Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding are to leave Ulster

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-43739023


There are few places I can post how I feel on such a touchy subject. Here will have to do.

Confession: I have said things in Whatsapp messages which would ruin my career if made public. Context is irrelevant when people quote in isolation. If you said it, you face the wrath.

Anyone else?

Who can say 100% that their whatsapp/text messages from the beginning of phone technology would not screw you over if publicised?


As a general rule I believe the best way to deal with wrong doing is to teach/educate/admonish.
Not just to say you will, but to have those at the centre testify publicly to that process of rehabilitation.
The first step of course is a real unscripted sincere apology that people can view and make judgement on. Scripted read outs do not work.

For me, I'd much rather my son looked up to Jackson and in 5/6 years time somehow hears Jackson talk about his shame and regret.
Something like that educates children much more than banishing these guys.

So what has happened instead?

Rather than accepting the kinder yet more challenging option of working with the guys and taking them on a journey, they are being exiled effectively.

What kind of love does that? Would you exile a family member, a good friend, or would you strive to see them change their life around?

There is zero love for these young guys who came through the academy and put their everything into the club. They are just assets to the club, and assets that have gone bad.

They might have had a slight tinge of commitment, and possibly were considering resisting the social media swell, but sadly money talks, and the sponsor money is by far the most important thing to this corporate business. And it doesn't matter that the sponsor operating the strings like a puppeteer has been found wanting moth ethically and professionally in the past itself.

What irks me most is that the swell against the club and IRFU to sack them is done so under the flimsy veneer of the boys being 'role models', when the absolute truth is that this is and always was a crusade to deal out punishment upon these two guys irrespective of the courts decision.

The #ibelieveher hastag existed before evidence was even heard and carrys on even after verdict. I have seen evidence twisted and misrepresented and folks quoting headlines completely wrong.

It's sickening. There was a mission to destroy these guys lives from the start and nothing would stop them.


Last but not least - I call upon the IRFU to explain exactly what their reasoning is for their departure. The two guys are on 100% equal standing as Gilroy in terms of demeaning, derogatory language in messages.
So if Gilroy is not also away, then the decision must be based on something else.
It can't be the case, because the verdict lawfully/legally settles that.
So what is it?

Will the IRFU try to avoid giving their position and their reasoning?


Lastly, please I don't want to be misrepresented. I think these young lads are idiots. I think their language is vile. On a personal morality level, I'm not a fan of their (what I would call) promiscuity or high levels of alcohol.
But I do believe wholeheartedly in second chances, in rehabilitation, in changed lives, in testimony.
And I believe in not imprisoning people without full proof evidence.

I'm amazed by your post. I couldn't feel more differently. Having a group chat on what's app isn't private. It's public. Because it's with a group. As in it's seen by and shared with a group of people who can also then share this with many people as they like. And everyone knows this.

Comparing a woman to a pig on a spit and bragging about a "gang bang" is the most disgusting thing I've ever heard of a rugby player do or say. Really. And this includes Trevor Brennan climbing into a stand to punch a fan. And he was banned for life.

If that were your daughter they were talking about think about how you would feel about this. Seriously. Take a moment and really imagine that this woman that they were sharing a laugh about were your daughter and how you would feel then about this.

In my profession there is absolutely no way that I could keep my job had I had public conversations like this. In many professions you would be sacked and there would be no option but to change profession entirely.

They will get a second chance at getting their work and their reputations back. But not in their home province. You make it sound like moving to Paris or Bordeaux or Bath or some other perfectly lovely place to live and being paid exceptionally well to do your job is a punishment to extreme. If that's the case then I wish someone would punish me in this way. I'll gladly take that punishment. Really clivemcl, this isn't the end of the world for them. Since many of the people in Ireland think that they are guilty of r*** moving country is probably a better option for them than staying where their faces and the trial are now so infamous. They'll get to live somewhere where there was much less publicity about the trial, where the awful details aren't known and where all that is known is that they were acquitted. People in other countries are more likely to feel sorry for them or not even know about it. I think leaving the country is a good move for all the men involved. If they were smarter they'd have wanted to do this of their own accord. People will forget in time the gory details of what they admitted to and said but right now being somewhere else is actually good for them.

Interesting that sponsors never took issue with players caught drink driving or the signing of a player with a drug scandal past...

Flanker Pedrie Wannenburg has admitted that he had used cocaine and ecstasy, and also abused alcohol.

