- Status
p.Tah
John Thornett (49)
From the DT
I like how the article refers to the Rugby Championship as the 4 Nations. Guessing that's James Hooper's contribution.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...ing-time-at-home/story-fni0cx4q-1227086432341
I like how the article refers to the Rugby Championship as the 4 Nations. Guessing that's James Hooper's contribution.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...ing-time-at-home/story-fni0cx4q-1227086432341
Biffo
Ken Catchpole (46)
is it possible for you to put up a graph showing the rate of posting to this thread?
time v number of posts
that might be interesting.
you'd probably have to put an hourly scale on the horizontal axis
qwerty51
Stirling Mortlock (74)
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
An utterly piss-poor effort from all concerned: the Quade thread reached the lofty heights of 137 pages while the Kurtley saga stalled at a measly 59. Whomever was involved in this shortfall should hang their heads in shame.
give it a break - it was shut down for 4 hours- mind you it was easier to follow during that period.
I find myself liking posts on all 17 sides of the argument - certain proof this is mostly gossip, innuendo (the r is silent) and rumour.
Athilnaur
Arch Winning (36)
For criminal matters yes, but this is civil, the test is balance of probabilities. Broadly you could say satisfied on the facts that there are enough facts, and that from these facts the judge concludes the person did 'it'. It is a much lower test than beyond reasonable doubt, but still must be compelling.
Spieber
Bob Loudon (25)
Mark Williams, rowing enthusiast and a member of the Shore School family. Possibly had son in same year as Angus Pulver but I am happy to be corrected on that one. Also, ex-chamber mate of IS!
I like to watch
David Codey (61)
If you are a first offender in Qld,you can elect to go down the Justice mediation process.
To do this you must admit your guilt and apologise to the victim/s and make any restitution if applicable.
This is a court supervised process.
Once you have completed the process to the courts satisfaction,they discontinue the proceedings.
In NSW if the court grants you a Section 10,no conviction is recorded.
That does not mean you were declared innocent.
Spieber
Bob Loudon (25)
Possibly not - I think, but happy to be corrected again, that Mark went to St Pauls at Manly, or CBC as it was then known, so this should not be a question of religious affiliationsShore? Seriously. Does the ARU knowing anyone that didn't go to Shore?
Shame for Kurtley he went to Joeys
Biffo
Ken Catchpole (46)
Spieber
Bob Loudon (25)
Inside Shoulder, one of our more excitable posters.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
Yes?
I can confirm all of that (except that he's won more masters rowing championships at state, national andinternational level than have actually been held - so I'd rank him above "enthusiast") but he's not "a mate" of Pulver's.
He's done a lot of sport arbitration before he was a judge.
He did not go to Shore so he's not "on the inside".
He is his own man.
waiopehu oldboy
Stirling Mortlock (74)
I haven't read all 1250 posts so apologies if this has already been asked & answered but what is the extent of the independent tribunal's brief? Is it to merely establish what happened & when, then report accordingly to the ARU Board, or is to also recommend what sanction each party should receive? If I were Pulver I'd be going for the latter, on the basis that ARU's best way of emerging from this fiasco with its reputation & finances intact is as follows:
Rather than melodramatically "tearing up" Beale's soon to expire contract for gross misconduct or some such, find his misconduct merely serious (or better yet use old faithful "bringing the game/ organisation into disrepute") & set the penalty at non-renewal of ARU contract. If he sticks around, pulls his head in & plays the house down to the point he demands Wallaby re-selection, Aus rugby wins; if he walks and esp if his hard-core mate(s) also walk on principle, Aus rugby still wins IMO.
Patston appears to be currently on sick leave & is the only person who can possibly claim any kind of victim status. She has to be allowed to return to ARU but clearly can't have any day-to-day contact with the players. Let her do as much of her job as is possible from behind a desk, give her additional duties if need be. If she stays & does her job, ARU wins. If she finds it not chalenging enough & walks I doubt she has much of a case PROVIDED that ARU can show they've given her the support she deserves.
Link IMO is in a similar position to KB (Kurtley Beale) but with the difference that terminating him would be a disaster both PR-wise & financially. Having paid Deans out just 14 months ago (& if rumour be true JON not long prior to that) another golden handshake is surely out of the question. Let him see out his term & if by some miracle the Wobs bring back Bill he's a hero who can choose to stay or go; or if the Wobs crash & burn he can be given the flick on that basis alone & the current mess need never enter into discussion or litigation.
Lastly, I see the media says that Link has "quashed" rumours of an untoward relationship with Patston. Sorry to be pedantic but he's done no such thing. Judges QUASH judgements handed down by other Judges/ juries where they find those judgements to have been flawed. People accused of inappropriate behaviour DENY the rumours and very occasionally provide evidence to REFUTE allegations. Anything else is just them giving their side of the story.
Rather than melodramatically "tearing up" Beale's soon to expire contract for gross misconduct or some such, find his misconduct merely serious (or better yet use old faithful "bringing the game/ organisation into disrepute") & set the penalty at non-renewal of ARU contract. If he sticks around, pulls his head in & plays the house down to the point he demands Wallaby re-selection, Aus rugby wins; if he walks and esp if his hard-core mate(s) also walk on principle, Aus rugby still wins IMO.
Patston appears to be currently on sick leave & is the only person who can possibly claim any kind of victim status. She has to be allowed to return to ARU but clearly can't have any day-to-day contact with the players. Let her do as much of her job as is possible from behind a desk, give her additional duties if need be. If she stays & does her job, ARU wins. If she finds it not chalenging enough & walks I doubt she has much of a case PROVIDED that ARU can show they've given her the support she deserves.
Link IMO is in a similar position to KB (Kurtley Beale) but with the difference that terminating him would be a disaster both PR-wise & financially. Having paid Deans out just 14 months ago (& if rumour be true JON not long prior to that) another golden handshake is surely out of the question. Let him see out his term & if by some miracle the Wobs bring back Bill he's a hero who can choose to stay or go; or if the Wobs crash & burn he can be given the flick on that basis alone & the current mess need never enter into discussion or litigation.
Lastly, I see the media says that Link has "quashed" rumours of an untoward relationship with Patston. Sorry to be pedantic but he's done no such thing. Judges QUASH judgements handed down by other Judges/ juries where they find those judgements to have been flawed. People accused of inappropriate behaviour DENY the rumours and very occasionally provide evidence to REFUTE allegations. Anything else is just them giving their side of the story.
Inside Shoulder
Nathan Sharpe (72)
After half a bottle of that St Thomas's (see craft beer thread - come in HJ) I read that as execrable.
No less apt, I'm sure.
Bruwheresmycar
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
I've had enough.
Bring back Robbie Deans.
Bring back Robbie Deans.
Wilson
David Codey (61)
Reunite the three amigos in one provincial side? I think it might be best to see how we go with two at once first. Also he doesn't seem to be too keen on riding the pine so it wouldn't be the best fit.
Pfitzy
George Gregan (70)
You can't set an action to NOT take an action.
I think what would end up happening - for the ARU to save face, you understand - is give him a small contract that basically makes it impossible to stay.
Happens all the time in the corporate workplace when you can't afford redundancies: make the conditions of employment so unappealing that the employee just looks elsewhere.
The difference here is we're talking contract versus perm
- Status