Paddy Jackson and Stuart Olding are to leave Ulster

First topic message reminder :

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'd hope perhaps naively that every pro rugby club would have punishments for turning up to work drunk or unable to perform. And support structures for those with problems.

As I say this has nothing to do with evidence - it is all l about the damage to the image of the brand.
It appears they were sacked, Ulster/IRFU will have determined they can do that without risking being sued.

I'd hope perhaps naively that every pro rugby club would have punishments for turning up to work drunk or unable to perform

I believe they have but to be cleared this did not occur in work time

They will have been paid to go quietly.

Standulstermen wrote:They will have been paid to go quietly.

I am sure they have come to an arrangement, both parties recognising that their position was untenable. Jackson statement suggested as much and certainly did not give any suggestion that it was being contested. I am sure that the last thing he would want would be another tribunal appearance claiming unfair dismissal and all the publicity that would entail. At least this way they can start afresh next season.

As others have said, this is likely the best solution for everyone.

There was a hint in Oldings statement but no more. I suspect whatever payoff he (Jackson) gets will go straight into repaying his family and the legal bills. He will command a pretty big salary in England i suspect.

I personally think it's just cowardly by Ulster, the fact Gilroy didn't go shows it's nothing to do with the messages but the publicity generated.

I don't know if Ulster would have lost any genuine supporters if the players had of been reinstated but I do know this:
I used to be a season ticket holder before i had health issues, now that my health issues have totally cleared up I had considered getting the season ticket again for next year because I saw some positives in our youth and a new coach etc.
Since i have had the health issues have been to more than 3 home games per season along with 4 friends. I have also bought the new shirt every year and have several bits or merch bought.
I will not be having a season ticket, i will not go to another game at Kingspan, i will not buy another bit of merch. When I talked to my friends today they told me they have no interest in ever going to an Ulster match again.
So I do not know if Ulster would have lost paying fans had the guys been reinstated but I do know this they have lost this paying fan along with 4 others that I know off.

Read on PR that the Ulster committee were 10-2 on keeping them. unsurprisingly logan was one of the two. I've renewed and will still go. I understand the decision taken even if i dont agree with and much like Neil i think its the cowardly and easy way out. I go with my da who has renewed but having spoken to a few guys we meet with theres at least two have said they wont be renewing. Not that they will never go back but just they wont renew.

geoff999rugby wrote:As I say this has nothing to do with evidence - it is all l about the damage to the image of the brand.
It appears they were sacked, Ulster/IRFU will have determined they can do that without risking being sued.

I'd hope perhaps naively that every pro rugby club would have punishments for turning up to work drunk or unable to perform

I believe they have but to be cleared this did not occur in work time

If damage to the brand was the reason for dismissal, then Paddy and Stu were deemed to be representing Ulster/Ireland. Being a role model has no time off work, which is why players should be monitored throughout the whole year.

Since the protesters were supposedly catalysed into action by the misogynist comments, presumably they will try to destroy Gilroy now as well?
Ulster/IRFU have not treated the three players in this row equitably, so they are very much open to legal action. It will be interesting to see how much hush money was paid when the accounts come out.

The Great Aukster wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:As I say this has nothing to do with evidence - it is all l about the damage to the image of the brand.
It appears they were sacked, Ulster/IRFU will have determined they can do that without risking being sued.

I'd hope perhaps naively that every pro rugby club would have punishments for turning up to work drunk or unable to perform

I believe they have but to be cleared this did not occur in work time

If damage to the brand was the reason for dismissal, then Paddy and Stu were deemed to be representing Ulster/Ireland. Being a role model has no time off work, which is why players should be monitored throughout the whole year.

Since the protesters were supposedly catalysed into action by the misogynist comments, presumably they will try to destroy Gilroy now as well?
Ulster/IRFU have not treated the three players in this row equitably, so they are very much open to legal action. It will be interesting to see how much hush money was paid when the accounts come out.

You don’t know what the reasons are for revoking their contracts. Speculation won’t get you anywhere. It’s done now. Time to move on.

