No statement.

dead ball · Post by **dead ball** » Fri Dec 30, 2005 8:44 pm

I am doing the following very reluctantly. I do not believe in doing this behind backs and as such I have called on the URSC both privately and publicly to make a statement and clarify the committee's role in the events that have unfolded. They have chosen not to.

I feel it is in the interests of the Club to publish answers that were sent to me privately, I apologise ahead of time if this offends anyone.

Dear ****

Following the committee meeting tonight a reply to your email has been
agreed as follows:

A representative of the URSC Committee spoke live on the Nolan TELEVISION
show, with the authority of the Committee, after the Committee had been
approached directly by a researcher on the Nolan TV show.

The Nolan RADIO show did not contact URSC; it is a phone-in programme open
to the general public. While some contributors to the programme may have
been members of the URSC no contributors identified themselves as members of
the URSC nor did they claim to speak on behalf of the URSC. Membership of
the URSC does not, nor should it, curtail freedom of speech.

An individual who spoke on the Nolan Radio show as a supporter of Ulster
Rugby, on finding that the information was incorrect, has apologised to
Ulster Rugby and to the Committee of the Ulster Rugby Supporters Club.

The Committee has given careful consideration to the matter and proposes to
take no further action.

B** S****
URSC Chairman

Stanley · Post by **Stanley** » Fri Dec 30, 2005 9:15 pm

Well that's cleared that up!

Anybody want to talk about tomorrow's match?

dead ball · Post by **dead ball** » Fri Dec 30, 2005 9:47 pm

I thought this might be interesting.

URSC On Tour wrote:
The e-mails will be answered when we have completed an investigation into the matter. But the amount of misinformation being put around by someone who seems intent on mischief-making is remarkable. Just to clarify a few things.

1. No representative of the URSC took part in the Nolan radio show.
2. We have not received a complaint from UR about anything on the Nolan show.
3. No disciplinary action has been taken against any current, or former, Committee member.

It is clear that one Committee member did contribute to the show, but as a private individual, as he is surely entitled to do. As far as I'm aware he did not identify himself as being from the URSC, although I didn't hear the programme myself. If any member has any other information about this, please let us know.

Why is this interesting? Well this statement was penned by the secretary of the Club on this site and was an off the cuff remark before the URSC investigated the matter. It bears a striking resemblance to the statement after the investigation.

Was there a real investigation? If so carried out by who? Oh and why no official statement?

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Fri Dec 30, 2005 10:41 pm

Could it be because it was accurate. I stand by everything I wrote on that thread. I also note that while the likes of BP came out with an uninformed and inaccurate criticism, CT hasn't really challenged anything I've said.

With regard to the URSC response to your e-mail, I had no part in drafting it and I didn't know what was sent to you until you publicised it here.

dead ball · Post by **dead ball** » Fri Dec 30, 2005 10:52 pm

Gary wrote:Could it be because it was accurate. I stand by everything I wrote on that thread. I also note that while the likes of BP came out with an uninformed and inaccurate criticism, CT hasn't really challenged anything I've said.

With regard to the URSC response to your e-mail, I had no part in drafting it and I didn't know what was sent to you until you publicised it here.

Fair enough Gary. Soooo....Was there a real investigation? If so carried out by who?

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Fri Dec 30, 2005 11:08 pm

Can only say I think the Committee addressed the FACTS, unlike some people around here who submerged themselves in rumours and innuendo, not to mention, I suspect, a lie or two. Personally I think the Committee should have come out with a more detailed response which showed the misinformation been spewed forth here and in pm's by one or two people, but that's a matter for the Committee.

ballpark · Post by **ballpark** » Sat Dec 31, 2005 1:37 pm

Gary wrote: I also note that while the likes of BP came out with an uninformed and inaccurate criticism,
.

What was the uninformed and inaccurate criticism then Gary?

ballpark · Post by **ballpark** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 1:59 pm

ballpark wrote:
Gary wrote: I also note that while the likes of BP came out with an uninformed and inaccurate criticism,
.
What was the uninformed and inaccurate criticism then Gary?

48 hours on and I'm not holding my breath for Gary to respond otherwise i'd be dead by now.

Gary says, Can only say I think the Committee addressed the FACTS, unlike some people around here who submerged themselves in rumours and innuendo, not to mention, I suspect, a lie or two. So you THINK the committee addressed the facts, which makes you imply others as yet unspecified are lying.

