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

joseywhales · 28-03-2018 04:51PM

I mean they could get served with a retrospective suspension or a playing one until the start of next season in a purely PR stunt.
The best thing they could do is attend seminars in professional behavior as a public rep. and one on consent. The could give talks to new academy classes, would be helpful for everyone to minimize future issues and would enhance their reputation. Everyone loves a redemption story. Spin it!

Brewster · 28-03-2018 04:58PM

The season was over, the lads were on holiday and were not intended to be at training the next day. Of course the txt messages were distasteful, but they are hardly a hanging offence?? Had circumstances been different, these txts would not have come into the public domain. We all know why they did come into the public domain. I just feel the IFRU have to get behind them. The court of social media can hold no influence over this process.

prawnsambo · 28-03-2018 04:59PM

Brewster wrote: »

The season was over, the lads were on holiday and were not intended to be at training the next day. Of course the txt messages were distasteful, but they are hardly a hanging offence?? Had circumstances been different, these txts would not have come into the public domain. We all know why they did come into the public domain. I just feel the IFRU have to get behind them. The court of social media can hold no influence over this process.

Nobody's referencing the 'court of social media'.

Brewster · 28-03-2018 05:02PM

prawnsambo wrote: »

Nobody's referencing the 'court of social media'.

So sponsors won’t be influenced by commentary on social media then???

The Black Stags · 28-03-2018 05:02PM

joseywhales wrote: »

I mean they could get served with a retrospective suspension or a playing one until the start of next season in a purely PR stunt.
The best thing they could do is attend seminars in professional behavior as a public rep. and one on consent. The could give talks to new academy classes, would be helpful for everyone to minimize future issues and would enhance their reputation. Everyone loves a redemption story. Spin it!

While I agree some PR with suspensions/classes or whatever might be they way to go. Ulster really really need Jackson for the last few games this season or they are looking like they are out of the Championship Cup. Jackson has been training on his own, no idea of his form or if he can step back in or anything like that. But Jackson in half decent form might just save Ulster a lot of money next season.
But there is the review as well, who knows how long that will take.

prawnsambo · 28-03-2018 05:19PM

Brewster wrote: »

So sponsors won’t be influenced by commentary on social media then???

Perhaps I should be clearer. Nobody here is talking about 'the court of social media'.

Unless I've missed something. The discussion seems to be centred around potential contractual issues.

lalababa · 28-03-2018 05:21PM

joseywhales wrote: »

Personally I dont think an employer has any ownership of an employees free time, nor a right to judge them on it. Now if they are paid as public representatives to uphold PR status of the organisation, then its part of their job not to mess around in public. Is it part of the job of a professional athlete? Can someone be responsible for being put on trial for a crime they didn't commit and the PR outcome of that trial?

Exactly this. Can't fire everyone who's had drunken shinaniggans . There would be nobody left. The Dole rate would have to be cut big time. It's a sort of a witch Hunt isn't it. People in the public eye especially sports people being vilified. The media and godam sponsors trying to hold them up as God's. Load of boll**ks.

bilston · 28-03-2018 05:24PM

ClanofLams wrote: »

Brewster wrote: »

I ask the question again.... Why wouldn’t the IRFU back them? What are the grounds for terminating their contracts?

Their comments on WhatsApp that have become public knowledge do not reflect well. I have no doubt that many other players have made similarly poor comments on WhatsApp etc but ultimately theirs became public. I’m not judging them, I’m sure I have said equally ill advised remarks myself but they are a significant factor. They can be used against them notwithstanding the innocent verdict.

This is a time of ‘activism’, the merits and disadvantages of that could be debated but it can’t be disputed. If Jackson/Olding represent Ulster or Ireland again I have little doubt that there will be campaigns and boycotts of sponsors organised,etc. The IRFU has to consider the financial implications this will cause.

That may not be ‘fair’ but it’s probably the right call for the IRFU for the pair to ply their trade elsewhere.

If they are let go because of their WhatsApp messages, of which Jackson was responsible for maybe one, then Irish rugby players should be very afraid
..in fact we all should be.

They've effectively been suspended for a year...thats punishment enough for any moral improprierty.

bilston · 28-03-2018 05:27PM

I wonder if the playing squad will have a say. You'd think a few of them have pretty strong opinions on the matter

Squidgy Black · 28-03-2018 05:33PM

bilston wrote: »

I wonder if the playing squad will have a say. You'd think a few of them have pretty strong opinions on the matter

I'm sure if it would have to be run past them first before any re-instatement was made, if it was to happen.

The last thing Ulster need is conflict in the locker room with the current state of the organisation.

Former Former · 28-03-2018 05:34PM

prawnsambo wrote: »

Perhaps I should be clearer. Nobody here is talking about 'the court of social media'.