I live in the Republic. I hold an executive position in an international corporation and am well enough rewarded to enjoy what is usually considered a very "well-off" lifestyle. My kids go to private schools and we live in a fine house in Co. Kildare. I'm very thankful for all the blessings in my life and at the heart of it, I'm a contented man, happy with my lot.

But I can see that this little island is home to increasing numbers of jealous, small-minded, self-obsessed, ignorant and angry people. I no longer care for most of it. I live my life with my family, friends and loved ones and I decided to 'opt out' from those things that cause me frustration or annoyance. For that reason, after today, I no longer care for or support the IRFU. I'll no longer go to international matches and I'll no longer support them financially. I know that my own private protest won't make any difference to anyone except me - and I don't do it for anyone except myself. Like others, I won't be renewing my season ticket with Ulster. Again, I expect this to have no impact on the powers that be. But doing so maintains my own sense of righteousness and honesty.

I hope Paddy and Stuart rebuild their lives and successful careers abroad. I hope they find plenty of success, happiness and contentment (like me!) so that they can shrug their shoulders at all those sad, jealous, hate-filled people and care less about what any of them think.

Kipling's words come to mind:
"... Or being lied about, don’t deal in lies,
Or being hated, don’t give way to hating,
...
If you can bear to hear the truth you’ve spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools... "

Good luck to the lads. I accept their apologies and I believe them. For alot of the people in this country, that wasn't enough. Their anger wouldn't be quenched until they had done as much as possible to hurt the two innocent men. Incapable of forgiveness or accepting of the outcome of the legal system. Another sad indictment of this country and its people.

I don't think having a drink is damaging the brand aukster though. Having several too many and getting accused of r*** is probably pushing it a touch to far!

And we've seen england players overstepping ie the hotel maid. Tindal. The 2nd case wasn't even that much drink related but drinking in a public place can come back to bite.

The question not only for Ulster but everyone in life is ‘What will you do to change the way things are?’.
Well? What is your attitude? To castigate, expell, cut loose and banish?
Is that going to be your legacy?
Commitment, nurture and rehabilitation is a more noble way to treat those who go astray.

If these boys hit the headlines for other reasons down the line my question will be ‘who took on the task of guiding and keeping these guys accountable? Not Ulster anyway, they washed their hands, assuming the role of Pontus Pilate, and gave in to the frenzied crowd’.

I’ve no admiration for a club that walks away from the difficult tasks and takes the easy route .

Another way of thinking about this would be if it had happened in the south at another province, the laws there would have meant the press count not identify them, due to their profile it may have resulted in a blanket ban on media reports on the case, since they were found not guilty it would never have been reported and in the press.

In light of this do you think the IRFU/Branch review would have still lead to their dismissal?
Is it maybe likely that due to the media black out they would have been severely reprimanded but given a second chance to get their lives and career on track?

If you think it may or would have been different in this case, it means that you agree that they were hard done by.

I have stood up for Logan in the past as well, think me and stand were the only ones who did.
I have to admit, I turned against him a while ago, and he has acted cowardly, the failure to meet the Seasons tickets holders, the lame pre-recorded Q+A timed to get least attention.

If the 10-2 vote and going against it, is true, why hold the vote?
The 10 members he overruled must be turning against him.

I hope that next weekends game is deserted. I really hope its boycotted, with more than 250 people outside, saying that Ulster hung them out to dry.

I'm not a season ticket holder, so cannot threaten not to renew, I can't say I will never go again as I support the team, but I won't be back while Logan is still in charge.

Yes he is a good money generator, but at every other detail of his role he has failed. He doesn't have the courage to face fans, or to make the correct decision, even if it could make him unpopular.

Do you think that since its likely he will be leaving in the summer he didn't want a blemish on this record of backing them, which may have made it more difficult to find his next job?

Or my worse fear, the IRFU realise they have a puppet, and make him an offer to stay.

Kingshu wrote:I have stood up for Logan in the past as well, think me and stand were the only ones who did.
I have to admit, I turned against him a while ago, and he has acted cowardly, the failure to meet the Seasons tickets holders, the lame pre-recorded Q+A timed to get least attention.