Classic. Gary get real, because some people don't agree with you isn't a sign of them lying. By your own admission you didn't hear the radio programme in question nor did you attend the subsequent committee meeting at which you THINK facts where discussed. Sounds like the only one, to use your own words, spreading rumours and innuendo, not to mention, I suspect, a lie or two is you Gary.

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 2:44 pm

Oh yes BP, some people are lying here, and I say that, not just because they disagree with me, but because I know the truth. For instance, what about CT telling me he was "haveuheard" and then denying it on this board? I notice he has n't yet responded to my questions concerning the real reason for his resignation from the Committee.
As for yourself BP, you claimed the URSC cancelled a boxing day event with Leinster fans. As I'm sure you are aware no such event, or indeed any event, was ever planned for boxing day. Something was planned for the original date of the match for our members only. This event became
more difficult after the date switch (People having to be paid double time etc). Thus, you misled people. As I said to your mate Le Paul, I don't give a toss whether you believe me or not, but I will challenge you every time you mislaed anyone again on this board. Back to the windmills old boy - they don't answer back

ballpark · Post by **ballpark** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:07 pm

'As for yourself BP, you claimed the URSC cancelled a boxing day event with Leinster fans. As I'm sure you are aware no such event, or indeed any event, was ever planned for boxing day. Something was planned for the original date of the match for our members only. As for yourself BP, you claimed the URSC cancelled a boxing day event with Leinster fans. As I'm sure you are aware no such event, or indeed any event, was ever planned for boxing day. Something was planned for the original date of the match for our members only. This event became
more difficult after the date switch (People having to be paid double time etc). Thus, you misled people(People having to be paid double time etc). Thus, you misled people'

I'm afraid Gary you are a complete and utter chicken if ever there was one. There was an event planned with Leinster supporters right? organised by the URSC, O.K. Now pardon my feckin' irritation with this friggin' nit pickin' but the event was cancelled right?? Read the last comment you made, This event became more difficult after the date switch. So it was planned for the date switch before obstacles arose that could not be overcome therefore it was cancelled. How the feck did I mislead people.

Frankly Gary you implied that lying and misinformation related to other matters so this little bit of semantics is you backing off. Frankly your evasive to say the least, if that is the best you can up with to prove I've lied mislead or given inaccurate information.

CT can answer your accusations against him i'm not in a position to do that nor do I wish to.

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:16 pm

BP - READ THIS SLOWLY AND TRY TO UNDERSTAND. I'M EVEN WRITING IN NICE BIG CAPITALS TO HELP YOU. NO EVENT WAS EVER ORGANISED OR ADVERTISED TO BE OPEN TO LEINSTER SUPPORTERS. THE PLANNED XMAS PARTY WAS FOR OUR MEMBERS ONLY. IT WAS ARRANGED FOR THE FRIDAY NIGHT BEFORE XMAS WHEN THE MATCH WAS ORIGINALLY TO BE PLAYED. BUT THE MATCH WAS SWITCHED TO BOXING DAY AND WE DECIDED TO CANCEL FOR THE REASON I MENTIONED BEFORE AND BECAUSE WE HAS ASKED A NUMBER OF MEMBERS THEIR OPINIONS - AND NONE SAID THEY WOULD STAY AFTER THE MATCH. I'M AFRAID I CAN'T MAKE IT ANY SIMPLER THAN THAT.
SO, LET'S TAKE IT SLOWLY, CONTRARY TO WHAT YOU PUT OUT ON THE BOARD, NO EVENT WAS EVER ORGANISED FOR BOXING DAY WITH LEINSTER FANS. YOU WERE WRONG - AGAIN.
Now you seem to be reduced to petty insults - a clear sign of desperation. But keep trying - I don't want you to run away from this board too.

ballpark · Post by **ballpark** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 4:11 pm

Now you seem to be reduced to petty insults - a clear sign of desperation. But keep trying - I don't want you to run away from this board too. Petty insults??

Frankly i don't give a damn about the small print which you wallow in but event was planned round the Leinster game, event cancelled OK.??

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 4:25 pm

Don't lose the rag BP. But now you seem to have got the picture - just a rather different one to that which you painted before. Glad to be able to correct you.

ballpark · Post by **ballpark** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 4:58 pm

Gary wrote: .......................

ballpark · Post by **ballpark** » Mon Jan 02, 2006 6:05 pm

By your own admission you didn't hear the radio programme in question nor did you attend the subsequent committee meeting at which you THINK facts where discussed. Sounds like the only one, to use your own words, spreading rumours and innuendo, not to mention, I suspect, a lie or two is you Gary In case you thought it had been buried by semantics about events, you originally pointed the finger at me and others over Stanley and the radio show you never heard.