He was posting false rumours about the girl involved in the Murray/Zebo incident as if they were fact.  

Now he's referencing Brendan Fanning and Neil Francis as contributing worthwhile commentary on the futures of Jackson & Olding....

The girl was moved from doing audits for some reason. Can you explain. And yes, Francis and Fanning are credible in this instance.

Sin é wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:If the IRFU are going to start checking amounts of alcohol taken during down time or promiscuity levels I'd suggest they don't dig too deep or they may find themselves having to offload more than they'd like in years to come.

I think you are wrong there with regard to Munster & Leinster professional players anyway. Pretty much all of them are in settled relationships and have been from a young age. Zebo was probably the exception, but at this stage he is well settled down with two kids. From what I can see of the Leinster players, they seem fairly settled. For instance, Henshaw moved to Leinster because his girlfriend was studying there.

And you are wrong with respect to the vast majority of Ulster players
Whether you are talking the older crew or the younger ones.
I also think if you think the Munster and Leinster boys don't go out on the lash semi regularly you are blind
A high percentage of players go out drinking from all teams - the vast majority of those players still know how to handle themselves
A small percentage of players, usually younger ones can take it too far and get into scraps or worse.
Again true of all teams
To try and dismiss the Murray/Zebo incident because it was a few years ago and was kept quiet is dodging the issue.
Take text - are you happy that the n word was used by one of those players in their text - that is worse than anything in the Jackson/Olding trail in which Jackson didn't even say anything untoward

Sin é wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:If the IRFU are going to start checking amounts of alcohol taken during down time or promiscuity levels I'd suggest they don't dig too deep or they may find themselves having to offload more than they'd like in years to come.

I think you are wrong there with regard to Munster & Leinster professional players anyway. Pretty much all of them are in settled relationships and have been from a young age. Zebo was probably the exception, but at this stage he is well settled down with two kids. From what I can see of the Leinster players, they seem fairly settled. For instance, Henshaw moved to Leinster because his girlfriend was studying there.

Christ on a bike sin. The image they portrayed to the public can often not be the same as what goes on behind closed doors.
The point being you don't by know untill, well untill you do. Making sweeping statements about how upstanding a person is due to there public profile is incredibly niave at best.

Pretty sure we wouldn’t know J and O’s exact tally of drinks on a given night or their choice of sexual activities had it not been made public knowledge by a failed prosecution.

And yet simply because we don’t know of it, Sin assumes it doesn’t exist for any other player involved with Ireland. Good grief. This is getting ridiculous.

Sin é wrote:

Pete330v2 wrote:If the IRFU are going to start checking amounts of alcohol taken during down time or promiscuity levels I'd suggest they don't dig too deep or they may find themselves having to offload more than they'd like in years to come.

I think you are wrong there with regard to Munster & Leinster professional players anyway. Pretty much all of them are in settled relationships and have been from a young age. Zebo was probably the exception, but at this stage he is well settled down with two kids. From what I can see of the Leinster players, they seem fairly settled. For instance, Henshaw moved to Leinster because his girlfriend was studying there.

What a pile of unsubstantiated crap. You know absolutely nothing of what the vast majority of players get up to for the vast majority of their down time. Talk sense for once will you.

Pete330v2 wrote:If the IRFU are going to start checking amounts of alcohol taken during down time or promiscuity levels I'd suggest they don't dig too deep or they may find themselves having to offload more than they'd like in years to come.

Exactly which is why I would envisage any agreement be contingent on a confidentiality clause. No one wants to operate in the black and white because it leaves Little wiggle room in case of future infractions.

We are being crucified in the press over our silence.
Whilst we cannot control the garbage they print our CEO really should be coming out with a statement even as a holding operation.
For once he need to show some real leadership - I wont hold my breath

Gilroy declared unavailable for Edinburgh - better put my boots on the plane just in case !

geoff999rugby wrote:Gilroy declared unavailable for Edinburgh - better put my boots on the plane just in case !

Injury?