If the 10-2 vote and going against it, is true, why hold the vote?
The 10 members he overruled must be turning against him.

IRFU over ruled Ulster from what I understand. Read elsewhere that the Bank of Ireland was going to withdraw all sponsorship of Irish Rugby (BofI is jersey sponsor of Leinster & Munster). Bear in mind that if BofI pulled out, no one else would touch Irish Rugby.

This is worth a listen. Piece starts at 22 mins in (report of BOI statement etc).
26 mins in: PR person explaining how sponsors would have looked at it. After that, Prof. of Law in Australia speaking about similar situation in Australia, then Eddie O'Sullivan speaking about the impact on Irish rugby.

http://www.rte.ie/radio/utils/radioplayer/rteradioweb.html#!rii=b9_10861566_414_14-04-2018_

clivemcl wrote:The question not only for Ulster but everyone in life is ‘What will you do to change the way things are?’.
Well? What is your attitude? To castigate, expell, cut loose and banish?
Is that going to be your legacy?
Commitment, nurture and rehabilitation is a more noble way to treat those who go astray.

If these boys hit the headlines for other reasons down the line my question will be ‘who took on the task of guiding and keeping these guys accountable? Not Ulster anyway, they washed their hands, assuming the role of Pontus Pilate, and gave in to the frenzied crowd’.

I’ve no admiration for a club that walks away from the difficult tasks and takes the easy route .

My opinion would be that the lads probably need to get out of Ulster anyway as this would follow them around and make it impossible to move on from it. A new challenge will be good for them. Talk of PJ heading to Claremont - that would be brilliant move for him.

If the lads think they were treated badly by the IRFU, they can count their blessings they are not AFL players.  An AFL player was suspended as soon as he was questioned by the police, when charged he was sacked. He was acquitted of r***, but hasn't played football since and now works as a labouror on a building site.

Trial by Twitter has won out here, ultimately they were found Not Guilty and that should be respected. The twitterati luvvies wanted to impart as much damage as they could as part of their own agenda. A witch hunt that was completely disgusting. Their WhatsApp comments were ladish, boasting, immature bravado and clearly not meant for public consumption.

In the past when things were going ok (ie playoffs in the Pro12 and QFs at least in the Heineken) you could forgive logan the coaching merry go round because it seemed, financially, we were on the right track. You simply cannot make the claims he has made though and stand over the deterioration of rugby that we have had to witness.

His awol act over the last 12 months is nothing short of disgraceful as was the video put out on youtube. I'll be going next week as i promised my son we'd be going. I wish i hadn't now but he's blissfully unaware of all this. As things stand what i find harder to take is just in how little regard the fans are held by the branch and the IRFU. I wish i could say i wont be back but its a hollow promise. If next year is no better on the field possibly. Im now hoping against hope we have someone better than Jim bloody Mallinder lined up to take over and it will help lift the gloom.

Be_the_ball wrote:Trial by Twitter has won out here, ultimately they were found Not Guilty and that should be respected. The twitterati luvvies wanted to impart as much damage as they could as part of their own agenda. A witch hunt that was completely disgusting. Their WhatsApp comments were ladish, boasting, immature bravado and clearly not meant for public consumption.

If you are going to blame anyone/any thing, blame the legal system in Northern Ireland/UK for allowing the full transcript of the court proceedings to be headline news on every newspaper and tv/radio station on the island of Ireland for nine weeks.

Whether or not the WhatsApp were intended for public consumption, it gave everyone an insight into their appalling attitude to women.

Hang on, the legal system followed due process, and delivered a verdict. The twitterati decided on a verdict AND punishment based on their own agenda and preduces and have now achieved their aim. This is very dangerous and undermines the legal process.

Be_the_ball wrote:Hang on, the legal system followed due process, and delivered a verdict. The twitterati decided on a verdict AND punishment based on their own agenda and preduces and have now achieved their aim. This is very dangerous and undermines the legal process.

I agree with Sin and posted the below earlier.

