nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

IRFU and RWI conflict MOD NOTE POST 126

Burkie1203

How has this come about

https://twitter.com/offtheball/status/962763672358735874

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

prawnsambo

irishbucsfan wrote: »

That they're trying to single out and bully a journalist? Some of them have come out and said that.

https://twitter.com/Cumoski/status/962776120402771968

They're not saying why. There's been an admission of (a) an error in an article and (b) an 'incident' in Paris and it's just getting muddier instead of clearer.

irishbucsfan

Former Former wrote: »

As soon as they name the person in question, the focus becomes that person and what he did, not the actions of the IRFU.

He came forward and named himself on OTB.

You're completely right though, I'm not entirely convinced it was a great idea. But there's not exactly a handbook on how to handle this situation.

What he really needs is the NUJ's support. There have been dire times in the past when organisations have gone after NUJ members and the sports journos stood very closely by them and were greatly appreciated, he'll find support there if he needs it.

Former Former

As soon as they name the person in question, the focus becomes that person and what he did, not the actions of the IRFU.

irishbucsfan

Hurrache wrote: »

Why haven't any journalist come out and said that's the issue, if it is?

That they're trying to single out and bully a journalist? Some of them have come out and said that.

https://twitter.com/Cumoski/status/962776120402771968

Hurrache

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Bollocks.

They're trying to protect a colleague, when the other party is attempting to single them out.

I get it. You may not like what he wrote or that he was tenacious on a subject,

Why haven't any journalist come out and said that's the issue, if it is?

irishbucsfan

phog wrote: »

Ha, journalists who complain about being "locked out" and still won't inform us why. Where's the truth in the news now

They're trying to look the victim here when in looks like one of them is the guilty party and the rest have rowed in behind him.

Bollocks.

They're trying to protect a colleague, when the other party is attempting to single them out.

I get it. You may not like what he wrote or that he was tenacious on a subject, but there are times when we absolutely need print journalists to go after issues like this, even if its uncomfortable. Women's rugby has been greatly, greatly assisted by similarly uncomfortable reporting by Cummiskey. RWI will long outlast Schmidt and Nucifora, and that is a very good thing.

Hurrache

Deleted User wrote: »

Maybe it's extremely serious in nature. That or perhaps it's embarrassingly petty.

Will have to wait until one of them decides to write about it and then decide if we believe them or not.

Yeah, the was it looks now is that as you say it's something pretty dumb from the journalists side and they're staying quiet, or something more serious which may have legal repercussions somewhere down the line.

irishbucsfan

Interested Observer wrote: »

Thornley, who is the chairperson (or whatever the title is) of the RWI, he was on Second Captains yesterday and said there was an 'incident' in Paris that has lead to this. He wouldn't say what this incident was either. It was also mentioned on the podcast the the IRFU have told RWI exactly why the huddles have been cancelled.

The incident he's referring to is the journalist not being allowed into the print briefing, because the IRFU were not happy with their reporting.

phog

Ha, journalists who complain about being "locked out" and still won't inform us why. Where's the truth in the news now

They're trying to look the victim here when in looks like one of them is the guilty party and the rest have rowed in behind him.

[Deleted User]

Hurrache wrote: »

Unusual for a whole section of reporters to be so secretive about the cause of something that directly affects them when they admit themselves they know the reason why.

Maybe it's extremely serious in nature. That or perhaps it's embarrassingly petty.

Will have to wait until one of them decides to write about it and then decide if we believe them or not.

irishbucsfan

prawnsambo wrote: »

Then why doesn't he say what the mistake was? If it's as innocent as he says, surely that would expose the alleged bullying?

Well I don't know specifically why he isn't, I don't know ROC and I'm surprised he even came forward to confirm it was him, I'm sure he was advised against it.

prawnsambo

Interested Observer wrote: »

Thornley, who is the chairperson (or whatever the title is) of the RWI, he was on Second Captains yesterday and said there was an 'incident' in Paris that has lead to this. He wouldn't say what this incident was either. It was also mentioned on the podcast the the IRFU have told RWI exactly why the huddles have been cancelled.

Not the huddles generally, that's a separate matter as far as I'm led to believe. The error/mistake that caused ROC to be excluded from the Paris one is what I'm talking about.

It was referred to as an error in an article that was later corrected. That's what we're wondering about.

But now we're talking about an 'incident'. This is just getting muddier and muddier.

Hurrache

Unusual for a whole section of reporters to be so secretive about the cause of something that directly affects them when they admit themselves they know the reason why.

[Deleted User]

Interested Observer wrote: »

Thornley, who is the chairperson (or whatever the title is) of the RWI, he was on Second Captains yesterday and said there was an 'incident' in Paris that has lead to this. He wouldn't say what this incident was either. It was also mentioned on the podcast the the IRFU have told RWI exactly why the huddles have been cancelled.

Starting to slowly come out in the wash now alright. Journalists who obviously know what has happened being surprisingly coy about it all. You would think they'd be outraged and putting all the information to print but we're barely any further along than we were yesterday.

Was looking forward to discussing this at the coffee machine this morning.

[Deleted User]

prawnsambo wrote: »

Then why doesn't he say what the mistake was? If it's as innocent as he says, surely that would expose the alleged bullying?

