What a waste of rugby talent

First topic message reminder :

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-50455162

No way back for Folau now.

It's a bit more than that, just over 4 milliln quid.

That is a helluva hit if true they are not exactly rolling in it.

More importantly to me though, it implies that IF was right all along and can mouth off whatever he likes and his employer can do bugger all about it.

There are no doubt some finer points of law at play here and contracts may get re drafted in the future because of it.

It does not seem right to me though

Ofc, just a joke BigG

I did realise that

It sounds like the A$8m rumour is wildly inaccurate.

It will be easier to tell when ARU publish their accounts, but Castle has insisted that while the settlement is confidential, it was less than the cost of going to trial and will not have an impact on this year's budget.

The cost for the ARU is dependent on whether they have some form of insurance cover for unfair treatment in the workplace.

You'd like to think he'll now use that money to help people. Oh no hang on. He thinks people are getting what they deserve. What a plank the guy is.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You'd like to think he'll now use that money to help people. Oh no hang on. He thinks people are getting what they deserve. What a plank the guy is.

I really do not believe he has received all that much.

I agree with LT, it would have made no sense to have settled for that amount. If their case was that bad then why would they have risked ever going to court in the first place

It's a Micky take that hes got anything more than requested to leave and never come back.

It's a pretty horrible indicator of where we are as a society nowadays that someone can say such inflammatory things and get paid for it. Still, hopefully this marks the end of Folau being in the public eye and he can live his sad little deranged life in private.

Hypothetically, could a gay player in the Oz squad (if there was one) come out and sue the Ozzie union for not supporting them in this matter and for apologising to Folau? If Folau got money for not having his religious views respected then a gay player could surely sue the union for paying Folau when Folau didn't respect gay players' rights to freedom of expression and sexuality!

The Oracle wrote:Hypothetically, could a gay player in the Oz squad (if there was one) come out and sue the Ozzie union for not supporting them in this matter and for apologising to Folau?  If Folau got money for not having his religious views respected then a gay player could surely sue the union for paying Folau when Folau didn't respect gay players' rights to freedom of expression and sexuality!

I don't know.... but would an habitual drunk player... a guy who drank heavily each week, in pre-season and during the season.... would he keep his role in a club, do we think? And if he didn't, wouldn't he too be liable to use the Folau Law to claim compensation or indeed even demand to keep his role even whilst drinking? After all, he was on Folau's list of transgressors too and he got a human right to drink beer if his neighbour can.

Depends if you can perform under the influence as well as Paul McGrath.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Depends if you can perform under the influence as well as Paul McGrath.

Yeah, Paul was on the list too.

Just goes to prove, not everything in the world needs the word 'gay' to be newsworthy. Adulterers got a tongue lashing too. Not much print about their displeasure with Folau. Must be because most of them were too busy laughing.... them and the drunks.

I think the major difference there fly is you chose to drink, cheat on your wife etc - you don't chose to be gay.

Supposedly he had affidavits from fellow players who were going to support him in court and this is what forced RA to go from "We are right and he can get lost" to "We were both right and both wrong"

Only rumours but if true would have open a whole can of worms for RA to deal with.

Brendan wrote:Supposedly he had affidavits from fellow players who were going to support him in court and this is what forced RA to go from "We are right and he can get lost" to "We were both right and both wrong"

Only rumours but if true would have open a whole can of worms for RA to deal with.

I believe they were ex-players. TBH this was a simple case of employment and contract law.

Nice to see sonny bill Williams use the platform for something that does need calling out. Honourable mention to Gary Neville for his work yesterday.

Sonny Bill is a prime example of how to be a deeply religious sporting icon - his message is only ever of peace and tolerance.

Guest wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-50455162

No way back for Folau now.

Well as predicted Israel has returned to rugby league who are a far less middle class, squeamish bunch than rugby union. Interesting to see that he has gone to a French club who although a strongly roman catholic country are a secular society by law.

Won his case against the Australian Rugby Union - despite their bleating that they only threw money at him because it was cheaper than fighting the case - and back in rugby. If you don't like his opinions and I don't that is fine, but don't take away his freedom of speech. If so then presumably you would want all copies of the bible and the Koran destroyed as he is just quoting from religious scripture.

nlpnlp wrote:

Guest wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-50455162

No way back for Folau now.

