Ulster Team Talk Thread III: Les Miserables SEE MOD WARNING POST #1924 + #2755

Buer

BBDBB wrote: »

They are all monitoring the review. Their concern is obvious, they dont want to be associated with something that could damage their brand

The IRFU/Ulster review panel are in a very tricky situation. Losing significant revenue is a big blow

If they sack SO & PJ, they may well have a case for unfair dismissal given the Not Guilty verdict, the privacy of a WhatsApp group & you could argue the 'sentence' has already been served given the 2 year(ish) suspension

If they pay them off/buy them out of their contract, that will cost them and would need to be balance against the gains of the sponsors continued partnership

They're all monitoring it but making publicly stating that they are doing so and that they've contacted the CEO to air their concerns puts added pressure on the IRFU.

We don't really have any idea of what's contained within their contracts. If there is, as Brendan Fanning reported, a clause saying they're liable for disciplinary action if they bring themselves or the game into disrepute, I think it's pretty much a given that they have done so. But it's all guesswork.

The only question is whether they can terminate on that basis. I would say a pay out of their contract and a handshake is a realistic outcome here and the two boys should accept that and try to kick start their careers again. If they do so in as quiet a fashion as possible, there's even a slight chance they could return to Ireland in 2 years and represent their country again.

awec

If they're sacked I hope they take the IRFU to the cleaners.

awec

Buer wrote: »

They're all monitoring it but making publicly stating that they are doing so and that they've contacted the CEO to air their concerns puts added pressure on the IRFU.

We don't really have any idea of what's contained within their contracts. If there is, as Brendan Fanning reported, a clause saying they're liable for disciplinary action if they bring themselves or the game into disrepute, I think it's pretty much a given that they have done so. But it's all guesswork.

The only question is whether they can terminate on that basis. I would say a pay out of their contract and a handshake is a realistic outcome here and the two boys should accept that and try to kick start their careers again. If they do so in as quiet a fashion as possible, there's even a slight chance they could return to Ireland in 2 years and represent their country again.

Yea.. right.

If the IRFU are so spineless as to suggest kicking this can down the road for two years the two lads should just maximise the amount of money they get from the IRFU right now by whatever means and go have a career somewhere else.

They'll have no issue finding alternative employment.

BBDBB

I think you are right that will be the likely and least damaging of the outcomes, the amount will need to be undisclosed as I suspect it will be greeted as a further outrage by the campaign against them.

I think a significant gap to their Ireland career would be also on the cards. Firstly whilst the heat of this dies down and secondly as they ply their trade elsewhere, (England or France would be most likely)

Buer

awec wrote: »

If they're sacked I hope they take the IRFU to the cleaners.

Again, we have no idea of their contractual stipulations and, if I had to bet on it, I'd say the IRFU have covered themselves.

There's almost zero chance that they'll be taking legal action against the IRFU though. Both sides will want this settled as smoothly and quickly as possible.

awec

Buer wrote: »

Again, we have no idea of their contractual stipulations and, if I had to bet on it, I'd say the IRFU have covered themselves.

There's almost zero chance that they'll be taking legal action against the IRFU though. Both sides will want this settled as smoothly and quickly as possible.

Why?

Jackson has already said he'll take action.

Buer

awec wrote: »

Why?

Jackson has already said he'll take action.

What did Jackson specifically say? The fire and brimstone approach we saw in the days after the trial has been significantly dialled down.

I'd be shocked if he tried to take legal action against the IRFU. He knows that would burn so many bridges for him both in terms of ever representing his country again and in terms of further damaging public opinion of him.

The other items announced yesterday in terms of legal arguments being released did him no further favours either.

For the record, I'd like to see him reinstated.

BBDBB

If their Ireland career is effectively over due to working abroad and being labelled as persona non grata then they may well be urged to sue separately as they would each stand a chance of winning such a case and help pay off legal bills.

prawnsambo

BBDBB wrote: »

If their Ireland career is effectively over due to working abroad and being labelled as persona non grata then they may well be urged to sue separately as they would each stand a chance of winning such a case and help pay off legal bills.

That's precedented. It's a selection 'policy' of the IRFU. I put 'policy' in inverted commas because the IRFU/Joe/Nucifora have said that each case is looked at on its merits effectively.