Another way of thinking about this would be if it had happened in the south at another province, the laws there would have meant the press count not identify them, due to their profile it may have resulted in a blanket ban on media reports on the case, since they were found not guilty it would never have been reported and in the press.

In light of this do you think the IRFU/Branch review would have still lead to their dismissal?
Is it maybe likely that due to the media black out they would have been severely reprimanded but given a second chance to get their lives and career on track?

If you think it may or would have been different in this case, it means that you agree that they were hard done by.

The the northern legal system had been the same as the Souths and they could not be named, and most likely the case not reported on, I think we would have a very different outcome.

While other are saying they get to go to France for big money and sunshine its not to bad. You are forgetting it has already cost them a possible a slam medal, but also their future international career and WC chances.
If they wanted big many and sunshine they would have gone previously

Be_the_ball wrote:Hang on, the legal system followed due process, and delivered a verdict. The twitterati decided on a verdict AND punishment based on their own agenda and preduces and have now achieved their aim. This is very dangerous and undermines the legal process.

I disagree.

They are not guilty of r***. They are however guilty of being deeply unpleasant people with an appalling attitude to women. You do not have to commit a crime to make you toxic to a business' brand.

Thats true and in fairness therein lies the difference. Ulster fans view it as a province, first and foremost and not a business. Sponsors and the IRFU bigwigs look at it through a different prism. While both sections obviously can appreciate the importance of the other side, the two viewpoints lead to opposite views.

Sin é wrote:

Be_the_ball wrote:Trial by Twitter has won out here, ultimately they were found Not Guilty and that should be respected. The twitterati luvvies wanted to impart as much damage as they could as part of their own agenda. A witch hunt that was completely disgusting. Their WhatsApp comments were ladish, boasting, immature bravado and clearly not meant for public consumption.

If you are going to blame anyone/any thing, blame the legal system in Northern Ireland/UK for allowing the full transcript of the court proceedings to be headline news on every newspaper and tv/radio station on the island of Ireland for nine weeks.

Whether or not the WhatsApp were intended for public consumption, it gave everyone an insight into their appalling attitude to women.

Sorry but what appalling attitude? I keep hearing this and from their messages they talked of sex or made up stories. That seems to be the problem, those complaining think sex is a subject not to be talked about

The worst offender was Gilroy yet everyone seems to have no problem with him staying

Don't be surprised if Gilroy plays till the end of his contract (2019) and then leaves

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Be_the_ball wrote:Trial by Twitter has won out here, ultimately they were found Not Guilty and that should be respected. The twitterati luvvies wanted to impart as much damage as they could as part of their own agenda. A witch hunt that was completely disgusting. Their WhatsApp comments were ladish, boasting, immature bravado and clearly not meant for public consumption.

If you are going to blame anyone/any thing, blame the legal system in Northern Ireland/UK for allowing the full transcript of the court proceedings to be headline news on every newspaper and tv/radio station on the island of Ireland for nine weeks.

Whether or not the WhatsApp were intended for public consumption, it gave everyone an insight into their appalling attitude to women.

Sorry but what appalling attitude? I keep hearing this and from their messages they talked of sex or made up stories. That seems to be the problem, those complaining think sex is a subject not to be talked about

The worst offender was Gilroy yet everyone seems to have no problem with him staying

The group conversation was that women were there to be used and abused for their pleasure - basically dehumanising them. It was the opposite of being respectful and very few would share that attitude. If they do, they need to be brought into the 21st Century. That is caveman stuff.

Really, what part of the conversation said that?

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Be_the_ball wrote:Trial by Twitter has won out here, ultimately they were found Not Guilty and that should be respected. The twitterati luvvies wanted to impart as much damage as they could as part of their own agenda. A witch hunt that was completely disgusting. Their WhatsApp comments were ladish, boasting, immature bravado and clearly not meant for public consumption.

If you are going to blame anyone/any thing, blame the legal system in Northern Ireland/UK for allowing the full transcript of the court proceedings to be headline news on every newspaper and tv/radio station on the island of Ireland for nine weeks.

Whether or not the WhatsApp were intended for public consumption, it gave everyone an insight into their appalling attitude to women.