Well as predicted Israel has returned to rugby league who are a far less middle class, squeamish bunch than rugby union.  Interesting to see that he has gone to a French club who although a strongly roman catholic country are a secular society by law.

Won his case against the Australian Rugby Union - despite their bleating that they only threw money at him because it was cheaper than fighting the case - and back in rugby.  If you don't like his opinions and I don't that is fine, but don't take away his freedom of speech.  If so then presumably you would want all copies of the bible and the Koran destroyed as he is just quoting from religious scripture.

This fundamentally misunderstands what freedom of speech is. Freedom of speech is the right to voice your opinion without the state censoring or imprisoning you as a result. There is no suggestion that Israel Folau should face any judicial action from the law courts. Folau's platform is an exalted one as an Australian rugby player, however it is not a platform he has or could have created solely of his own accord. As an Australian rugby player he stands on the shoulders of those who came before him and it is for him to leave a legacy to those who come after. As the arbiter of that platform, Rugby Australia have their own freedoms. The right to determine who uses their platform and for what cause. They have established the values they stand for, Folau was made aware of that and chose to oppose them nonetheless. No one has threatened or questioned his freedom of speech, they have disagreed with what he said and utilised the mechanisms at their disposal to unequivocally signal their opposition. Likewise, the platform afforded to him by playing Super League is one built by players that have come before him and those who play with and against him. That means he is standing on the hard work and dedication of Gareth Thomas and Keegan Hirst, using the platform they helped construct having accused them of depravity. Sponsors have the right to decide they do not want their brand associated with an individual who propagates homophobia. Yes we should all have the freedom of speech, but we all have a responsibility to consider the consequences of what we say and weigh up whether it is worthwhile. Folau determined that he was going to utilise the full extent of his freedom of speech, he cannot complain when others exercise the mechanisms available to him in opposition.

Ha. Hes signed for a club who have made him sign a contract saying if he expresses those views publically again they can fire him. Many people within league have expressed disgust and Wigan have announced a pride day for when catalans come to town.

I would have hoped no clubs in either code would touch him by, sadly, any sort of principles often go out of the window on sport.

Hypocrisy is rife. Like Money Bill who claims to be the devoutest of all and yet craves all kinds of publicity and is so cash-hungry its a bit sad.

He’s signed a clause? Funny, the last one didn’t work. He’ll do it again. The need to save people from their ills is like a calling, and can’t be stopped by merge humans, or pieces if paper. Bet he won’t last.

I am both a Christian and a rugby fan. I find the whole situation very sad. There are no winners but I don't know the answer to social media to be honest because we treat it like our diaries when it's more like publishing. I hope for everyone's sake people find understanding and forgiveness on all sides as that seems frequently forgotten as a key teaching.

Sure, as long as everyone includes Folau. No point everyone else understanding and forgiving if he ain’t. Last time forgiveness and understanding came in the form of a settlement out of court, with neither side the wiser, but at least one able to cut its losses. And certainly by adding the clause, his new employers aren’t convinced.

Folau is a bigot and a disgrace to whichever sport he represents.

I am a big believer in free speech. People forces there opinion;s on any thing. "BUT" Condemning people a race of people just because you do not agree with their choice of sexualaty is a big no no for me.

If some one is gay,bisexual  it is none of any one else business but theirs, and that should be respected by others.

Christ Madge, that’s a riddle.

What race was affected?

Clubs are now threatening legal action against the Dragons if any league sponsors withdraw because of Folau.

Cyril wrote:Folau is a bigot and a disgrace to whichever sport he represents.

a bit harsh, don’t you think?

He is naive to think his public speaking about his faith doesn’t harm people, and he is ignorant to think his public speaking is in contrast with what his employers require of him, but bigoted in what way?

Is it now the case that being political correct is a given for sports stars.

Sport still has very few openly gay people so is that a reflection of the culture with the sport especially at the professional level or just the men's game.

In the outrage culture where do we draw the line. Currently it is my it supports my side I am fine or it does support my view it is terrible let's ruin the person in every way because he is a bigot/racist etc. Jackson not guilty in the eyes of the law was deemed by many unsuitable to play in the Premership.  Connacht ripped up Sevu Reece's contract for admitted GBH on his partner but it was ok for him to be an AB.  Calls during the WC for SA players to be removed from the squad because of Racist accusations. Cips hitting a female officer during arrest.