This time there is also reference to a video, as there was in the case of former Springbok captain Joost van der Westhuizen.

Wannenburg’s drug and alcohol abuse nearly cost him his rugby career. Bulls coach Frans Ludeke even warned him: “I think you should find something else to do.”

This was after a video was sent to the Blue Bulls Rugby Union ((BBRU). That coupled with his mother finding a straw with which he snorted cocaine in his bedroom, led Wannenburg to reconsider his lifestyle.

He is now tested by the Bulls’ team doctor on a weekly basis for alcohol and drug abuse.

Wannenburg, who has played several Tests for the Springboks and can play lock, flank and No 8, tells his story in the latest issue of the magazine Finesse, which is available at shops on Monday.

This follows Joost van der Westhuizen’s recent admission regarding the so-called Joost sex video and the fact that he had abused drugs and alcohol.

Wannenburg, who has been in the headlines for the wrong reasons – including his stormy love-life - on a number of occasions in recent years, told Beeld on Sunday that it is best to be honest – “no matter how difficult it is”.

“It is, and remains, difficult to talk in public about deeds you are ashamed of. I’m grateful for the people that are standing by me and supporting me. This motivates me to work hard at being the old Pedrie of which I can be proud,” he said.

He said that his big ambition was to again pull the Bok jersey over his head.

According to the article, the video was made in a night club where Wannenburg had used drugs. It was sent to the BBRU and led to Ludeke’s warning.

Intotouch wrote:I'm amazed by your post. I couldn't feel more differently. Having a group chat on what's app isn't private. It's public. Because it's with a group. As in it's seen by and shared with a group of people who can also then share this with many people as they like. And everyone knows this.

Comparing a woman to a pig on a spit and bragging about a "gang bang" is the most disgusting thing I've ever heard of a rugby player do or say. Really. And this includes Trevor Brennan climbing into a stand to punch a fan. And he was banned for life.

I'm interested then as to why the reports don't state that Gilroy is going too. He said as much demeaning/derogatory comments as either the other two.


In response to your question how I'd feel if it were my daughter...
My mind honestly wouldn't be on the messages. Lads can be vulgar, that doesn't surprise me. Does it surprise you?
It's a million miles from what I would ever say, but I'm not shocked entirely that some guys say this stuff.
It for sure does imply that they think little of these women that they see as targets for their sexual gratification, and that is exactly the thing I would hope they would learn from.

Do you even want to know if they are truly sorry, or have changed their attitudes? I'd rather they stayed and I could see their transformation, than send them elsewhere and let them be their problem, not knowing if they are now different guys or not.

If it were my daughter... I'd be far more concerned with her allegations of r*** than the language in their texts. Their whatsapp content might offend me and make the whole trial harder to endure, but I would have to ackowledge that using language like that does not in itself imply they are capable of r***. Just misogyny.

The #ibelieveher group are vile, disgusting pigs who make my every being cringe. Foul beings who wanted only a witch hunt.
Paddy and Stu are idiots but their lifestyle was no secret to Ulster Rugby yet nothing was done to curtail their behaviour. They deserved to be made examples of how they could be turned around but it looks like the easy option of bowing to the hadhtag morons has been taken. I will await the statement.
I do believe the players had already sorted out contracts away from Ulster since very soon after the trial. I was also told by a strong source thar Paddy wasn't coming back no matter what so it may not all be down to the lords and masters. As I said, I will await the statement but here's the thing, I won't tear my hair out, I won't set up a protest group or respond with hashtag abuse. Sometimes you just have to accept how things are being handled, hope it'll end up being the right choice and move on.

You’re 100 % right on that Pete but the lads have been made an offer and that combined with whatever their new club is offering has made the possibility of staying here not worth it. That’s their call.

All the arguments I’ve heard from people regarding role models etc applies to Gilroy, and yet he doesn’t appear to be facing the same fate. It appears like ‘job done’ from the protestors POV judging by twitter, andvyet if their reasons really are their reasons, their campaigning shouldn’t stop until action is taken against Gilroy.

Unless of course, all this was never about their misogynistic messages but instead about dealing out justice the court in their eyes failed to do...

I have litte sympathy for them. Their behaviour was a disgrace and i cant see how ulster had any choice given the details that came to light.