Thornley, who is the chairperson (or whatever the title is) of the RWI, he was on Second Captains yesterday and said there was an 'incident' in Paris that has lead to this. He wouldn't say what this incident was either. It was also mentioned on the podcast the the IRFU have told RWI exactly why the huddles have been cancelled.

prawnsambo

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Because the entire ploy has been to single him out and bully him. They didn't want to name him at all but fair play to him for coming forward I guess, I wouldn't have done it because it just plays into their hands and there's people (not on here) who are petty enough now to go after him just because they perceive him to be "against" Irish rugby.

Then why doesn't he say what the mistake was? If it's as innocent as he says, surely that would expose the alleged bullying?

irishbucsfan

Icemancometh wrote: »

That interview is a bit odd. If O'Connor's mistake is so innocent as Molloy is suggesting, why are they dancing around it?

Because the entire ploy has been to single him out and bully him. They didn't want to name him at all but fair play to him for coming forward I guess, I wouldn't have done it because it just plays into their hands and there's people (not on here) who are petty enough now to go after him just because they perceive him to be "against" Irish rugby.

molloyjh

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Icemancometh wrote: »

That interview is a bit odd. If O'Connor's mistake is so innocent as Molloy is suggesting, why are they dancing around it?

What was the mistake?

Nobody knows outside the parties involved. Although ROC wouldn’t have been the first guy I expected to have been in the centre of this.

Icemancometh

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Icemancometh wrote: »

That interview is a bit odd. If O'Connor's mistake is so innocent as Molloy is suggesting, why are they dancing around it?

What was the mistake?

I've no idea

Burkie1203

Icemancometh wrote: »

That interview is a bit odd. If O'Connor's mistake is so innocent as Molloy is suggesting, why are they dancing around it?

What was the mistake?

stl.ire

I’m sorry but why are people so worked up about this??

The IRFU have stopped a privilege (not a right) for journalists and made their jobs more difficult (not impossible) and journalists are upset.

Are the IRFU probably being petty d*cks? Yes.
Have certain members of the Irish media been petty d*cks recently? Also Yes.

20 pages of angry posts about a d*ck measuring contest is weird and frankly boring.

joseywhales

Perhaps it's a battle to see who can speak last, exciting times

Icemancometh

That interview is a bit odd. If O'Connor's mistake is so innocent as Molloy is suggesting, why are they dancing around it?

CatFromHue

Ruaidhri O'Connor was on OTB tonight and was talking about the paper journos interview with Schmidt after the game. He said that Schmidt has never been keen on it and there's been issues with it in the past, the issues being it was going to be cancelled.

O'Connor didn't want to, and didn't, talk about him being excluded from a briefing

From 17mins on

thomond2006

Ruaidhri O'Connor was the journalist in question. Confirmed by the man himself on OTB. Other than that he didn't comment on that specific issue.

joseywhales

Can you imagine how boring rugby coverage will be without journalists?

"Record wheat yields for the 10th consecutive year in Soviet Ireland!"

Neil3030

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I know exactly what's happened. These journalists have delusions of grandeur. They see all these movies involving great moments in journalism like The Post, Spotlight, All The President's Men, Veronica Guerin and even the one about Lance Armstrong and they want that. They want to break some epic story that will be talked about for years and be made into an award winning movie. They are so desperate for this that they are actually trying to create the story where there is none.
These huddles have turned into the journalists hounding Schmidt about drugs, rape trials, foreign imports, overseas based players, politics, feminism, Trump, Brexit and everything else except the team he coaches and the game they just played. And Schmidt has had enough.

I don't actually know if any of the above is true but I think it's a good theory.

I'd agree with a greatly toned down version of this, to be honest. I don't think it's the journalists with delusions of grandeur, but more a problem with filling the hours and pages of content now required by the myriad publications and broadcasts dedicated to rugby. There is only so many column inches and conversations that you can devote to the 80 minutes on the field. It's inevitable that journalists will turn to ancillary issues to try stand out, or to try fill the void. Just be thankful you don't live in Wales!

There is another theory that I don't think has been mooted anywhere - this could simply be man management by Schmidt. You have the Munster lads probably pissed off at the Grobler coverage, and the Ulster lads possibly pissed off about coverage of other things, so by no-showing one media session he buys immediate loyalty from both camps. You could imagine the likes of Alex Ferguson playing this card.

The Rape of Lucretia

Yeah_Right wrote: »

I don't actually know if any of the above is true but I think it's a good theory.

Its not bad. I think it can even be extended and viewed as an existential crisis in the sports print journalism profession. Marginalised, passé, left behind by the direct medium of the internet, fora, one man band bloggers, trendy blokey podcasters drinking tea around the kitchen table and mixing rugby with Shakespearean and Heidegger references, these guys are no longer really part of the loop between a sport and its fans. Their bluff has been called. If there were never a 'huddle' (ugh!), again, would the world notice ? Does a journo writing a story for a newspaper that nobody reads anyway, make a noise ?

CatFromHue

agreed, they're just splitters anyway

swiwi_

Not sure I’ll read the thread. Are we really that fussed about a tiff with Rugby West Indies?