New - Warren Gatland of the week

Talk about the men in white, and everything Ulster!!

Moderators: The Fonz, Moderators

Vote for your Warren Gatland of the Week?

Terry "I say" Thomas
0
No votes
Nigel Owens
4
11%
Simon Zebo
27
73%
M'Burney
1
3%
Donald Trump
5
14%
 
Total votes: 37

User avatar
Dave
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 20508
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Dave » Fri Oct 26, 2018 6:59 am

BR wrote:
Dave wrote:
BR wrote:
Dave wrote:
BR wrote: Which is why Jackson and Olding are in France..

On the one hand the IRFU have usurped natural justice on the other hand they have swept things under the carpet.
Why on earth are you continually attempting to drag our boys into this?

PJ and Stu were sacked for a lot lot less than the nature of the abuse I read about today. They did not direct any words at a person.

Hurling sexist abuse directly at a person trying to do a difficult job in front of a crowd of people is disgusting. Not having the balls to even give your own name after being confronted is cowardly and shameful. The fact that others did not intervene and cannot name the individuals reflects an organisation not fit for purpose.
Perhaps you know more than I do, but I don't know (or want to know) everything that 'your boys' got up to;
Neither do I know exactly what happened in Coleraine,
The IRFU have investigated both and reached their own conclusions and applied penalties within their power.

I remember the UAFC collectively decided that it was unfair to publicly name the accused until they are found guilty. Yet they want Coleraine RFC to name those accused of 'almost criminal' actions. Actions which O believe they deny.
What are you alleging by 'got up to'?

The IRFU came in later on but it was UR who conducted the initial review. The outcome only glaringly highlights the injustice inflicted on PJ and Stu. The disparity between the decisons reflect a biased and corrupt regime.

Anonymity for accussed in sexual crime is entirely different to what is happening here. The individuals in question have reportedly not been identified. That isn't the same thing as being granted anonymity. The UAFC has never agreed on anything. I suggest you engage with specific posters who presented the issues you raised, should you seek further clarification.
I'm not alle
Ok
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17390
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by BR » Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:09 am

Dave wrote:
BR wrote:
Dave wrote:
BR wrote:
Dave wrote:A crime does not need to have taken place for the branch to impose a sanction.
Which is why Jackson and Olding are in France..

On the one hand the IRFU have usurped natural justice on the other hand they have swept things under the carpet.
Why on earth are you continually attempting to drag our boys into this?

PJ and Stu were sacked for a lot lot less than the nature of the abuse I read about today. They did not direct any words at a person.

Hurling sexist abuse directly at a person trying to do a difficult job in front of a crowd of people is disgusting. Not having the balls to even give your own name after being confronted is cowardly and shameful. The fact that others did not intervene and cannot name the individuals reflects an organisation not fit for purpose.
Perhaps you know more than I do, but I don't know (or want to know) everything that 'your boys' got up to;
Neither do I know exactly what happened in Coleraine,
The IRFU have investigated both and reached their own conclusions and applied penalties within their power.

I remember the UAFC collectively decided that it was unfair to publicly name the accused until they are found guilty. Yet they want Coleraine RFC to name those accused of 'almost criminal' actions. Actions which O believe they deny.
What are you alleging by 'got up to'?

The IRFU came in later on but it was UR who conducted the initial review. The outcome only glaringly highlights the injustice inflicted on PJ and Stu. The disparity between the decisons reflect a biased and corrupt regime.

Anonymity for accussed in sexual crime is entirely different to what is happening here. The individuals in question have reportedly not been identified. That isn't the same thing as being granted anonymity. The UAFC has never agreed on anything. I suggest you engage with specific posters who presented the issues you raised, should you seek further clarification.
I can't be alleging anything. I'm not the one who is taking a not guilty verdict of specific charges and extrapolating that to mean that nobody acted badly.
Just like I'm not taking a single statement from a ref to decide I know what happened in Coleraine.

The UB has jurisdiction over CRFC. When presented with the all the evidence the latter accepted UB's decision. They really had no choice as their own investigation was inconclusive.

I wonder would you be able to afford the risk of publicly accusing someone of near criminal activity? Maybe an MP needs to do it under parliamentary privilege.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

User avatar
Tender
Red Hand Ambassador
Posts: 2833
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 1:23 pm
Location: Not Spain

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Tender » Fri Oct 26, 2018 7:18 am

They are paying a fine for that thing which may, or may not have happened, and Everyman, or woman, is putting the thing which may, or may not have happened, behind them and moving on.
The good men, and women, of Coleraine will welcome any wee woman who wants to Referee their games and will install feminine hygiene products in the wee women’s bogs. There is no evidence to substantiate the media claims which sought to explain the thing which may, or may not have happened on the massive chip which all Coleraine men, and women, carry around because they don’t live in Belfast or Londonderry/Derry.

