Who will decide

[Dave]

Dave,
You are correct that this is now about the future of two young sportsmen but sadly I can see no final outcome other than the Union saying "game was brought into disrepute...blah blah ... refer you to policy number 43 in our employees handbook blah blah blah.... we listened to you before making our minds up.....".
Vodafone and the rest will have a quiet word in the ears of the blazers. In fact, they probably already have done so.
Olding handled the post trial stuff very well but I don't believe it will save his career on this island.

The best they can hope for in my modest opinion is that the IRFU let them back in 2019, having purged themselves in some other jurisdiction. That's just the reality of the business of sport. I have nothing more to say but to wish them well.

I like to know which offence they would even charge them with. Potentially indecency in the wassap exchange. Perhaps this is why SO was quicker to apologise. PJ said nothing of substance in the chat.

An experienced HR professional who has had access to their: contract, code of conduct and disciplinary procedure may be able to predict what they could be charged with. Also helpful as secondary sources would be evidence of any other actions taken or not taken under the auspices of those same documents in similar circumstances. As for the rest of us, not a baldy notion. It would be pure speculation based on guesswork.
There is zero chance of a dodgy dismissal being slipped past McVeigh and Winters and I mean zero. Starting with the verdicts handed down as well as the manner and speed with which they were handed down means that Paddy and Stu have a very strong hand before sitting down.
I only see two options other than reinstatement. Either they are justifiably dismissed, or their contracts are bought out by the IRFU for a large wad of cash with a "mutual consent" announcement.
Paddy and Stu want to clear their names. If they agree to leave by mutual consent, it's going to cost the IRFU, because anything other than reinstatement will be viewed as a partial admission of wrongdoing and justification for the protestors. If the IRFU want them to take one for the team, they'd better get the cheque book out.

A pretty fair analysis, Sniper.

[stickinout]

Dave,
You are correct that this is now about the future of two young sportsmen but sadly I can see no final outcome other than the Union saying "game was brought into disrepute...blah blah ... refer you to policy number 43 in our employees handbook blah blah blah.... we listened to you before making our minds up.....".
Vodafone and the rest will have a quiet word in the ears of the blazers. In fact, they probably already have done so.
Olding handled the post trial stuff very well but I don't believe it will save his career on this island.

The best they can hope for in my modest opinion is that the IRFU let them back in 2019, having purged themselves in some other jurisdiction. That's just the reality of the business of sport. I have nothing more to say but to wish them well.

I like to know which offence they would even charge them with. Potentially indecency in the wassap exchange. Perhaps this is why SO was quicker to apologise. PJ said nothing of substance in the chat.

Good point. I wouldn't be surprised if the defending barristers had already looked over their contracts, and had worked out their strategy in dealing with the IRFU. SO needed to show some contrition, or maybe i'm being cynical and there was no strategic positioning being done by them.

[Snipe Watson]

Wonder if Nucifora has input as if he’s responsible for ensuring all provinces have the player resource to make them competitive then he should be saying PJ and SO are essential to turning round Ulsters sh!tv state. Obviously Murray was to Munster and Ireland hence was left untouched.

I don't think the importance of the players will come into it. It'll be objectively based on the documents and as how the IRFU sees fit to interpret aforesaid documents! You know what lawyers and their likes are like Snipe, some of them could argue black is white..

Well there will be two sets of lawyers in the room. The PPS spent 9 weeks trying to out manoeuvre KRW recently and the facts won out.
Parsing a document can only take you so far. The wording of the documents is likely to be fairly watertight.

[Snipe Watson]

Good point. I wouldn't be surprised if the defending barristers had already looked over their contracts, and had worked out their strategy in dealing with the IRFU. SO needed to show some contrition, or maybe i'm being cynical and there was no strategic positioning being done by them.

You haven't had much to do with barristers by the sound of it.
The lawyers have been in and out of their contracts for months they know them inside out. They will have every single angle covered. they already know their arguments as well as what the other side will argue.
Paddy and Stu's defence began with the statements outside court. One was aggressive and firm and the other was much more contrite. That was all prepared and strategic, good cop bad cop.

[Deraless]

Must admit I've never heard anything about any of these on social media...

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[damianmcr]

Ah the strippers one was all over whatsapp.

Some Dublin radio station even called one of them and had a right laugh.

[Deraless]

Ah the strippers one was all over whatsapp.

Some Dublin radio station even called one of them and had a right laugh.

That almost sounds like a celebration of lad culture from that radio station!

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[richardt84]

Good point. I wouldn't be surprised if the defending barristers had already looked over their contracts, and had worked out their strategy in dealing with the IRFU. SO needed to show some contrition, or maybe i'm being cynical and there was no strategic positioning being done by them.

You haven't had much to do with barristers by the sound of it.
The lawyers have been in and out of their contracts for months they know them inside out. They will have every single angle covered. they already know their arguments as well as what the other side will argue.
Paddy and Stu's defence began with the statements outside court. One was aggressive and firm and the other was much more contrite. That was all prepared and strategic, good cop bad cop.

In the context of the above this link may be of relevance http://www.aocsolicitors.ie/irfu-ulster ... c-opinion/




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Kofi Annan]

Bottom line folks, any employer can sack any employee for any thing that they think off, however they still have to pay a price. But they can sack you for not liking your shoes, butbst8ll they have to pay the price .