Sorry but what appalling attitude? I keep hearing this and from their messages they talked of sex or made up stories. That seems to be the problem, those complaining think sex is a subject not to be talked about

The worst offender was Gilroy yet everyone seems to have no problem with him staying

The group conversation was that women were there to be used and abused for their pleasure - basically dehumanising them. It was the opposite of being respectful and very few would share that attitude. If they do, they need to be brought into the 21st Century. That is caveman stuff.

Sin. If for one second you don't think that some of the Munster ( or any other province) players havnt shared similar messages between themselves then you are seriously deluded.
The simple facts are they will have, and during the case a lot of deleting will have gone on.
This isn't an Ulster problem, it's a widespread social thing, and to think otherwise is just ignorance.

I dont think anyone is saying its isolated to Ulster. But the two players were brought to trial on a very serious charge, the messages were revealed and in the process they damaged themselves and the club they represented. I really think this was the only option and I dont think the players can have many complaints. They brought the the cub into dsirepute, damaged its brand and threatened its sponsorship. They had to go for their own sake and for the club. Saying Im sure it happens at other clubs doesnt really absolve them or change anything. I think the precedent set that if you are brought to trial on a charge like that and those kind of messages become public then you will have your contract terminated is reasonable.

People asking why isnt Gilroy sacked - because he wasnt accused of sexual assault clearly is the reason. The two players were found legally not guilty in the eyes of the the law but for many out there their actions and behavior were unacceptable and life isnt as clear cut as being found not guilty of a crime that is notoriously difficult to prove will result in widespread re-acceptance. Being accused of r*** and then being found sharing messages celebrating "spit roasting" a distressed complainant of sexual assault will be unforgivable for many irrespective of the outcome of the case. What happened to the two players could happen to a whole lot more players I am quite sure but that doesnt absolve the them of having to deal with the consequences. I would be surprised if anyone expected to keep their job after a trial like that.

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

So zebo and Murray were perfect gentlemen, walked her home, sent flowers, didn't discuss it with any of there freinds?

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

Seems to be a lot of conclusions you are jumping to there Sin...

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

So zebo and Murray were perfect gentlemen, walked her home, sent flowers, didn't discuss it with any of there freinds?

We don't have any evidence to it being other than that. She probably stayed the night and boasted about it the next day to a friend who circulated it to a group. The video was circulated in a WhatsApp group. Don't even know if they were members of the group, but they said nothing.

Sin é wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

So zebo and Murray were perfect gentlemen, walked her home, sent flowers, didn't discuss it with any of there freinds?

We don't have any evidence to it being other than that. She probably stayed the night and boasted about it the next day to a friend who circulated it to a group. The video was circulated in a WhatsApp group. Don't even know if they were members of the group, but they said nothing.

Sin you don't know any of that. You are choosing to believe that's true.

Sin é wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

So zebo and Murray were perfect gentlemen, walked her home, sent flowers, didn't discuss it with any of there freinds?

We don't have any evidence to it being other than that. She probably stayed the night and boasted about it the next day to a friend who circulated it to a group. The video was circulated in a WhatsApp group. Don't even know if they were members of the group, but they said nothing.

Why don't we ruin some other people's careers based solely on Sin's imagination, seems reasonable. (The preceding text was sarcasm).

To be fair they may go onto a better side than ulster.

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

So zebo and Murray were perfect gentlemen, walked her home, sent flowers, didn't discuss it with any of there freinds?

We don't have any evidence to it being other than that. She probably stayed the night and boasted about it the next day to a friend who circulated it to a group. The video was circulated in a WhatsApp group. Don't even know if they were members of the group, but they said nothing.

Sin you don't know any of that. You are choosing to believe that's true.

I know there were no court cases over whether it was consensual or not.

Be_the_ball wrote:
Why don't we ruin some other people's careers based solely on Sin's imagination, seems reasonable. (The preceding text was sarcasm).

How is their rugby career being ruined? Its not as if they are short of offers from top Clubs in France and UK.
Was Tadgh Byrne's rugby career ruined because Leinster released him?