From the details that emerged from the trial i think there isva real possibility they were guilty but the burden of proof to secure a conviction is a heavy one. Ultimately i dont thinkbthe prosecution could show beyond reasonable doubt they were guilty so the decesion to acquit was correct. However from the details that emerged i think there is a real possibilty they were guilty.

Of course it was that Clive, the disgusting, ill-linformed twitter brigade are misandrists through and through filled with constant anger and injustice.
The arguements regarding role models are cliched in the extreme as are the arguements of 'what if it was your daughter' an example of which can be seen above from your man who's suddenly started posting on Ulster topics for the first time in full gloat mode. It's parroting behaviour really.
The IRFU statement will be very interesting and will be a deciding factor for a number of season ticket renewals I'm sure, futile gestures IMO. The other forum are calling for as empty a stadium as possible but that's hardly constructive or realistic. People will obviously still stream through the gates.
We have to continue in our support of the only team we have despite everything. A new coaching team with a number of new players and a new start next season after a season to forget is what's called for. Surely the only way is up.

catchweight wrote:I have litte sympathy for them. Their behaviour was a disgrace and i cant see how ulster had any choice given the details that came to light.

From the details that emerged from the trial i think there isva real possibility they were guilty but the burden of proof to secure a conviction is a heavy one. Ultimately i dont thinkbthe prosecution could show beyond reasonable doubt they were guilty so the decesion to acquit was correct. However from the details that emerged i think there is a real possibilty they were guilty.

What details emerged to suggest that?
Do you even know what evidence the defence held back in because they didn't need to use it?

The details of the trial i read. Im not convinced at all they are innocent. However i dont think the was sufficient certainty to convict them.

What absolute nonsense catchweight. From the details that have emerged we have to seriously wonder (and indeed one r*** counsellor did) why the case was ever brought. I suspect it’s job done now for those that brought the case but I hope the PPS has serious questions to answer going forward.

Their messages were disgraceful but then as Clive points out what about Gilroy? It’s the cheapest most expedient way for all parties to put it behind them. That doesn’t make it right. I can only hope that those involved in the lynch mob are judged less harshly by when they inevitably Frak up (which we all do in some capacity at some point)

Give me a break. People would be sacked for far less than what the pair of them did.

I thought the trial was inconclusive as to what really happened.

Standulstermen wrote:

Their messages were disgraceful but then as Clive points out what about Gilroy? It’s the cheapest most expedient way for all parties to put it behind them. That doesn’t make it right. I can only hope that those involved in the lynch mob are judged less harshly by when they inevitably Frak up (which we all do in some capacity at some point)

That is probably it in a nutshell.

Would the two of them ever really be able to move on from this while remaining in Ulster? Probably not given the feelings it has aroused on both sides and so this is likely to be the pragmatic solution for all camps.

I imagine some financial settlement will be made and the two of them will move on to a different environment, most likely France, where they will have a genuine chance to rebuild and redeem themselves. Maybe they will be able to come back to Ulster at some stage in the future once things have calmed down (which it will).

I expect Gilroy will get a fairly severe reprimand as well in the report but he is not in the same spotlight as the other two and so is likely to be able to do his time at home.

I have to say that I feel sorry for them. Their conduct has bern poor, but surely Ulster Rugby and Irish Rugby have to take responsibility. They have been Ulster employees since they turned 18, and have been in the Irish rugby system since school. This isn't an isolated incident within Irish Rugby, but rather than take ownership of the problem and become ambassadors for change IRFU and UR have decided to pay off the players and sweep it under the carpet. Blame the fellas and pretend they had nothing to do with it.
The pitchfork brigade have won, but will we see real change. I would rather see UR and the lads having to go into schools and rugby clubs and trying to root out this.lack of respect for women and drinking culture than sweep it under the carpet.

Separating out the arguments about whether it's morally right for people big angry at the 2 guys it is probably the best move for them ie easier to recover from. It perhaps won't hang so heavy over their heads elsewhere.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Separating out the arguments about whether it's morally right for people big angry at the 2 guys it is probably the best move for them ie easier to recover from. It perhaps won't hang so heavy over their heads elsewhere.

True. I heard initially that during the trial Paddy had been looking at Japan and after the not guilty verdict some doors opened in France. Who knows other than the lads themselves?
The IRFU must be happy enough to go into the RWC with one established and capable outhalf. Carberry will no doubt get a lot more game time at 10 from now on.

Olding to Sale maybe? Straight swap with addison.