Coleraine, twinned with Lurgan.
Support the Team, not the regime
Guinness is Good For You.

User avatar
Kofi Annan
Lord Chancellor
Posts: 6891
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 3:10 pm

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Kofi Annan » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:10 am

I really can’t believe some on here are trying to defend Coleraine and likening what happened as some sort of boyish behaviour.

This was a subtained verbal attack, of foul and sexist abuse against a referee {regardless of gender} for the full period of the game, at no stage did anyone appear to have stopped it, is that support or fear of the culprits? BR, I recall a past post when this first raised its head saying that what was said was “ not that bad” do you still think what you’ve heard now from a pretty fair journalist, who had read the full statement ( and more) that the abuse was “not that bad”

I don’t believe there is a single poster here { with an exception of two) that would stand by and allow this to happen anywhere. A lot are missing the point from the event until the outcome, the abuse, the clubs support of the four, the deceit from the club, the arrogance of the club, the handling by UR, the handling by the referee society And the attitude to this event.

Finally, Mark Simpson who is leading the charge on this has openly stated that “ people have tried to prevent him running this story, again question has to be why? And who ?

As for you rum, your just an ># a person who lives in the past , just >bud .
“For the liespotter who knows how to listen well, the random words, sounds, and phrases in a person's speech are never as random as they seem. They offer a clear sightline into the liar's psyche.”

User avatar
Dave
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 20508
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Dave » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:19 am

Any excuse to launch a swipe at our boys, BR? Please explain to the board how they 'acted badly'? What did you mean by 'got up to'? Doesn't sound like something good.

This is one of the strangest versions of whataboutery I have ever witnessed. Stop comparing what happened to our boys with this incident. Please just stop it. Two careers ruined because of sponsorship pressure and a weak/corrupt FIRFU. It is insensitive to all involved to compare it to this nonsense.

This is not a criminal trial. It is possible to make an inference based on probability. If one party is accused and accepts their fate, I cannot deny their own acceptance. Where have I made any statement about seeing some single statement as true? I have merely accepted the remarks of acceptance from the club.

I have nothing more to say. Keep your whataboutery to yourself and leave our boys alone.
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?

User avatar
big mervyn
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 12378
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by big mervyn » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:33 am

Kofi Annan wrote: I don’t believe there is a single poster here { with an exception of two) that would stand by and allow this to happen anywhere.
I struggle to comprehend why these boys weren't confronted by the other spectators. If Joy Neville had got a fraction of that abuse at Ravenhill then I'd like to think the perpetrators would have got very short shrift from those around them. Shuffling away with a few disapproving looks doesn't really cut it albeit the crowd was probably sparse with no security. Fair play to Grainne Crabtree for confronting them at the end.
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall

User avatar
Tender
Red Hand Ambassador
Posts: 2833
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 1:23 pm
Location: Not Spain

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Tender » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:37 am

How many days Dave, how many days?

Fair comment Mervyn, if only one person had confronted the four tossers, they’d have shuttafeckup, as cowards always do.
Support the Team, not the regime
Guinness is Good For You.

User avatar
Gerald the Mole
Warrior
Posts: 1104
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:44 am

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Gerald the Mole » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:44 am

big mervyn wrote:
Kofi Annan wrote: I don’t believe there is a single poster here { with an exception of two) that would stand by and allow this to happen anywhere.
I struggle to comprehend why these boys weren't confronted by the other spectators. If Joy Neville had got a fraction of that abuse at Ravenhill then I'd like to think the perpetrators would have got very short shrift from those around them. Shuffling away with a few disapproving looks doesn't really cut it albeit the crowd was probably sparse with no security. Fair play to Grainne Crabtree for confronting them at the end.
Very simple, because of who they are, I am informed one is a long standing club sponsor and has a lot to lose so he is calling the shots, at least two are long standing members so it’s not true to say that they can’t be identified.

There were women at the game not a lot , but hopefully someone will out them,

As mentioned before The club have had issues with verbal abuse before and the sanction then was mediocre, time to stamp it out , an example has to be made, Grainne is actually a very good referee , and for these people to be protected says more about the club, in fact I wonder what would happen if clubs refused to play them.