Unless I've missed something. The discussion seems to be centred around potential contractual issues.

They're closely linked though.

The IRFU have made enormous hay from media exposure and having nice presentable media friendly players. It boosts the profile of the sport and it swells the coffers with sponsorship. Give a random sample of Irish people mugshots of the Irish XV and the Irish soccer XI and I guarantee the rugby players are far more recognisable even though soccer is much more popular.

It's just not the case that Jackson's job is only to train and play; he's there to sell Brand Ulster and Brand Ireland.

In an ideal world we'd all acknowledge the verdict, take a breath and go back to business as usual, but that's not possible. Even if he's the same player he always was, he's not the same IRFU employee and probably never will be. Whether that's fair or not is a matter of perspective.

Sephiral · 28-03-2018 05:44PM

I think they will move.

I strongly suspected that a Not Guilty verdict was incoming because the evidence was not strong enough to convict. If I was management at Ulster Rugby or IRFU I would be against them playing again. The issue is far too divisive, even among the fan base. It is entirely possible that there will be players who could also have an issue.

Podge_irl · 28-03-2018 05:47PM

Sephiral wrote: »

I think they will move.

I strongly suspected that a Not Guilty verdict was incoming because the evidence was not strong enough to convict. If I was management at Ulster Rugby or IRFU I would be against them playing again. The issue is far too divisive, even among the fan base. It is entirely possible that there will be players who could also have an issue.

It is utterly wild speculation, but my gut feeling is that the players would be far more pro them returning then anti (there but for the grace of god go I kind of thing).

Sephiral · 28-03-2018 05:53PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

It is utterly wild speculation, but my gut feeling is that the players would be far more pro them returning then anti (there but for the grace of god go I kind of thing).

Yeah, I'd actually agree. I wouldn't think it would be unanimous, or anywhere near if I am being honest.

MJohnston · 28-03-2018 06:23PM

I can't be the only one who was that little bit quieter with my support for Ireland this Six Nations in social media due to...not quite embarrassment, but just acknowledgement of the fact that the trial was going on through the tournament. There was a really weak association between the two things, but it just felt like a consideration. If Jackson ends up back on the team, personally don't think I'll be public with my support for the team to the same extent (beyond anonymous places like here), certainly would feel slightly reticent to watch them play even on TV in company if he was playing. That's not even a reflection of my own views on what happened, but just a reaction to how the whole thing is being received in general.

This doesn't really apply to Ulster because there has been zero reason to support them this season regardless of the trial.

prawnsambo · 28-03-2018 06:24PM

Former Former wrote: »

They're closely linked though.

The IRFU have made enormous hay from media exposure and having nice presentable media friendly players. It boosts the profile of the sport and it swells the coffers with sponsorship. Give a random sample of Irish people mugshots of the Irish XV and the Irish soccer XI and I guarantee the rugby players are far more recognisable even though soccer is much more popular.

It's just not the case that Jackson's job is only to train and play; he's there to sell Brand Ulster and Brand Ireland.

In an ideal world we'd all acknowledge the verdict, take a breath and go back to business as usual, but that's not possible. Even if he's the same player he always was, he's not the same IRFU employee and probably never will be. Whether that's fair or not is a matter of perspective.

Yes, they're linked. But long before there was social media, you had sponsors walking away from their cash cows because of the issues surrounding them. It's not that long ago (and social media wasn't the monster it is now) that sponsors walked away from Tiger Woods when his 'troubles' made front page news.

And there are even older examples that predate social media. Social media is just the mouthpiece of the great mass of the unwashed. It didn't have to have a voice to have an influence in the past.

Podge_irl · 28-03-2018 06:26PM

MJohnston wrote: »

I can't be the only one who was that little bit quieter with my support for Ireland this Six Nations in social media due to...not quite embarrassment, but just acknowledgement of the fact that the trial was going on through the tournament. There was a really weak association between the two things, but it just felt like a consideration. If Jackson ends up back on the team, personally don't think I'll be public with my support for the team to the same extent (beyond anonymous places like here), certainly would feel slightly reticent to watch them play even on TV in company if he was playing. That's not even a reflection of my own views on what happened, but just a reaction to how the whole thing is being received in general.

This doesn't really apply to Ulster because there has been zero reason to support them this season regardless of the trial.

I thought the Not my Captain nonsense died a pretty quick death when Ireland started winning to be honest. Support and coverage of the rugby team was pretty ubiquitous for the period.

Squidgy Black · 28-03-2018 06:30PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

I thought the Not my Captain nonsense died a pretty quick death when Ireland started winning to be honest. Support and coverage of the rugby team was pretty ubiquitous for the period.

I don't think people paid much attention at all to the trial during the 6 nations.