Diamond doesn’t mind baggage either.

catchweight wrote:Give me a break. People would be sacked for far less than what the pair of them did.

I thought the trial was inconclusive as to what really happened.

https://theulsterfry.com/featured/ni-unemployment-solved-as-everyone-now-qualified-barrister/

Why would you need to be a barrister to be unsure of what actually happened?

The only people who really know are those that were involved on the night in question.

The jury who return the verdicts are not qualified barristers.

Reality check they are going because of the trial not the Whats App message - don't care what any statement says.
If so Gilroy would be out the door and Zebo should have been turfed out 9 years ago.
Its the adverse publicity that is the reason they are going not what they did - imagine is everything.

What does gall me though is the BoI moralising about this as not something they want to be associated with.
Bunch of hypocrites - this is a bank that robbed every man, woman and child in the south of 9000 euro, this is a bank
that made hundreds of people homeless through a dodgy mortgage scheme - total scum bags.
I'll be cancelling my CC with immediate effect.

As the saying goes words cant hurt me ands totally reprehensible though the messages were to compare it with an assault as someone above does (re Brennan) is a joke. I was there, and fairly close to it, it was an act of wanton violence and far worse

I think they are going because of the trial in conjunction with the messages.

They were acquited of the charges but themessages that came to light undermined them totally as individuals charged with r***.

I cant really see how Ulster Rugby had any other choice in the circumstances.

Yes, certain hypicrosy from sponsors who at the end of the day are concerned only with their image and branding and the potential negative financial consequences rather than morality. To be expected though in the circumstances.

Now have they been released or have they asked to be released? As I think the difference between the two is quite vast.

Obviously is financial consequences but people who make people homeless are in no position to preach to other about their conduct.

As I say total scumbags

So the precedent is now set - ignore players behaviour unless they get caught, in which case throw them under a bus. Maybe that's the lesson that the IRFU and Ulster want to give to scare the players into submission?

The Bank of Ireland gesture probably precipitated the announcement, so since this all seems to be about money, will the IRFU now reimburse Ulster for the loss of these players for this season?

I have defended Shane Logan in the past for his astute business acumen, but no longer - he is obviously just a puppet who only cares about the commercial side of the club and nothing for his players.
To quote Frank Slade in the film Scent of a Woman (appropriately), "Well, gentlemen, when the sh1t hits the fan, some guys run...and some guys stay." Logan ran.
"And if you think you're preparin' these minnows for manhood, you better think again, because I say you are killin' the very spirit... this institution proclaims it instills." Ulster and the IRFU need to take a long hard look at themselves and consider showing a bit more integrity and a bit less expediency.

Aukster ..welcome to the light (re Logan)

The mans a coward

The messages were appalling, but did they break any laws or endanger lives? No they didnt. A player like Wislon can break the law and endanger lives by being caught drink driving twice and his contact wasnt on the line. Disgraced our sport? Do drugs cheats like de fava and GG in Munster not disgrace it more but get a second chance.
If they have left because they wanted a clean start then fair enough. If Ulster moved them out then its the wrong call they deserve a second chance and will have learned a lot. Its also Ulsters responsibility to turn out well rounded individuals as well as rugby players from the acamady they failed and need to look into this.
Some are saying not guilty does not make them innocent, but its a basic human right to be assumped innocent untill proven guilty. Ulster and the protesters have to consider them innocent or they are denying them that human right. Active Human right denial is worse than misogynist private texts.

Its better than ignoring players behaviour when they are caught. The idea that Ulster Rugny are responsible for the actions and messages that their players is ridiculous.

The club is bigger than two players who brought most of this on themselves.

They couldnt do anything but sack them in the circumstances. Or be forever seen as a club where that kind of behaviour is tolerated.

Catch I was just laughing at the pomposity of your "I thought the trial was inconclusive" comment.

You weren't a part of it. You have heard a fraction of the evidence that the jurors did - some was delivered behind closed doors, some still can't be reported because it would identify the complainant.

No-one knows what happened that night, but you also, in reality, know very little about what happened in the actual trial, so your opinion, like mine, is worth buttons.

I hear more offensive comments re women on my coffee break from professional women ffs. They also comment on men too by the way, the are offensive equally
Anyway, back to the players. When you think about it would the lads feel more than a little ill at ease going about their everyday life in Belfast? I'd say that factor would have helped in making their minds up even before the verdict. I had hoped they would have stayed but you can't always get what you want in the words of Jagger, a misogynist the hashtaggers probably listen to.

catchweight wrote:Give me a break. People would be sacked for far less than what the pair of them did.