For a proper description of a career being ruined, a good example would be Trevor Brennan who received a lifetime ban from rugby (at the insistance of Syd Miller I believe) and was fined 20K for striking an Ulster supporter. He later appealed it and got a 5 year ban.

The lads should count themselves lucky they were not banned for life from all rugby.

Sin é wrote:

Be_the_ball wrote:
Why don't we ruin some other people's careers based solely on Sin's imagination, seems reasonable. (The preceding text was sarcasm).

How is their rugby career being ruined? Its not as if they are short of offers from top Clubs in France and UK.
Was Tadgh Byrne's rugby career ruined because Leinster released him?

For a proper description of a career being ruined, a good example would be Trevor Brennan who received a lifetime ban from rugby (at the insistance of Syd Miller I believe) and was fined 20K for striking an Ulster supporter. He later appealed it and got a 5 year ban.

The lads should count themselves lucky they were not banned for life from all rugby.

WHAT!! So saying mean words !!WORDS!!! about women is the same as assault? What world do you live in?

catchweight wrote:I dont think anyone is saying its isolated to Ulster. But the two players were brought to trial on a very serious charge, the messages were revealed and in the process they damaged themselves and the club they represented. I really think this was the only option and I dont think the players can have many complaints. They brought the the cub into dsirepute, damaged its brand and threatened its sponsorship. They had to go for their own sake and for the club. Saying Im sure it happens at other clubs doesnt really absolve them or change anything. I think the precedent set that if you are brought to trial on a charge like that and those kind of messages become public then you will have your contract terminated is reasonable.

People asking why isnt Gilroy sacked - because he wasnt accused of sexual assault clearly is the reason. The two players were found legally not guilty in the eyes of the the law but for many out there their actions and behavior were unacceptable and life isnt as clear cut as being found not guilty of a crime that is notoriously difficult to prove will result in widespread re-acceptance. Being accused of r*** and then being found sharing messages celebrating "spit roasting" a distressed complainant of sexual assault will be unforgivable for many irrespective of the outcome of the case. What happened to the two players could happen to a whole lot more players I am quite sure but that doesnt absolve the them of having to deal with the consequences. I would be surprised if anyone expected to keep their job after a trial like that.

OK, using your logic.

I accuse you of r***. You should be fired from your job. Guilt or innocence doesn't matter, merely the accusation.

the-goon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Be_the_ball wrote:
Why don't we ruin some other people's careers based solely on Sin's imagination, seems reasonable. (The preceding text was sarcasm).

How is their rugby career being ruined? Its not as if they are short of offers from top Clubs in France and UK.
Was Tadgh Byrne's rugby career ruined because Leinster released him?

For a proper description of a career being ruined, a good example would be Trevor Brennan who received a lifetime ban from rugby (at the insistance of Syd Miller I believe) and was fined 20K for striking an Ulster supporter. He later appealed it and got a 5 year ban.

The lads should count themselves lucky they were not banned for life from all rugby.

WHAT!! So saying mean words !!WORDS!!! about women is the same as assault? What world do you live in?

Words have meaning. Brennan got a life ban (later appealed to 5 years). He lost a contract to play rugby for a further year and get into coaching.

This is what the committee thought:

'It was the view of the committee that Mr Brennan's behaviour was completely unjustified and that he caused serious harm to an innocent spectator and significant damage to the image of rugby union.

Now, don't tell me that this whole affair has not damaged the image of rugby in Ireland.

Sin é wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

So zebo and Murray were perfect gentlemen, walked her home, sent flowers, didn't discuss it with any of there freinds?

We don't have any evidence to it being other than that. She probably stayed the night and boasted about it the next day to a friend who circulated it to a group. The video was circulated in a WhatsApp group. Don't even know if they were members of the group, but they said nothing.

Sin you don't know any of that. You are choosing to believe that's true.

I know there were no court cases over whether it was consensual or not.