Dubinusa · 28-03-2018 06:31PM

I don't know if the squad holds that much sway.
IRFU and Ulster rugby is a business and that's going to be a business decision, regardless of the opinion of the squad.
The bottom line, it is a business model, a profitable and well run and supported business, do S.O and P.J help that business grow and succeed, or do they hurt the image and derail sponsorship.
Management could give a horsecock sandwich about opinions and the future of these boys, but if it does affect earnings; support, sponsorship and divides an already stressed locker room then they will most likely do what's maintains a profit and keeps the sponsorships intact. Right or wrong may not be a factor in this instance. It may be a best case business scenario.
But then again, what do I know.

ClanofLams · 28-03-2018 06:39PM

bilston wrote: »

If they are let go because of their WhatsApp messages, of which Jackson was responsible for maybe one, then Irish rugby players should be very afraid
..in fact we all should be.

They've effectively been suspended for a year...thats punishment enough for any moral improprierty.

I didn't say it was right but it's obviously going to be raised, those who will protest will say look at the language they used about women,etc. Had that not came out it would be more palatable (although still not without difficulty) for both to resume playing with Ulster. The province and the IRFU could say there was a trial and they were found not guilty.

Obviously the province could still say that but there is no doubt those protesting will use the whatsapp messages and state the return of these players is proof that Ulster Rugby & the IRFU condones such language about women. Depending upon how much traction such a campaign gets that could make life very difficult for the IRFU, which is why I think most likely they will seek to avoid such a scenario.

bilston · 28-03-2018 07:02PM

MJohnston wrote: »

doesn't really apply to Ulster because there has been zero reason to support them this season regardless of the trial.

Ain't that the truth!

bilston · 28-03-2018 07:03PM

Squidgy Black wrote: »

Podge_irl wrote: »

I thought the Not my Captain nonsense died a pretty quick death when Ireland started winning to be honest. Support and coverage of the rugby team was pretty ubiquitous for the period.

I don't think people paid much attention at all to the trial during the 6 nations.

They would have done had Jonny not knocked over that DG!

Podge_irl · 28-03-2018 07:08PM

bilston wrote: »

They would have done had Jonny not knocked over that DG!

I agree completely.

All the majority of people really care about is success in sport or the ability to moan in the absence of it.

Brewster · 28-03-2018 07:09PM

Podge_irl wrote: »

I thought the Not my Captain nonsense died a pretty quick death when Ireland started winning to be honest. Support and coverage of the rugby team was pretty ubiquitous for the period.

It did to be fair, but it should never have started.

The problem here is the court of public opinion. The IRFU need to stand tall over this. They can formally warn players about their future responsibilities etc., but players must be allowed to resume their careers, in Ireland. Anything else makes a mockery out of the whole judicial process.

MJohnston · 28-03-2018 07:14PM

Brewster wrote: »

It did to be fair, but it should never have started.

The problem here is the court of public opinion. The IRFU need to stand tall over this. They can formally warn players about their future responsibilities etc., but players must be allowed to resume their careers, in Ireland. Anything else makes a mockery out of the whole judicial process.

This is silly, there are plenty of things that aren't illegal that can bring the game into disrepute, and the IRFU is entitled to act on those.

foxyladyxx · 28-03-2018 07:16PM

lalababa wrote: »

Ulster and IRFU should stand up and be counted , putting full support behind these players. Back training in a couple of weeks, back to normal service there on. The Irish rugby bodies would lose much respect from me if they do anything less.
Do anything less and I would see them as craven mice , unjust, mamon following ,false pc brigade following , social media gimps,husks of rational beings.

Seriously?

ClanofLams · 28-03-2018 07:16PM

Brewster wrote: »

It did to be fair, but it should never have started.

The problem here is the court of public opinion. The IRFU need to stand tall over this. They can formally warn players about their future responsibilities etc., but players must be allowed to resume their careers, in Ireland. Anything else makes a mockery out of the whole judicial process.

I don't see the relation between any decision made in court and any action taken by the IRFU. The latter is well entitled to hold players to a higher standard than merely the laws of the land. The judicial process won't be impacted by any decision the IRFU takes.

stl.ire · 28-03-2018 07:18PM

Both are out of contract at the end of the season right?
Can see them being kept out for fitness or something until their contracts are up and then let leave.
Big headache if the play or sign a new deal.

Dubinusa · 28-03-2018 07:23PM

I think PJ is signed thru 2019

Brewster · 28-03-2018 07:29PM

ClanofLams wrote: »

I don't see the relation between any decision made in court and any action taken by the IRFU. The latter is well entitled to hold players to a higher standard than merely the laws of the land. The judicial process won't be impacted by any decision the IRFU takes.

What are standards you refer to though?? As I say, the txts were private, and had circumstances been different they would never have come to light. They got drunk, sexual activity occurred, and they privately bragged about it. Is this what the IRFU is passing judgement on?

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

Comments