No baboon. Internal review. The IRFU and UR are on dodgy ground here

Anyone who stays after an internal review will probably have a few sensitivity courses to fulfil

There'll probably also have to be a mea culpa, they'll need to go public and explain themselves and Nolan will be chomping at the bit to get it too

I see one of the mods has been in. Good work. Ironically marty i do think the two guys (and maybe Gilroy) doing a few things regarding elevating their language towards the fairer sex and possibly explaining to young players how it isnt 'cool' so to speak to discuss things in those terms should be about as far as it goes. Theres the opportunity to mend fences while at the same time doing the right thing despite the baying mob.

Ah the all seeing, all knowing TJ has given his 2 cents worth. Someone call the CPS, looks like they did the trial all wrong, who needs a jury etc.

The thing is with TJ an Sine, is you know for sure if this incident happened to Hogg, or Murray or Zebo their opinion on the matter would be completely different. My opinion - that's all it is.

I agree stand, I think everyone is allowed to make mistakes. They are after all still young to an extent and still learning.

It's also a chance for Ulster to look at itself and the way it prepares young players, like geoff says there needs to be leadership from the top and I think Logan or someone needs to come out and acknowledge that Ulster have a role to play in their behaviour and the culture that allowed it to fester

the-goon wrote:Ah the all seeing, all knowing TJ has given his 2 cents worth. Someone call the CPS, looks like they did the trial all wrong, who needs a jury etc.

The thing is with TJ an Sine, is you know for sure if this incident happened to Hogg, or Murray or Zebo their opinion on the matter would be completely different. My opinion - that's all it is.

100% Sin e has already indicated that he is willing to turn a blind eye/rationalise the Murray Zebo incident with the girl from Dublin.

If it was anyone in my team that behaved in this way I would condemn them equally.    r*** is a very difficult crime to prove.  I have read the full report of the trial in the Irish times and made up my mind from that.  I suggest you do the same.  Read the evidence she gave.  Read how she was treated in court.    I do not have to be beyond reasonable doubt to make up my mind.  a jury quite rightly does.

do you really think them innocent?

again - anyone in my team I would condemn harshly and indeed if they were players from my team I would be lobbying the SRU to make sure they never played in Scotland again.

A link to the full report of the trial.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/inside-court-12-the-complete-story-of-the-belfast-r***-trial-1.3443620?mode=amp

You at it again?

You can read what you want in a paper, except there are still reporting restrictions in place so not everything can be reported so if you read everything you would know that.

So how about keeping quiet about it all

Marty - merely replying to the posts above mine.  I have made my point but I do need to defend myself from being called a hypocrite.  Read the irish times link

No issue with my post that was removed being removed BTW. I suggested it was reported for the mods to remove if they thought it the right thing to do

You and the Irish Times are hypocrites, telling people to read up on things when you don't even have the full facts yourself and the Times calling it the complete story when they can't report the full story

I get the feeling from everything she said that she had a very immature understanding of what r$#@ is where the lines between non consent and regret are quite blurred and out of synch with reality and legal precident most probably distorted further through fear of judgement in a fairly conservative society. I think she probably did believe something bad happened to her however its seems more likely than not that it wasnt r!@%.

The case was decided in a court of law not in the selected reporting of the Irish Times.

It was clear after a couple of weeks that it was going to be a not guilty verdict.
The jury agreed.
The suspicion remains if it had been Joe Blogs it would never have gone to court

everyone is entitled to their opinion i suppose. I do think TJ you need to read more than that article if forming it though. For me i dont know if they did it and of course the idea of guilty men lining out for ulster doesn't sit well with me. I think though that the idea of innocent men being restricted from earning their livelihoods from a false accusation and a few dodgy whatsapp messages (i would not stand over the entirety of my own 15 odd years of social media use) would equally upset me. So i am forced to back the system in this instance and the 11 people who heard and saw everything (and returned their verdict) and accept that the presumption of innocence be extended to those who are found not guilty. I think any sea change within Ulster will possibly mean more if we dont surgically remove our scars but rather let them heal and learn from how we got them.