But sin your argument was about how they treated/thought of women. You claim the same activity carried out by zeebo and Murray is fine as they were gentlemen, wouldn't dare say bad things, pure wholesome chaps. But the to Ulster lads are a disgrace. Yet they used that woman the same way zeebo and murray did.. they met her in a kebab house(obvs a first date in your eyes) invited her back and used her. But that's fine to you as your not privy to the private conversation they had about it.

And weren't you the one espousing Christian values? Where is your forgiveness? Or does it only count if they are from munster.?
It's called hypocrisy sin and that's what really tits me off obout your argument. Pick a moral and apply it equally. Or keep your one eye and one day the behaviour of your sainted Munster boys may shock you. Because if you think they haven't been up to the same with the same language used you really are massively out of touch with the world

the-goon wrote:

catchweight wrote:I dont think anyone is saying its isolated to Ulster. But the two players were brought to trial on a very serious charge, the messages were revealed and in the process they damaged themselves and the club they represented. I really think this was the only option and I dont think the players can have many complaints. They brought the the cub into dsirepute, damaged its brand and threatened its sponsorship. They had to go for their own sake and for the club. Saying Im sure it happens at other clubs doesnt really absolve them or change anything. I think the precedent set that if you are brought to trial on a charge like that and those kind of messages become public then you will have your contract terminated is reasonable.

People asking why isnt Gilroy sacked - because he wasnt accused of sexual assault clearly is the reason. The two players were found legally not guilty in the eyes of the the law but for many out there their actions and behavior were unacceptable and life isnt as clear cut as being found not guilty of a crime that is notoriously difficult to prove will result in widespread re-acceptance. Being accused of r*** and then being found sharing messages celebrating "spit roasting" a distressed complainant of sexual assault will be unforgivable for many irrespective of the outcome of the case. What happened to the two players could happen to a whole lot more players I am quite sure but that doesnt absolve the them of having to deal with the consequences. I would be surprised if anyone expected to keep their job after a trial like that.

OK, using your logic.

I accuse you of r***. You should be fired from your job. Guilt or innocence doesn't matter, merely the accusation.

This isnt my logic nor anything to do with what I said.

I would expect to be fired from my job if I was charged with r*** and the public were made aware I was bragging about spit roasting the complainant.

catchweight wrote:

the-goon wrote:

catchweight wrote:I dont think anyone is saying its isolated to Ulster. But the two players were brought to trial on a very serious charge, the messages were revealed and in the process they damaged themselves and the club they represented. I really think this was the only option and I dont think the players can have many complaints. They brought the the cub into dsirepute, damaged its brand and threatened its sponsorship. They had to go for their own sake and for the club. Saying Im sure it happens at other clubs doesnt really absolve them or change anything. I think the precedent set that if you are brought to trial on a charge like that and those kind of messages become public then you will have your contract terminated is reasonable.

People asking why isnt Gilroy sacked - because he wasnt accused of sexual assault clearly is the reason. The two players were found legally not guilty in the eyes of the the law but for many out there their actions and behavior were unacceptable and life isnt as clear cut as being found not guilty of a crime that is notoriously difficult to prove will result in widespread re-acceptance. Being accused of r*** and then being found sharing messages celebrating "spit roasting" a distressed complainant of sexual assault will be unforgivable for many irrespective of the outcome of the case. What happened to the two players could happen to a whole lot more players I am quite sure but that doesnt absolve the them of having to deal with the consequences. I would be surprised if anyone expected to keep their job after a trial like that.

OK, using your logic.

I accuse you of r***. You should be fired from your job. Guilt or innocence doesn't matter, merely the accusation.

This isnt my logic nor anything to do with what I said.

I would expect to be fired from my job if I was charged with r*** and the public were made aware I was bragging about spit roasting the complainant.

Even if you didn't r*** her, and she just falsely accused you after the fact? You would be ok with being fired? Well fair enough.

So you have never talked about your sexual encounters to your friends via private message ever in your life? Fair enough.

I'm glad you have never said anything derogatory about women in your life ever, as if you have you'd be a massive hypocrite. Good man

Sin é wrote:

the-goon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

Be_the_ball wrote:
Why don't we ruin some other people's careers based solely on Sin's imagination, seems reasonable. (The preceding text was sarcasm).