I thought the trial was inconclusive as to what really happened.

Absolutely bizarre comment. Catch yourself on.

A unanimous verdict after 3 hours on a 48 day trial is fairly conclusive

toml wrote:

catchweight wrote:Give me a break. People would be sacked for far less than what the pair of them did.

I thought the trial was inconclusive as to what really happened.

Absolutely bizarre comment. Catch yourself on.

A unanimous verdict after 3 hours on a 48 day trial is fairly conclusive

Conclusive as to what exactly?

As to whether the prosecution proved the charges ocured beyond reasonable doubt - yes

As to what actually happened that night - you really dont know. Only those involved do.

Conclusive that the court did not think a crime was comitted. It was a criminal court.

The squeaky wheel gets the grease. Spineless from the IRFU and sponsors.

Not exactly. They could have felt no crime occured at all. They could have though a crime was commited but felt the prosecution fell short of proving it beyond reasonble doubt. We dont really know and never will.

Its a high standard of proof needed to secure a convition on r***. Thinking a r*** may have occured or even probably occured is not enough to convict.

If there is sufficient doubt there, the defence wins.

I think the way the IRFU has seen it is "The court's decision is you didn't do it but you shouldn't have put yourself in the position for the accusation to be levelled in the first place".

If the same thing happened to your average Joe Bloggs I can guarantee that the company would fire you regardless of the outcome based on company values etc

So PJ and SO have indeed been sacked whilst Gilroy has been sanctioned and will be unavailable until the 26th of April. A strange outcome of a review into whatsapp messages where CG sent a much more 'offensive' message than PJ. Perhaps they IRFU and Ulster Rugby have been a little dishonest on the reasons for the review but it's probable that Logan bent over willingly again and took one up the jacksy like the ineffective coward he is.

On a lighter note, t'other forum has crashed or more probably imploded

Haha Pete I saw that too. Probably for the best with the amount of reprobates on it.
Maybe it has been hacked!

Pete330v2 wrote:So PJ and SO have indeed been sacked whilst Gilroy has been sanctioned and will be unavailable until the 26th of April. A strange outcome of a review into whatsapp messages where CG sent a much more 'offensive' message than PJ. Perhaps they IRFU and Ulster Rugby have been a little dishonest on the reasons for the review but it's probable that Logan bent over willingly again and took one up the jacksy like the ineffective coward he is.

There's no mention of Whatsapp messages in the statement but that's the only grounds to fire them and they haven't applied the logic equally

Intotouch wrote:I'm amazed by your post. I couldn't feel more differently. Having a group chat on what's app isn't private. It's public. Because it's with a group. As in it's seen by and shared with a group of people who can also then share this with many people as they like. And everyone knows this.

Comparing a woman to a pig on a spit and bragging about a "gang bang" is the most disgusting thing I've ever heard of a rugby player do or say. Really. And this includes Trevor Brennan climbing into a stand to punch a fan. And he was banned for life.

If that were your daughter they were talking about think about how you would feel about this. Seriously. Take a moment and really imagine that this woman that they were sharing a laugh about were your daughter and how you would feel then about this.

In my profession there is absolutely no way that I could keep my job had I had public conversations  like this. In many professions you would be sacked and there would be no option but to change profession entirely.

They will get a second chance at getting their work and their reputations back. But not in their home province. You make it sound like moving to Paris or Bordeaux or Bath or some other perfectly lovely place to live and being paid exceptionally well to do your job is a punishment to extreme. If that's the case then I wish someone would punish me in this way. I'll gladly take that punishment. Really clivemcl, this isn't the end of the world for them. Since many of the people in Ireland think that they are guilty of r*** moving country is probably a better option for them than staying where their faces and the trial are now so infamous. They'll get to live somewhere where there was much less publicity about the trial, where the awful details aren't known and where all that is known is that they were acquitted. People in other countries are more likely to feel sorry for them or not even know about it. I think leaving the country is a good move for all the men involved. If they were smarter they'd have wanted to do this of their own accord. People will forget in time the gory details of what they admitted to and said but right now being somewhere else is actually good for them.