If we draw the line at words then we go down the entertainment route of social media robbing us in the future of star players.  Let's not forget Aki liked then deleted the post, while Billy had calls for him to be sacked because he believes in orthodox Christian values (as do Muslims and Jews).  This only heads one way, in 5 years time Billy would have been not called up by England again

If one person says something they believe and 1000 voices come out and condemn it, I can't see how that one voice does more damage than the 1000 supporting you. World is becoming polarised and PC won't change people's beliefs just strenghten them

Gooseberry wrote:Clubs are now threatening legal action against the Dragons  if any league sponsors withdraw because of Folau.

If this happens and they win it would be a joke. Telling clubs that all players must be vetted by the other clubs before being able to sign them is ridiculous. If Folou is the most influential thing in the Super League for sponsers they have bigger problems than I thought.

Who needs to pay for marketing...this is doing wonders for them.

The Katie Hopkins approach GF.

Im not a fan of what Folau has said...think hes an idiot...but im pretty sure more people know who the Catalan Dragaons are now than ever before.

What if he is mentally ill?

Do people judge him in the same way?

Cyril wrote:That’s brilliant!

My local in Roath (Cardiff) year’s ago was Bar Billabong and emblazoned on the wall was loads of sayings like that. My favourite was ‘busier than a one-armed paper hanger in a hurricane’

Billabong is called the Pear Tree now, no TV's there for the rugby now but still some cracking pubs in Roath.

For all those lining up to take a shot at Folau, please answer the following questions yes or no:

1. Should we ban the bible and burn all copies of it?

2. Should we ban the Koran and burn all copies of it?

3. Should Tonga be banned from the world of rugby?

Both the bible and the Koran condemn homosexuality. In Tonga homosexuality is illegal. So if you want to ban Folau you need to deal with the above 3 points.

I am sure you all think that you are very tolerant and homosexual friendly. However, with 1 in 10 men being gay (and probably more) why are there no current professional rugby union players who are openly out as gay or bi-sexual? Is it because gay men are no good at rugby? Or is it because they are worried about the reaction of the so called moral majority.

If the Tongan rugby federation said the same things that Folau did, then yes, ban them them international rugby. Hate speak is hate speak.

That you say that very few gay players come out is exactly because of the likes of Folau (and many others in the game that hold his view, for religious or non-religious reasons). Bigots are bigots.

We need to call out people like Folau, who are so open in their hatred, in the hope that it shows that sport is inclusive. Sadly, it seems (as he shows no change in his sentiments) he will always take top dollar (irony?) because he’s good at what he does.

Falou setting up his ‘begging’ account to fight his ‘battle’ just showed his hypocrisy in terms of his career over his cause.

Wow, this is a first.... I totally agree with Cyril. Well said.

Not sure that book burning is a relevant comparison. You can dislike a book without wanting it burned.

Folau isn't being banned, either. I can't get a professional rugby contract but I'm not banned, I just don't meet the required standard. In my case, it's sporting ability, while in Folau's case it's his public profile.

Sport doesn't exist in a vacuum. When apartheid was a hot topic, the main argument for continuing to play South Africa teams was a version of "keep politics out of sport". John Arlott eloquently dismissed that stance in a debate at the Cambridge Union in 1969. The same is true for gender, and sexuality, as it is for race.

In 1968 Arlott wrote "Few of those within world-class cricket are political animals. That, however, is no excuse for being politically unconscious."  In his later speech, Arlott said those in favour of ignoring apartheid, and continuing to play South Africa,  “will not exclude politics from sport but will in fact be attempting to exclude sport from life”.

If you only take Folau's undoubted rugby ability into account when offering him a contract, and not his publicly stated views as well, then you are also "attempting to exclude sport from life”.

Cyril wrote:If the Tongan rugby federation said the same things that Folau did, then yes, ban them them international rugby. Hate speak is hate speak.

That you say that very few gay players come out is exactly because of the likes of Folau (and many others in the game that hold his view, for religious or non-religious reasons). Bigots are bigots.

