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

I flipping hope not.

I'm genuinely gutted about this.

Can we keep this page to just rugby.

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

Can we keep this page to just rugby.

It's a pretty relevant story to Ulster rugby

Deleted User wrote: »

'It's not the IRFU's place' = 'It is the IRFUs place' = 'it's not the IRFUs place because something something Gardai something rape' that's quite genuinely what you seem to be vacillating between to me.


How is that relevant? Why should the IRFU's actions impact how rape victims are treated by the Gardai?

Honestly, why do you think the IRFU should be getting involved in the criminal investigation of rape among non-rugby players?

The point about small incremental change is exactly that organisations like the IRFU can make a (very) small positive change!

How is that relevant? The IRFU cleaning it's own house is what's relevant, and the knock-on effects on younger players of seeing how their role-models behave (or are punished) is a pleasant bonus.






I respect you posting your views even if I don't necessarily respect the views themselves!


I never said that though.

I specifically said that the problem of SO/PJ at UR is resolved. Where did I say that this action is the end of any misogynistic tendencies in Rugby? If I didn't say or imply that, then I don't understand the point in making it part of the discussion!

"It is the IRFUs place" =something I have said and I believe to be the case
"it's not the IRFUs place" = something Ive never said and have no idea how you are thinking I have, genuinely mystified, but regardless, for clarity sake I dont think this, Ive never thought that or said it.

The Relevance is that an opportunity has been missed to utilise PJ and SOs fall from grace to actually do some good beyond simply being punished and sent into exile as an example. They are going to get a pay off of some kind and go earn big bucks in the premiership. As punishments go its not so bad, is it a massive deterrent to other younger players? We'll see.

As such I don't see that as a positive, its more like the IRFU seeking to avoid any further negative. I think there was an opportunity to take a broader view and address a bigger problem that affects more of society than just two rugby players. Only half of the defendants were rugby players, & the Cork school issue demonstrate that casual misogyny and a lack of respect towards the opposite sex, education re consent, respect and communication is a bigger issue. The IRFU could have taken a really positive step towards genuine and widely accepted resolution. Not necessarily to make everyone "happy" but certainly wiser and more informed and hopefully making better choices when it comes to drinking, sex and the way we interact.

I saw that opportunity and have tried to explain it. Pretty badly it seems. But with a heap of sponsors, all keen to demonstrate their values, household names and local businesses I think that PJ & SO could have been punished appropriately and commensurately and then utilised to educate others on issues such as Respect, Communication & Consent. The potential benefits on younger rugby players and the wider community would be more memorable and far reaching than seeing them simply exiled in my view. The IRFU could have partnered with the BOI, Kingspan, Kukri, etc to achieve a variety of benefits for our society. That opportunity has now passed and thats a pity. As many people have said, there are no winners in this.

Look, Im quite sure this conversation is now into an area where its going to draw fire for no longer being rugby related. I apologise for my part in that detour, I can get quite stubborn when I think Im being unfairly misrepresented, a poor character trait on my part. I genuinely think you and I are simply looking at this in two different ways. You see a just and commensurate salutary lesson that means its now resolved. I forsee further debate, dissatisfaction and division and an opportunity to do something really worthwhile and meaningful in the realm of addressing misogyny has been sadly missed.

all the best

BBDBB
Munster fan

BBDBB wrote: »

"It is the IRFUs place" =something I have said and I believe to be the case
"it's not the IRFUs place" = something Ive never said and have no idea how you are thinking I have, genuinely mystified, but regardless, for clarity sake I dont think this, Ive never thought that or said it.

The Relevance is that an opportunity has been missed to utilise PJ and SOs fall from grace to actually do some good beyond simply being punished and sent into exile as an example. They are going to get a pay off of some kind and go earn big bucks in the premiership. As punishments go its not so bad, is it a massive deterrent to other younger players? We'll see.

As such I don't see that as a positive, its more like the IRFU seeking to avoid any further negative. I think there was an opportunity to take a broader view and address a bigger problem that affects more of society than just two rugby players. Only half of the defendants were rugby players, & the Cork school issue demonstrate that casual misogyny and a lack of respect towards the opposite sex, education re consent, respect and communication is a bigger issue. The IRFU could have taken a really positive step towards genuine and widely accepted resolution. Not necessarily to make everyone "happy" but certainly wiser and more informed and hopefully making better choices when it comes to drinking, sex and the way we interact.

I saw that opportunity and have tried to explain it. Pretty badly it seems. But with a heap of sponsors, all keen to demonstrate their values, household names and local businesses I think that PJ & SO could have been punished appropriately and commensurately and then utilised to educate others on issues such as Respect, Communication & Consent. The potential benefits on younger rugby players and the wider community would be more memorable and far reaching than seeing them simply exiled in my view. The IRFU could have partnered with the BOI, Kingspan, Kukri, etc to achieve a variety of benefits for our society. That opportunity has now passed and thats a pity. As many people have said, there are no winners in this.

