The UAFC

BaggyTrousers wrote:

Cockatrice wrote:

Snipe Watson wrote:People are placing too much belief in what is posted here or reported in the press. None of us know the ins and outs of Gibbes' departure. I wish him well wherever he rocks up.
In some ways, it is good that a new DOR will be able to surround himself with his own people. It can't be easy to come into an existing structure with strong personalities already in post.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) using Tapatalk

Agree... but also a DoR or Head Coach that will have to make do with Kisses new signings and little scope for his own on pitch recruitment.... at least we will have our ten back.

If we don't Cockers, I will find you, and I will kill you.

Sorry baggy.... what I should have said is that our ten will be available to play rugby after his soon to be acquittal thereby throwing the ball firmly back into UR's court and whether they change their stance on his playing again.. common sense may yet prevail although other offers have been floating about in the i-cloud.

Russ wrote:

Rovi Snave wrote:Re. Hendy playing next year - from what I've heard he's gone if Jackson and Olding are acquitted and effectively sacked!!! Apparently he told Bryn where to stuff it after being dressed down for attending the trial.

It's going to et a lot worse before it gets better, if ever!

Can you shine some more light on this?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Not really, except to say the information came from a very reliable source and I have no reason to doubt it!!!

Rovi Snave wrote:

Russ wrote:

Rovi Snave wrote:Re. Hendy playing next year - from what I've heard he's gone if Jackson and Olding are acquitted and effectively sacked!!! Apparently he told Bryn where to stuff it after being dressed down for attending the trial.

It's going to et a lot worse before it gets better, if ever!

Can you shine some more light on this?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Not really, except to say the information came from a very reliable source and I have no reason to doubt it!!!

Thank you

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Cockatrice wrote:

BaggyTrousers wrote:

Cockatrice wrote:

Snipe Watson wrote:People are placing too much belief in what is posted here or reported in the press. None of us know the ins and outs of Gibbes' departure. I wish him well wherever he rocks up.
In some ways, it is good that a new DOR will be able to surround himself with his own people. It can't be easy to come into an existing structure with strong personalities already in post.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) using Tapatalk

Agree... but also a DoR or Head Coach that will have to make do with Kisses new signings and little scope for his own on pitch recruitment.... at least we will have our ten back.

If we don't Cockers, I will find you, and I will kill you.

Sorry baggy.... what I should have said is that our ten will be available to play rugby after his soon to be acquittal thereby throwing the ball firmly back into UR's court and whether they change their stance on his playing again.. common sense may yet prevail although other offers have been floating about in the i-cloud.

Cockers, which club in their right mind would offer a contract to a player being tried for rape?
What's more, I have heard nothing to suggest that PJ and Stu will be shown the door if they are acquitted. There's been plenty of uninformed bull posted on this thread, but that aside not a sausage.
Anyway, it makes no sense whatsoever for Ulster to try to force them out. It would also be at odds with Ulster's attitude when they were known to be under investigation, but before they were charged. Interestingly Paddy wasn't allowed into the USA, but he still played on for Ulster and Ireland. Furthermore it would fly in the face of the IRFU's statement that they had been "stood down from playing" (not suspended) pending the outcome of the case.
All the other scour about the blazers or sponsors want this or they want that means nothing.
I'd imagine they could well have grounds to take action against UR, the blazers and sponsors. No blazer or sponsor with an ounce of wit will express an opinion ahead of the outcome of the trial.
Another thing, the alleged terms in their contract would only apply to an offence they were actually convicted of. You cannot be sacked for being a jackass with a dodgy attitude towards women.
Had the messages been sent from an official UR electronic device, there could possibly be grounds for disciplinary action of some sort, but hardly termination of contract.

Of course I could be completely wrong.

Very true Snipe... But you can be sacked from the Civil Service for being a jackass, getting plastered and making a scene or making remarks agsinst MLAs or gays or women or religion. Just pointing out that some firms have a code of conduct while either at work or not.

I know of some employees who gave been sacked without any formal conviction.

Snipe Watson wrote:

Cockatrice wrote:

BaggyTrousers wrote:

Cockatrice wrote:

Snipe Watson wrote:People are placing too much belief in what is posted here or reported in the press. None of us know the ins and outs of Gibbes' departure. I wish him well wherever he rocks up.
In some ways, it is good that a new DOR will be able to surround himself with his own people. It can't be easy to come into an existing structure with strong personalities already in post.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) using Tapatalk

Agree... but also a DoR or Head Coach that will have to make do with Kisses new signings and little scope for his own on pitch recruitment.... at least we will have our ten back.

If we don't Cockers, I will find you, and I will kill you.

Sorry baggy.... what I should have said is that our ten will be available to play rugby after his soon to be acquittal thereby throwing the ball firmly back into UR's court and whether they change their stance on his playing again.. common sense may yet prevail although other offers have been floating about in the i-cloud.

