Gerald the Mole wrote:Heard that Absolutely vile abuse was thrown at the referee, Referees are right in boycotting this game, the branch failed badly in punishment to Coleraine.
I heard the complete opposite.
I heard that what was said was the sort of thing that is repeated up and down the country every Saturday.
I heard that the Branch investigation accepted that and their action was appropriate. However the ref wouldn't let it go and the Society want to make a stand.
So, what was said then, if it’s not that bad I am sure you will repeat it , I do believe the club was found guilty of an offence and fined , but suspended as is normal in Ulster Rugby.
To clarify:
I heard that what was said ...
I did not hear what was said.
So yes, as I understand it, the club was found guilty and sanctioned in line with precedent. The same as the Branch could do at numerous clubs each week, were complaints to be lodged.
BR, once again your waffling, what was said was bang out of order. No referee should suffer that abuse, Coleraine need to be punished more severe, points deducted and a proper an open apology to The ref might help.
So your assumption is that it was not that bad and acceptable? As you compare it to normal Saturday banter,
Not to put words into BRs mouth but my understanding of what BR said was that it similar things are heard across club grounds with no action taken
Gerald the Mole wrote:Heard that Absolutely vile abuse was thrown at the referee, Referees are right in boycotting this game, the branch failed badly in punishment to Coleraine.
I heard the complete opposite.
I heard that what was said was the sort of thing that is repeated up and down the country every Saturday.
I heard that the Branch investigation accepted that and their action was appropriate. However the ref wouldn't let it go and the Society want to make a stand.
So, what was said then, if it’s not that bad I am sure you will repeat it , I do believe the club was found guilty of an offence and fined , but suspended as is normal in Ulster Rugby.
To clarify:
I heard that what was said ...
I did not hear what was said.
So yes, as I understand it, the club was found guilty and sanctioned in line with precedent. The same as the Branch could do at numerous clubs each week, were complaints to be lodged.
BR, once again your waffling, what was said was bang out of order. No referee should suffer that abuse, Coleraine need to be punished more severe, points deducted and a proper an open apology to The ref might help.
So your assumption is that it was not that bad and acceptable? As you compare it to normal Saturday banter,
Again to make it clear - this is what I heard.
I also heard that Paddy Bamford insulted Brennan's mother.
If you know what was said or even know what was alleged to be said, then pray tell. However you originally said that you had heard it was absolutely vile, I have no idea if your source is any better than mine.
As Russ suggests my information is that it was no worse than can be often heard said about referees. I'm not suggesting that is acceptable (those who know me will know how little time I have for abuse of refs). Normally, however it is unpunished, simply because it is unreported. For whatever reason, this one became a complaint and rightly action was taken against the club.
BR, you would think so, but despite Shame claiming he was involved in everything , Domestic Rugby Was not part of his remit and done everything in his Celestial power not to get involved, I believe the true force behind Shame is back part time , even he won’t care about Coleraine
Coleraine should be proactive as a club, show that they have dealt FULLY with the matter and DEMONSTRATE how, that might help
Gerald the Mole wrote:BR, you would think so, but despite Shame claiming he was involved in everything , Domestic Rugby Was not part of his remit and done everything in his Celestial power not to get involved, I believe the true force behind Shame is back part time , even he won’t care about Coleraine
Coleraine should be proactive as a club, show that they have dealt FULLY with the matter and DEMONSTRATE how, that might help
You will note I did not say that it may help to have Logan.
When I originally heard about this, I heard Coleraine were having difficulty identifying exactly who had said what on the day in question. I don't know if they ever progressed that further.
But like on Police Camera Action, it is difficult to prosecute the driver, if you don't know who was behind the wheel at the time.
Gerald the Mole wrote:BR, you would think so, but despite Shame claiming he was involved in everything , Domestic Rugby Was not part of his remit and done everything in his Celestial power not to get involved, I believe the true force behind Shame is back part time , even he won’t care about Coleraine
Coleraine should be proactive as a club, show that they have dealt FULLY with the matter and DEMONSTRATE how, that might help
You will note I did not say that it may help to have Logan.
When I originally heard about this, I heard Coleraine were having difficulty identifying exactly who had said what on the day in question. I don't know if they ever progressed that further.
But like on Police Camera Action, it is difficult to prosecute the driver, if you don't know who was behind the wheel at the time.
The owner of the vehicle has a responsibility but, they just can’t say oh I don’t know who was driving,
Gerald the Mole wrote:BR, you would think so, but despite Shame claiming he was involved in everything , Domestic Rugby Was not part of his remit and done everything in his Celestial power not to get involved, I believe the true force behind Shame is back part time , even he won’t care about Coleraine
Coleraine should be proactive as a club, show that they have dealt FULLY with the matter and DEMONSTRATE how, that might help
You will note I did not say that it may help to have Logan.
When I originally heard about this, I heard Coleraine were having difficulty identifying exactly who had said what on the day in question. I don't know if they ever progressed that further.
But like on Police Camera Action, it is difficult to prosecute the driver, if you don't know who was behind the wheel at the time.
The owner of the vehicle has a responsibility but, they just can’t say oh I don’t know who was driving,
Gerald the Mole wrote:BR, you would think so, but despite Shame claiming he was involved in everything , Domestic Rugby Was not part of his remit and done everything in his Celestial power not to get involved, I believe the true force behind Shame is back part time , even he won’t care about Coleraine
Coleraine should be proactive as a club, show that they have dealt FULLY with the matter and DEMONSTRATE how, that might help
You will note I did not say that it may help to have Logan.
When I originally heard about this, I heard Coleraine were having difficulty identifying exactly who had said what on the day in question. I don't know if they ever progressed that further.
But like on Police Camera Action, it is difficult to prosecute the driver, if you don't know who was behind the wheel at the time.
The owner of the vehicle has a responsibility but, they just can’t say oh I don’t know who was driving,
They can.
But that would result in a sanction, “your car is clocked for speeding and Peelers send out a letter asking we was driving, by saying you don’t know does not end the process”