I'm amazed by your post. Mean words are as bad, if not worse than assault??? Ok, fine. So if you say anything I deem offensive, I have the moral right to knock you out by your logic. If words and violence are on equal footing, then using one to respond to the other is perfectly acceptable. Your logic. Clown.

Intotouch wrote:I'm amazed by your post. I couldn't feel more differently. Having a group chat on what's app isn't private. It's public. Because it's with a group. As in it's seen by and shared with a group of people who can also then share this with many people as they like. And everyone knows this.

You're stupidity astounds me, last night you made claims about Trevor Brennan that were wrong and now this. So if I have a conversation with people in my house it's a public conversation?

private
ˈprʌɪvət/Submit
adjective
1.
belonging to or for the use of one particular person or group of people only.
"all bedrooms have private facilities"

marty2086 wrote:

Intotouch wrote:I'm amazed by your post. I couldn't feel more differently. Having a group chat on what's app isn't private. It's public. Because it's with a group. As in it's seen by and shared with a group of people who can also then share this with many people as they like. And everyone knows this.

You're stupidity astounds me, last night you made claims about Trevor Brennan that were wrong and now this. So if I have a conversation with people in my house it's a public conversation?

private
ˈprʌɪvət/Submit
adjective
1.
belonging to or for the use of one particular person or group of people only.
"all bedrooms have private facilities"

Yeah, it is possibly the most moronic take I've seen on the trial, and there are plenty of contenders from some of our resident regressives.

toml wrote:Haha Pete I saw that too. Probably for the best with the amount of reprobates on it.
Maybe it has been hacked!

They were amassing an army, perhaps their servers are in Syria

Right decision made. The players’ position was untenable. For themselves. And for their employers.

Hopefully the complainant can get on with her life and this decision brings an end to public commentary about her and the case.

And I hope the two players can move on with their lives too. They will carry regret for a long time.

No it was the easy decision, throwing people under the bus to save your own skin is never right

'You're stupidity astounds me '. Made me chuckle anyway.

Pot Hale wrote:Right decision made. The players’ position was untenable.  For themselves. And for their employers.

Hopefully the complainant can get on with her life and this decision brings an end to public commentary about her and the case.

And I hope the two players can move on with their lives too. They will carry regret for a long time.  

If the public commentary stops then it will have all been in vain. Jackson and Oldings' international careers are over following this decision, so how do they move on from that? At the very least they should sue the IRFU for say £100k per cap they already have as given their age they could have expected to earn the same number in the future.
Much has been made of the players' behaviour not being that of 'role models', so I would expect the IRFU to immediately and publicly take steps to acknowledge their failure to instil this into their employees.
The difficulty is that it is normally only what is seen in public that defines a good role model. What happens in someone's private bedroom cannot be legislated for. Even though rugby has a drinking culture, most would agree that the events of that night were precipitated by alcohol consumption. Therefore if the IRFU are serious about getting the message across, they should ban all professional players from any alcohol forthwith. They have the right to breathalise employees regularly and should sack any player found with alcohol in their system. Role models have no time off, so they need to monitor their employees throughout the year.

The Great Aukster wrote:

Pot Hale wrote:Right decision made. The players’ position was untenable.  For themselves. And for their employers.

Hopefully the complainant can get on with her life and this decision brings an end to public commentary about her and the case.

And I hope the two players can move on with their lives too. They will carry regret for a long time.  

If the public commentary stops then it will have all been in vain. Jackson and Oldings' international careers are over following this decision, so how do they move on from that? At the very least they should sue the IRFU for say £100k per cap they already have as given their age they could have expected to earn the same number in the future.
Much has been made of the players' behaviour not being that of 'role models', so I would expect the IRFU to immediately and publicly take steps to acknowledge their failure to instil this into their employees.
The difficulty is that it is normally only what is seen in public that defines a good role model. What happens in someone's private bedroom cannot be legislated for. Even though rugby has a drinking culture, most would agree that the events of that night were precipitated by alcohol consumption. Therefore if the IRFU are serious about getting the message across, they should ban all professional players from any alcohol forthwith. They have the right to breathalise employees regularly and should sack any player found with alcohol in their system. Role models have no time off, so they need to monitor their employees throughout the year.

Solid thinking. Alcohol is a blight on so many people's lives.

They are a rugby club not a nanny.

The players need to take responsibilry for their own actions like any other person would.

I think ulster have done the correct thing. The only thing they could do really given the details that came to light in public.