We need to call out people like Folau, who are so open in their hatred, in the hope that it shows that sport is inclusive. Sadly, it seems (as he shows no change in his sentiments) he will always take top dollar (irony?) because he’s good at what he does.

Falou setting up his ‘begging’ account to fight his ‘battle’ just showed his hypocrisy in terms of his career over his cause.

1000% Agree

Rugby and society would be better without people like him.

NLP.
No.
No.
That law is problematic but in a rugby sense unless they were to start openly saying things like folou difficult for wr to get involved. From a football perspective I'm against the wc going to Qatar for some reference point.
Yes I suspect that players generally dont come out as they are worried about public reaction. Still considered brave for the recent ref to come out. Shame as I know of one major star who is gay and firmly in the closet. It can be easy to look at him and say hed make a huge difference being open but it's his life to choose.
And yes I'd echo the sentiments above.

Gooseberry wrote:Thought this was going to be another cheap shot at Scotland,

Who would take a cheap shot at such a powerful, unbeatable country like Scotland?
With players who don't know the meaning of the words quit, loss, or failure!
Players who have been brought up with such successful role models such as... Gavin Hastings back in the early 90's!

Never! we have total belief in mighty Scotland!

I've avoided this issue up until now for a few specific reasons...

They all revolve around people not understanding the situation correctly, and the hypocrisy of condemnation of an act.

There have been accusations of bigotry, racism, and links to violent acts, all because it's popular to bash the Christian faith at the minute.

Social media trends are very easily seen on this thread:

No matter your actions, no matter your beliefs, as long as you type the right attitude your golden, vary from a very specific world view and the crowd comes for you!

We have players who are ex alcoholics, wife beaters, caught cheaters, and ex criminals... yet they're all ok compared to the heinous crime of posting an unpopular view about the left wings new glory group!

The world's gone mad, and those who are calling him names the loudest are seriously thinking about the situation the least!

Oh shut up

Dirtydave wrote:I've avoided this issue up until now for a few specific reasons...

They all revolve around people not understanding the situation correctly, and the hypocrisy of condemnation of an act.

There have been accusations of bigotry, racism, and links to violent acts, all because it's popular to bash the Christian faith at the minute.

Social media trends are very easily seen on this thread:

No matter your actions, no matter your beliefs, as long as you type the right attitude your golden, vary from a very specific world view and the crowd comes for you!

We have players who are ex alcoholics, wife beaters, caught cheaters, and ex criminals... yet they're all ok compared to the heinous crime of posting an unpopular view about the left wings new glory group!

The world's gone mad, and those who are calling him names the loudest are seriously thinking about the situation the least!

Yeah it's the liberals fault the man is homophobic and it's this new PC world we live in. What a load of rubbish, Bambi was released in the 1940s and came with the very meaningful message of "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all". Folau was sh!t stirring and he knew it, it wasn't the first time. He was reminded that his contract specifically stipulated that his social media conduct had to follow the ARU guidelines. He was either too stupid or arrogant to listen and got fired after another breach. My previous contract of employment had a similar clause in it which I was careful to follow.

Folau breached his code of conduct and has since suffered the consequences, can we not leave it at that? There's people here and elsewhere literally wanting his head because of his viewpoint, albeit a sad and out of date one. That doesn't sit right with me.

* If we are strictly referring to his comments regarding the Aus bushfires, then it's hard not to think "what a stupid c u next Tuesday"... but still, I won't be wanting his death over it.

Thanks for proving my point bam bam. If you don't agree with me shut up!

Sam

Do you believe in the UNHRC principles of freedom of expression and freedom of religion?

I didn't mention liberals, I said left wing, which is what Twitter's owner Jack Dorsey claims the platform as. Should we not put words in each other's mouths?

You call Folau homophobic, he calls himself religious, let's be real that all religions clash with homosexuality, just look at the Birmingham school protests.

So where does the line blurr between protecting protected groups against tweets, and ripping up the human rights code for a protected group (which by British law Folau also is btw)?

The new game of victimhood is a complex road, there seems to be a lot of stone throwing, and not a lot of empathy for a minority who wants to express his religious views.

Calling Folau homophobic is akin to calling Folaus insulters racist imo