How is their rugby career being ruined? Its not as if they are short of offers from top Clubs in France and UK.
Was Tadgh Byrne's rugby career ruined because Leinster released him?

For a proper description of a career being ruined, a good example would be Trevor Brennan who received a lifetime ban from rugby (at the insistance of Syd Miller I believe) and was fined 20K for striking an Ulster supporter. He later appealed it and got a 5 year ban.

The lads should count themselves lucky they were not banned for life from all rugby.

WHAT!! So saying mean words !!WORDS!!! about women is the same as assault? What world do you live in?

Words have meaning. Brennan got a life ban (later appealed to 5 years). He lost a contract to play rugby for a further year and get into coaching.

This is what the committee thought:

'It was the view of the committee that Mr Brennan's behaviour was completely unjustified and that he caused serious harm to an innocent spectator and significant damage to the image of rugby union.

Now, don't tell me that this whole affair has not damaged the image of rugby in Ireland.

Ok, so by your logic, if you insult me, I have the moral right knock you out. Words have meaning don't you know.

Sin é wrote:

Be_the_ball wrote:
Why don't we ruin some other people's careers based solely on Sin's imagination, seems reasonable. (The preceding text was sarcasm).

How is their rugby career being ruined? Its not as if they are short of offers from top Clubs in France and UK.
Was Tadgh Byrne's rugby career ruined because Leinster released him?

For a proper description of a career being ruined, a good example would be Trevor Brennan who received a lifetime ban from rugby (at the insistance of Syd Miller I believe) and was fined 20K for striking an Ulster supporter. He later appealed it and got a 5 year ban.

The lads should count themselves lucky they were not banned for life from all rugby.

Their international careers are in ruins, they will never play International rugby again, or Lions rugby.

the-goon wrote:

So you have never talked about your sexual encounters to your friends via private message ever in your life?  Fair enough.  

Is this a thing? You sound surprised that he hasn’t.

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

carpet baboon wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:

Sin é wrote:

marty2086 wrote:Really, what part of the conversation said that?

That is the message given out in both what they said and their actions.

That's not what I asked, what part of the conversation did it

Well, CG asking if they had f**ed any s**ts. That suggests that this is a normal activity of this particular group for starters.
Then they start talking about spit roasting a woman as if she was a pig!

It would be interesting to know if close friends like Henderson are members of this particular group, or any other young team mates from Ulster Rugby like McCloskey/Luke Marshall - their own age group who didn't contribute to the conversation?

So zebo and Murray were perfect gentlemen, walked her home, sent flowers, didn't discuss it with any of there freinds?

We don't have any evidence to it being other than that. She probably stayed the night and boasted about it the next day to a friend who circulated it to a group. The video was circulated in a WhatsApp group. Don't even know if they were members of the group, but they said nothing.

Sin you don't know any of that. You are choosing to believe that's true.

I know there were no court cases over whether it was consensual or not.

But sin your argument was about how they treated/thought of women. You claim the same activity carried out by zeebo and Murray is fine as they were gentlemen, wouldn't dare say bad things, pure wholesome chaps. But the to Ulster lads are a disgrace. Yet they used that woman the same way zeebo and murray did.. they met her in a kebab house(obvs a first date in your eyes) invited her back and used her. But that's fine to you as your not privy to the private conversation they had about it.

And weren't you the one espousing Christian values? Where is your forgiveness? Or does it only count if they are from munster.?
It's called hypocrisy sin and that's what really tits me off obout your argument. Pick a moral and apply it equally. Or keep your one eye and one day the behaviour of your sainted Munster boys may shock you. Because if you think they haven't been up to the same with the same language used you really are massively out of touch with the world

The only thing I've claimed about Zebo & Murray is that there was no questions as to whether it was consensual (they used each other!). They didn't film the event and they didn't circulate it on social media. No one produced text messages where they talked about women in a derogatory way.

I don't think I was the one espousing Christian values. Don't confuse any comments I may have made about it possibly causing a split in the dressing room because of a few of the players because of their religious beliefs.