BBDBB

Just for the record, Id also like to see them reinstated

That said it wouldn't be easy for them

opponents making sly comments to wind them up
opposing fans chanting, holding up banners etc
the sickener - Ulster fans protesting

a horrible and depressing rite to have to go through, its sinking in with me that even after a not guilty verdict this still has legs to run and run

awec

Buer wrote: »

What did Jackson specifically say? The fire and brimstone approach we saw in the days after the trial has been significantly dialled down.

I'd be shocked if he tried to take legal action against the IRFU. He knows that would burn so many bridges for him both in terms of ever representing his country again and in terms of further damaging public opinion of him.

The other items announced yesterday in terms of legal arguments being released did him no further favours either.

For the record, I'd like to see him reinstated.

There was a mention of going to CAS if needs be, which I don't think would be for compensation but shows (hopefully) a willingness to not just roll over and have their bellies tickled.

If the IRFU sack him his bridges are already burnt. Why should he just roll over and accept it in the hope nobody will notice when he comes back in a few years and everything will be grand again. Public opinion isn't going to change. Many people's minds were made up long ago.

If the IRFU want rid now then just get as much money as you can from them and go have a long career somewhere else.

BBDBB

prawnsambo wrote: »

That's precedented. It's a selection 'policy' of the IRFU. I put 'policy' in inverted commas because the IRFU/Joe/Nucifora have said that each case is looked at on its merits effectively.

you are quite right

that said it may well be a convenient and non libellous label to put upon the decision to distance them

prawnsambo

BBDBB wrote: »

you are quite right

that said it may well be a convenient and non libellous label to put upon the decision to distance them

Yeah. There's no guarantee that you will be selected for Ireland. Even those on central contracts face the same scrutiny on their form and competitors for the same shirt.

These guys have Ulster contracts. So that would be the focus I suppose.

BBDBB

Yep, Ulster have the harder job in some respects. The IRFU can easily put the issue of selection on a long stick for a while, though Im sure their potential Ireland careers would be part of the discussion and any subsequent negotiation for a pay out

The IRFU would be mad to sack them. They could conceivably be in the Ulster Squad, training alone, effectively but not actually 'suspended with pay' for the entirety of the next season until their contracts expire. After which they would be free to pursue other avenues, the IRFU is not obliged to offer them employment.

That's if the IRFU make the business decision that they can't have them line out for them again.

The lads would not have recourse there I don't think.

BBDBB

you just blew my mind emmet

hadn't even considered that


would they be able claim constructive dismissal citing isolation as institutional bullying and lack of game time/opportunity as unfair treatment?

Sangre

Deleted User wrote: »

The IRFU would be mad to sack them. They could conceivably be in the Ulster Squad, training alone, effectively but not actually 'suspended with pay' for the entirety of the next season until their contracts expire. After which they would be free to pursue other avenues, the IRFU is not obliged to offer them employment.

That's if the IRFU make the business decision that they can't have them line out for them again.

The lads would not have recourse there I don't think.

I think isolating the guys and making it clear they would never be playing could be tantamount to constructive dismissal. I.E. making their job position so untenable as to force them to quit.

A review could take a year couldn't it?

Sangre

Sangre wrote: »

I think isolating the guys and making it clear they would never be playing could be tantamount to constructive dismissal. I.E. making their job position so untenable as to force them to quit.

Suspended with pay pending review outcome is completely and absolutely fair in standard practice.

They have basically been in this 'status' since the beginning of this season, and the IRFU could easily argue (as they already have) that it would be improper of them to have made any progress into a review until the case was closed. They can then take their time.

Sangre

Deleted User wrote: »

Suspended with pay pending review outcome.

Ah, I see your point now. Haven't caught up with full thread.

BBDBB

memo to self - Do NOT piss off emmet, he is a devious genius and will find a way to take you down. HE WILL FIND A WAY!

awec

If the IRFU pay them off or keep them suspended for the year because their behaviour goes against IRFU values then ok. It would be interesting to know when these values suddenly became a thing given past events (I suspect when the story is so big you can’t bury it), and it will be interesting to see how it affects other players in future, but at least it’s a somewhat valid reason.

If the IRFU let them go or suspend because of bad PR this is cowardly.