Cockers, which club in their right mind would offer a contract to a player being tried for rape?
What's more, I have heard nothing to suggest that PJ and Stu will be shown the door if they are acquitted. There's been plenty of uninformed bull posted on this thread, but that aside not a sausage.
Anyway, it makes no sense whatsoever for Ulster to try to force them out. It would also be at odds with Ulster's attitude when they were known to be under investigation, but before they were charged. Interestingly Paddy wasn't allowed into the USA, but he still played on for Ulster and Ireland. Furthermore it would fly in the face of the IRFU's statement that they had been "stood down from playing" (not suspended) pending the outcome of the case.
All the other scour about the blazers or sponsors want this or they want that means nothing.
I'd imagine they could well have grounds to take action against UR, the blazers and sponsors. No blazer or sponsor with an ounce of wit will express an opinion ahead of the outcome of the trial.
Another thing, the alleged terms in their contract would only apply to an offence they were actually convicted of. You cannot be sacked for being a jackass with a dodgy attitude towards women.
Had the messages been sent from an official UR electronic device, there could possibly be grounds for disciplinary action of some sort, but hardly termination of contract.

Of course I could be completely wrong.

I did not say that Ulster or anyone else would be awarding contracts to rapists.. I said that we would soon have our ten available after his pending acquittal... as for internal discussions well there is much more talk than you suggest.. As I say I have already concluded their innocence having listened to a very weak case that will leave the PPS and the PSNI asking questions of themselves.. after that Jackson should be playing.

Cornerfleg wrote:Very true Snipe... But you can be sacked from the Civil Service for being a jackass,

Hang on a minute Fleg, have you not been following the RHI fiasco, it would appear that civil servants get promoted for being jackasses.

Cockatrice wrote:

Snipe Watson wrote:

Cockatrice wrote:[quote="BaggyTrousers]
If we don't Cockers, I will find you, and I will kill you.

Sorry baggy.... what I should have said is that our ten will be available to play rugby after his soon to be acquittal thereby throwing the ball firmly back into UR's court and whether they change their stance on his playing again.. common sense may yet prevail although other offers have been floating about in the i-cloud.

Cockers, which club in their right mind would offer a contract to a player being tried for rape?
What's more, I have heard nothing to suggest that PJ and Stu will be shown the door if they are acquitted. There's been plenty of uninformed bull posted on this thread, but that aside not a sausage.
Anyway, it makes no sense whatsoever for Ulster to try to force them out. It would also be at odds with Ulster's attitude when they were known to be under investigation, but before they were charged. Interestingly Paddy wasn't allowed into the USA, but he still played on for Ulster and Ireland. Furthermore it would fly in the face of the IRFU's statement that they had been "stood down from playing" (not suspended) pending the outcome of the case.
All the other scour about the blazers or sponsors want this or they want that means nothing.
I'd imagine they could well have grounds to take action against UR, the blazers and sponsors. No blazer or sponsor with an ounce of wit will express an opinion ahead of the outcome of the trial.
Another thing, the alleged terms in their contract would only apply to an offence they were actually convicted of. You cannot be sacked for being a jackass with a dodgy attitude towards women.
Had the messages been sent from an official UR electronic device, there could possibly be grounds for disciplinary action of some sort, but hardly termination of contract.

Of course I could be completely wrong.

I did not say that Ulster or anyone else would be awarding contracts to rapists.. I said that we would soon have our ten available after his pending acquittal... as for internal discussions well there is much more talk than you suggest.. As I say I have already concluded their innocence having listened to a very weak case that will leave the PPS and the PSNI asking questions of themselves.. after that Jackson should be playing.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]
You did say: "other offers have been floating about in the i-cloud". I'm saying I very much doubt it.
As for talk, oh there's been plenty of that all right. Mainly emanating from people's hoops.

Out of interest is Olding still in contract?

I said offers .... maybe I should say enquiries .. either way at least one club is interested in one of the players.. as for talking through their hoops there is a lot of that in UR.

Cockatrice wrote:Out of interest is Olding still in contract?

I believe they are both contracted until summer 2019.
A contract renewal would be a very different situation.

Snipe Watson wrote:

Cockatrice wrote:Out of interest is Olding still in contract?

I believe they are both contracted until summer 2019.
A contract renewal would be a very different situation.

On legal aid allegedly

Cockatrice wrote:

Snipe Watson wrote:

Cockatrice wrote:Out of interest is Olding still in contract?

I believe they are both contracted until summer 2019.
A contract renewal would be a very different situation.

On legal aid allegedly

Allegedly

Pay per play?

Dave wrote:Pay per play?

Thanks Dave which means he hasn’t earned much if anything for quite a while now.

They are both contracted, not a zero hours contract.
They're going to be on full pay.