Look, Im quite sure this conversation is now into an area where its going to draw fire for no longer being rugby related. I apologise for my part in that detour, I can get quite stubborn when I think Im being unfairly misrepresented, a poor character trait on my part. I genuinely think you and I are simply looking at this in two different ways. You see a just and commensurate salutary lesson that means its now resolved. I forsee further debate, dissatisfaction and division and an opportunity to do something really worthwhile and meaningful in the realm of addressing misogyny has been sadly missed.

all the best

BBDBB
Munster fan

Understand what you say but never going to happen. The mob wanted them gone and while I don't believe the IRFU were influenced by that directly, any unhappiness with sponsors would have been reported back to IRFU.

The problem is if they stayed and tried to do as you said, the protests would have kept coming. IRFU don't want it to drag on relentlessly.

Saw it posted elsewhere but two Irish lads found Not guilty but are forced out of the country to have a career. Yet a Nigerian who took part in and was convicted for the gang rape of a 14 year old girl in Dublin (when he was 16) continues to develop his career in the LOI.

It's wrong but this is about optics and image.

awec wrote: »

If they’re being given the boot, as seems to be the case, Ulster better be given carte blanche on replacements.

And I don’t want Joey Carbery for a year.

The trouble is it's hard to get a 10 so close to a WC. I've repeatedly said a big NIQ 10 option would be Handre Pollard. Given the departures this season I presume the money is there to pull it off, but availability and actually being able to persuade someone like that to Ulster makes it a lot harder.

It seems like the IRFU will pay them off. So I guess all that employment law stuff we spoke about becomes sort of redundant now.

We don't know what actually happened that night, but there is a chance that there is a girl in Belfast who was raped that night. Allowing them to return to ulster, become heroes again, would have served as a constant reminder to her of the trauma. That would have been torture for her.

So I think asking them to move on was the right idea. It's just not just brushing it under the carpet, it shows some compassion for an individual who may have been harmed. That's not the reason anyone will give mind you, they'll say it was sponsor pressure.

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Understand what you say but never going to happen. The mob wanted them gone and while I don't believe the IRFU were influenced by that directly, any unhappiness with sponsors would have been reported back to IRFU.

The problem is if they stayed and tried to do as you said, the protests would have kept coming. IRFU don't want it to drag on relentlessly.

Saw it posted elsewhere but two Irish lads found Not guilty but are forced out of the country to have a career. Yet a Nigerian who took part in and was convicted for the gang rape of a 14 year old girl in Dublin (when he was 16) continues to develop his career in the LOI.

It's wrong but this is about optics and image.

Too idealistic for the mood of time? Yeah, you are probably right, although how would the optics look if PJ and SO were to be seen engaging with the various protest groups. They might be a little wiser from the experience and would have drawn a lot of positive attention for those causes. Ulster, the IRFU, BOI etc could have been in the vanguard of driving positive social change. Yes its not their job and why should they are valid questions, but they have these core values that supposedly underpin their ethical and moral behaviours, but when given the opportunity to actually make those values count for something positive they have all shuffled about, pushed the IRFU to the front and said "get rid of this problem cos its making us look bad" rather than attempt to make a difference. As such the values aren't really values at all

As it is the hope is that this will all die a death, that the protestors will sink back from the front pages and it all goes away. I think that does a genuine disservice to the issues being raised and fails to address the sexism and misogyny that stretches beyond rugby. There were lots of really good points made in the circus that has surrounded this case about the way rape is handled by authorities, low reporting figures, anonymity of defendants and victims, attitudes towards consent etc and sadly it will now disappear until the next high profile case that becomes the focus.

You may say Im a dreamer, but Im not the only one

Problems is IRFU/Ulster value sponsorship more than loyal fans.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

launish116 wrote: »

Problems is IRFU/Ulster value sponsorship more than loyal fans.

It might also be that they know that there's more to being the national governing body of a sport than just bowing down to the seething rants of myopic weekenders, but who knows.

Large sponsors commenting had nothing to do with it.... nothing short sighted about being agreived at a club level! It is these myopic weekenders you refer to pay to watch their club! There more a stakeholder than a group of protesters outside! Who no doubt will move their protests on to the next topic/agenda as it arises!

I IRFU have had bad press before.

launish116 wrote: »

Large sponsors commenting had nothing to do with it.... nothing short sighted about being agreived at a club level! It is these myopic weekenders you refer to pay to watch their club! There more a stakeholder than a group of protesters outside! Who no doubt will move their protests on to the next topic/agenda as it arises!

I IRFU have had bad press before.

Given that BOI sponsor Leinster and Munster too, plus a lot of grass roots stuff, I think them commenting would carry a lot more weight really. IRFU are well used to Ulster supporters complaining about their decisions, it’s nothing new. If a few decide not to renew their season tickets because of this, like they may have over Piennar. It’s nothing compared to losing one of the main sponsors of Irish Rugby as a whole.

My point is why should the sponsors be able to throw weight behind a decision? When primary stakeholder/fans at Ulster arn’t?

I

BBDBB wrote: »

Too idealistic for the mood of time? Yeah, you are probably right, although how would the optics look if PJ and SO were to be seen engaging with the various protest groups.

While SO might have been able to pull off a reformed character because of his immediate apology, PJ would not be believeable after his statement after the court case. The apology came a bit late in the day. No one would take him serious.

I think their supporters did more harm than good as well with their campaign to keep him. Instead of saying they were found not guilty of rape, they missed the reason they are going is because of their attitude to women.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/man-fired-over-inappropriate-emails-must-be-reinstated-1.2179904?mode=amp&__twitter_impression=true