The Israel Folau saga

[Tex]

By when does Izzy have to appeal the ruling? Midday or 3pm?

 

[Strewthcobber]

By when does Izzy have to appeal the ruling? Midday or 3pm?

That 72 hours has definitely been reported, but the Code of conduct says 7 days

The sanctioned Participant, any other Participant (with approval of the Union with jurisdiction for the appeal), the Rugby Body, the relevant State or Territory Union and Rugby AU (subject to Rule 4.6) has seven (7) days commencing from the date of the Committee Decision to appeal a decision made by the Code of Conduct Committee

 

[Derpus]

His appeal right to a Court, as is mooted, will have a much longer expiration.

 

[Dan54]

Hey I know it's been done to death, but if Izzy was actually quoting something from the bible, which I understood was the main defence, can someone tell me what passage it it was? Was talking to a mate who swears that there actual word homosexual in the bible, so I better sort it out, I may get a beer.

 

[KOB1987]

4. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

Paul writes:
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

 

[Derpus]

Might be able to help you Dan. I'm no Theologian but the etymology is dated fairly recently. From Wiki:

"The first known appearance of homosexual in print is found in an 1869 German pamphlet by the Austrian-born novelist Karl-Maria Kertbeny, published anonymously,[24] arguing against a Prussian anti-sodomy law.[24][25]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality#Etymology

So i'd say it's unlikely though perhaps finds it's way in through a modern translation?

Edit: see post above. Conflicting evidence. I think that's probably a pretty complex question and you should resolve it by buying each other a beer and calling it a draw.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Hey I know it's been done to death, but if Izzy was actually quoting something from the bible, which I understood was the main defence, can someone tell me what passage it it was? Was talking to a mate who swears that there actual word homosexual in the bible, so I better sort it out, I may get a beer.

The meme itself wasn't a direct quote. He paraphrased 1-Corinthians 9-10

Izzy's church believes King James Bible is the correct translation (or at least when he does do direct quotes in the 46 other posts, that's what he seems to use).

The direct quote is

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

 

[wamberal]

Incidentally, some biblical scholars are of the view that the injunction was against male prostitution, which apparently was a problem in the vast marketplace of the Temple.

 

[Strewthcobber]

The interesting point for me is if he did use a direct quote from his preferred bible - then RA and his sponsors probably don't have a problem with that.

 

[KOB1987]

The interesting point for me is if he did use a direct quote from his preferred bible - then RA and his sponsors probably don't have a problem with that.

He did. He put the image up and then quoted the relevant passage - interestingly the 'sexual perverts' version as opposed to the 'homosexual' one.

 

[Strewthcobber]

He did. He put the image up and then quoted the relevant passage - interestingly the 'sexual perverts' version as opposed to the 'homosexual' one.

No he didn't. He interpreted 1-Corrinthians in the meme but posted direct quotes of Galatians 5:19-21, Acts 2:38 and Acts 17:30 (All from KJV).

It's still there on Instagram if you want to have a look

 

[KOB1987]

OK my mistake. It's the Galatians one I got confused with, where he does list all the sinners and homosexuals aren't there.

 

[JeepsTragic]

Put aside what Izzy said, does anybody think that Cheika and Hooper can bring the wallabies together after they stuck their oar in and helped Castle throw Izzy under the bus? What do you think that the religious Polynesian boys like Toupo and Kerevi think? Would they think that the coach and the captain have their back, or would they think, I better keep any opinion I have to myself incase those guys throw me after Izzy.

This has been the biggest mistake of the whole saga. Cheika should have just shut up and let Castle handle it. By taking side of the administration over his players he has created a gap. I cant see the wallabies getting out of the quarters. After that both captain and coach need to fall on their swords.

 

[Derpus]

Put aside what Izzy said, does anybody think that Cheika and Hooper can bring the wallabies together after they stuck their oar in and helped Castle throw Izzy under the bus? What do you think that the religious Polynesian boys like Toupo and Kerevi think? Would they think that the coach and the captain have their back, or would they think, I better keep any opinion I have to myself incase those guys throw me after Izzy.

I think it's ridiculous that we are having this issue in the lead up to world cup and further exemplifies the selfishness of Izzy's actions.

Edit: they are footy players ffs. Not PR experts. They shouldn't have to think about this issue let alone be expected to respond perfectly.

 

[I like to watch]

^^^^^ I would have thought making the quarterfinals would be par.
Anything above would be a bonus.
So no harakiri....

 

[KOB1987]

Hooper and Cheika didn't throw Izzy under the bus at all. The media made it look like they did by quoting things out of context because it was a better story, and/or suited their own agenda.

 

[Braveheart81]

Here's the actual press conference.

Clearly Cheika and Hooper (and Gibson) were required to front the media to make a statement on the issue and answer questions.

 

[JeepsTragic]

Hooper and Cheika didn't throw Izzy under the bus at all. The media made it look like they did by quoting things out of context because it was a better story, and/or suited their own agenda.

The test of an organisation is how they respond when things go wrong. I would argue that the coach and the captain have acted poorly and that they will not be able to unite the team. They should have kept their thoughts to themselves. And if the wallabies fail to perform at the world cup then both need to be cut. If they don't get out of the pool stages, then both should be terminated before they land back in Australia.​

 

[Braveheart81]

The test of an organisation is how they respond when things go wrong. I would argue that the coach and the captain have acted poorly and that they will not be able to unite the team. They should have kept their thoughts to themselves. And if the wallabies fail to perform at the world cup then both need to be cut. If they don't get out of the pool stages, then both should be terminated before they land back in Australia.

They were clearly put up in front of the media to give a statement and answer questions on behalf of Rugby Australia because they are the coach and the captain.

Do you think they decided themselves that they'd like to do a press conference?

 

[JeepsTragic]

They were clearly put up in front of the media to give a statement and answer questions on behalf of Rugby Australia because they are the coach and the captain.



Do you think they decided themselves that they'd like to do a press conference?