If the IRFU let them go or suspend because of bad PR but leave an option open to return this is just outright spineless. Either you want them to play again or you don’t. Either these texts are so bad they get the boot or they’re not. Are they saying “we’re letting you go cause lots of people are upset, but we’ll see if people have forgotten in two years and if they have were grand with it”.

What sort of message would that send?

I believe the lads should stay. Punishment is deserved but termination of employment is just too much.

That said, if they are sent packing they have to be gone for good. Otherwise this is just a big PR charade by the IRFU and shame on them if they play this game.

We need an assertive response either way. **** or get off the pot. Back the lads or don’t. No wishy washy nonsense.

And if they are sent packing I hope for the two lads sake they maximise their financial windfall from it.

BBDBB

BBDBB wrote: »

memo to self - Do NOT piss off emmet, he is a devious genius and will find a way to take you down. HE WILL FIND A WAY!

It's not really any different from buying out their contract, other than it would be more malicious as it would effectively rob the two guys of another year of rugby.

If the IRFU bought out both contracts, then both could look to move away sooner.

Again, this is all based on the idea that the IRFU/Ulster make the business decision that they cannot have them as representatives again. I don't think that that is clear cut. I'm just pointing out that if they make that decision, there are straightforward ways for the situation to pan out.

Buer

Deleted User wrote: »

The IRFU would be mad to sack them. They could conceivably be in the Ulster Squad, training alone, effectively but not actually 'suspended with pay' for the entirety of the next season until their contracts expire. After which they would be free to pursue other avenues, the IRFU is not obliged to offer them employment.

That's if the IRFU make the business decision that they can't have them line out for them again.

The lads would not have recourse there I don't think.

I'd expect they'd definitely have recourse for that. Doing something like that would completely damage their market value and earning ability for future contracts elsewhere.

awec

awec wrote: »

If the IRFU pay them off or keep them suspended for the year because their behaviour goes against IRFU values then ok. It would be interesting to know when these values suddenly became a thing given past events (I suspect when the story is so big you can’t bury it), and it will be interesting to see how it affects other players in future, but at least it’s a somewhat valid reason.

Loathe to go into this, but drawing comparisons to what happened with the Munster players is wrong on a huge number of levels. You shouldn't try and pretend that it is valid, just because it could potentially support your argument if it was.

awec wrote: »

...I believe the lads should stay. Punishment is deserved but termination of employment is just too much. ..

I would be incredibly surprised if the IRFU made the mistake of terminating their contracts. They have much 'safer' (and probably cheaper) avenues to progress with, which sees a similar outcome, without the second-order effects that termination of contract (and the litigation that would surely follow) would surely bring.

Buer

Buer wrote: »

I'd expect they'd definitely have recourse for that. Doing something like that would completely damage their market value and earning ability for future contracts elsewhere.

The IRFU are under zero obligation to any player to select them in any representative team. It would be farcical if they were.

'Let them rot in the reserves' - https://www.google.ie/search?q=let+them+rot+in+the+reserves&rlz=1CATAAB_enGB693GB694&oq=let+them+rot+in+the+reserves&aqs=chrome..69i57.3768j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

awec

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The IRFU are under zero obligation to any player to select them in any representative team. It would be farcical if they were.

'Let them rot in the reserves' - https://www.google.ie/search?q=let+them+rot+in+the+reserves&rlz=1CATAAB_enGB693GB694&oq=let+them+rot+in+the+reserves&aqs=chrome..69i57.3768j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Doesn’t mean a year suspension could not be seen as constructive dismissal.

awec

awec wrote: »

Doesn’t mean a year suspension could not be seen as constructive dismissal.

Deleted User wrote: »

Suspended with pay pending review outcome is completely and absolutely fair in standard practice.

They have basically been in this 'status' since the beginning of this season, and the IRFU could easily argue (as they already have) that it would be improper of them to have made any progress into a review until the case was closed. They can then take their time.

.

It's worth bearing in mind that these are contracted players, not permanent employees. They could be put on gardening leave for the final year of their contract, they could be told that their services are no longer required, but they will still be paid, they could be Ravens players that never get selected.

They can reach the end of their contracts without ever being dismissed.

awec

[Deleted User] wrote: »

.

Pending review outcome. Are you saying the IRFU just delay the review outcome for a year to avoid making a decision?

Sangre

Fair procedures would require a prompt review of any disciplinary issues. A year would be seriously stretching it for an internal review.