#onlywomencancallslutsluts

[Mac]

Good point. I wouldn't be surprised if the defending barristers had already looked over their contracts, and had worked out their strategy in dealing with the IRFU. SO needed to show some contrition, or maybe i'm being cynical and there was no strategic positioning being done by them.

You haven't had much to do with barristers by the sound of it.
The lawyers have been in and out of their contracts for months they know them inside out. They will have every single angle covered. they already know their arguments as well as what the other side will argue.
Paddy and Stu's defence began with the statements outside court. One was aggressive and firm and the other was much more contrite. That was all prepared and strategic, good cop bad cop.

In the context of the above this link may be of relevance http://www.aocsolicitors.ie/irfu-ulster ... c-opinion/




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

http://www.aocsolicitors.ie/irfu-ulster ... c-opinion/

.........sums it up to the letter of the law.

[Deraless]

In the context of the above this link may be of relevance http://www.aocsolicitors.ie/irfu-ulster ... c-opinion/

So says a Mexican woman!

In all seriousness though that clarifies things a lot more given that they should know. Thanks Richardt Strauss.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[jean valjean]

Previous newspaper article.....


THE young woman at the centre of an alleged sex scandal involving two Ireland rugby players told how she has been left devastated by the encounter.The pretty university graduate spoke to the Sunday Independent after news of the alleged threesome spread across the internet.

This newspaper revealed last week how the Wicklow woman, who is in her mid-20s, allegedly had sex with two international players at a well-known Dublin hotel.

The tryst came to light after she revealed all to a friend on Facebook, saying: "I'm a broken woman."

The young woman at the centre of the controversy now said she has "huge regrets" about the alleged sexual encounter.

"I would take it back if I could," she said.

"The Facebook message was private. It makes it sound like I'm boasting but I wasn't. I was only telling my friend."

She added: "I am not proud at all. I never wanted anyone to know. If I could take it back I would."

More details emerged of the alleged encounter this week when it became a talking point on radio phone-in shows.

Meanwhile, the two rugby stars – who cannot be named for legal reasons – have been keeping a low profile as news of their alleged sexual antics spread.

A PR guru who represents several of the players' teammates told the Sunday Independent: "I have received a couple of calls asking me about it and I have spoken to people who have been in contact with the players. My advice to them is to keep their heads down."

One of the players was spotted driving his luxury car through his hometown last week after spending a few days out of the country.

The fling is said to have taken place following a night out by the rugby friends at a well-known Dublin nightspot.

The players had been socialising in Dublin's Grafton Street area before visiting an exclusive club where they were entertained in the VIP section. The young woman told her friend that later on she met one of the players by chance outside a takeaway.

She claims they went back to the sports star's Dublin hotel where they had a couple of drinks. She then alleges they "did the deed".

The second player came into the room afterwards and that was when, according to the woman, "we did the deed all together".

Her claims, including pictures of the woman, were sent around various mobile phone messaging groups – each of which can have anything up to 50 participants in a conversation at any one time.

It is alleged that the day after the encounter, an iPhone user unwittingly sent details of the night and the woman's picture to one of these groups where the woman's brother was also a member.

The woman told her friend afterwards: "I'm literally just sitting here crying. I only found out from my brother –he was sent it."

The alleged threesome is the first scandal of its kind to engulf the normally clean-cut Irish rugby team, who rarely court controversy off the pitch.

It is understood the woman had planned to go on a holiday abroad with two girlfriends this weekend.

However, it is not known if she will continue with her plans.



Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Snipe Watson]

Good point. I wouldn't be surprised if the defending barristers had already looked over their contracts, and had worked out their strategy in dealing with the IRFU. SO needed to show some contrition, or maybe i'm being cynical and there was no strategic positioning being done by them.

You haven't had much to do with barristers by the sound of it.
The lawyers have been in and out of their contracts for months they know them inside out. They will have every single angle covered. they already know their arguments as well as what the other side will argue.
Paddy and Stu's defence began with the statements outside court. One was aggressive and firm and the other was much more contrite. That was all prepared and strategic, good cop bad cop.

In the context of the above this link may be of relevance http://www.aocsolicitors.ie/irfu-ulster ... c-opinion/




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well that's what I've been saying since the verdicts.

[Snipe Watson]

Bottom line folks, any employer can sack any employee for any thing that they think off, however they still have to pay a price. But they can sack you for not liking your shoes, butbst8ll they have to pay the price .

#onlywomencancallslutsluts

That's OK if the case is not a cause celebre. Sack the employee and pay the tribunal settlement.

The IRFU cannot afford to have their decision dragged through the courts and overturned in full public view with wall to wall reporting. The high profile of the case now turns to being in the guys' favour instead of against them. Any skulduggery will be exposed and lead to a PR nightmare.

[Snipe Watson]

In the context of the above this link may be of relevance http://www.aocsolicitors.ie/irfu-ulster ... c-opinion/

So says a Mexican woman!

In all seriousness though that clarifies things a lot more given that they should know. Thanks Richardt Strauss.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Ye mean you didn't believe it when I told you?
I'm mortified.
That's you and me finished Dera.....