User avatar
LadyP
Novice
Posts: 200
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:07 pm

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by LadyP » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:52 am

I wonder What son tried to prevent Mark Simpson from running his story.
"This doesn't look good Parker"

User avatar
big mervyn
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 12378
Joined: Fri May 09, 2008 2:22 pm
Location: Overlooking the pitch (til they built the old new stand)

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by big mervyn » Fri Oct 26, 2018 8:59 am

LadyP wrote:I wonder What son tried to prevent Mark Simpson from running his story.
Hopefully it might encourage him and his colleagues to dig a bit deeper.
Volunteer at an animal sanctuary; it will fill you with joy , despair, but most of all love, unconditional love of the animals.
Big Neville Southall

User avatar
Dave
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 20508
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:27 pm

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Dave » Fri Oct 26, 2018 9:10 am

Tender wrote:How many days Dave, how many days?

Fair comment Mervyn, if only one person had confronted the four tossers, they’d have shuttafeckup, as cowards always do.
195
I have my own tv channel, what have you got?

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17390
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by BR » Fri Oct 26, 2018 10:11 am

Kofi Annan wrote: BR, I recall a past post when this first raised its head saying that what was said was “ not that bad” do you still think what you’ve heard now from a pretty fair journalist, who had read the full statement ( and more) that the abuse was “not that bad”
.
As you may remember, I heard *that* what was said wasn't that bad (in comparison to usual referee abuse). At no time did I say I heard what was said. I also pointed out that I disagree with abuse of referees and have a track record on this forum in condemning some of the stuff that now appears commonplace on the terraces and, not least, on this very forum.

I used to 'have a word' with people on the terrace who IMHO overstepped the mark, but more recently I admit I have given up the battle.

With particular reference to the complaint by GC - I will spell it out - no referee, at any level, should be on the receiving end of that abuse!

I don't want to cloud that statement of opinion with any further explanation that may be taken by some as caveats.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

User avatar
Rooster
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 40137
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Chicken coop 17

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Rooster » Fri Oct 26, 2018 11:42 am

Those who were giving that sort of abuse to any woman were well within the good dig in the bake territory and let's face it if they are so terrified of adverse publicity they wouldn't have pressed charges against anyone who had done it because the court case would have been headline stuff the papers.
“That made me feel very special and underlined to me that Ulster is more than a team, it is a community and a rugby family"
Rory Best

User avatar
Gerald the Mole
Warrior
Posts: 1104
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 9:44 am

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by Gerald the Mole » Fri Oct 26, 2018 11:57 am

i really really really hope they are outed

User avatar
BR
Rí­ na Cúige Uladh
Posts: 17390
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 11:12 am
Location: On a roll.

Re: New - Warren Gatland of the week

Post by BR » Fri Oct 26, 2018 12:02 pm

Dave wrote:Any excuse to launch a swipe at our boys, BR? Please explain to the board how they 'acted badly'? What did you mean by 'got up to'? Doesn't sound like something good.

This is one of the strangest versions of whataboutery I have ever witnessed. Stop comparing what happened to our boys with this incident. Please just stop it. Two careers ruined because of sponsorship pressure and a weak/corrupt FIRFU. It is insensitive to all involved to compare it to this nonsense.

This is not a criminal trial. It is possible to make an inference based on probability. If one party is accused and accepts their fate, I cannot deny their own acceptance. Where have I made any statement about seeing some single statement as true? I have merely accepted the remarks of acceptance from the club.

I have nothing more to say. Keep your whataboutery to yourself and leave our boys alone.
I'm not implying anything by 'got up to'. I mean their actions and activities, none of which have been found to be criminal.

Again I don't know what all happened that night, and crucially, neither do I pretend to.

Conflicting testimonies were given regarding some activities, do you know which ones are true? I don't.
There may well have been other parts of the night on which no testimonies were made.

Ultimately a young woman was left in a pretty poor state. Did someone 'act badly'? The IRFU seemed to think so. IIRC PJ and SO expressed regret for the events of the evening.

As you say the IRFU are not conducting criminal (or even civil) trials so they don't have to apply the same rigours. They are applying disciplinary sanctions on those within their jurisdiction (be they clubs or employees). They have done that in both cases.

While the 2 events are not even in the same league, I find the difference in reaction here interesting.

On the one hand condemning a witch hunt and on the other breaking out the pitch forks and burning torches.
Can I come out from behind the sofa yet?
www.stoutboys.co.uk

Post Reply