• Welcome to the forums of Green & Gold Rugby.
    We have recently made some changes to the amount of discussions boards on the forum.
    Over the coming months we will continue to make more changes to make the forum more user friendly for all to use.
    Thanks, Admin.

Kurtley Beale

Status
Not open for further replies.
Inside Shoulder

Inside Shoulder

Nathan Sharpe (72)
No4918 said:
"We know there are known knowns: there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns: that is to say we know there are things we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't know we don't know."
Click to expand...

is that from the ARU's Code of Conduct?
Its missing the bit about how there are things they have NFI about whether they have NFI
 
mst

mst

Peter Johnson (47)
Braveheart81 said:
Absolutely.

It's not the tribunal's fault that the only party who brought any sort of forensic evidence was Beale's.

The ARU were the ones who wanted Beale's contract terminated. They were relying on the fact that all the messages were from Beale. When it unable to be proven that the second more offensive message originated from Beale they were left without their smoking gun.

Maybe the ARU needed to realise that the guy fighting for his career was going to go to some effort to defend himself and if they wanted to get their way, they'd probably have to do the same.
Click to expand...


I also wonder how much the ARU wanted to really find? So, they want to cut Beale loose and discover that there are others involved?

Can you imagine it? Think of the possible headlines and then fallout. Purely speculating, but in the public domain at the moment the banter is around the captain and VC's, which then would include medallists and highly capped players........new coach?

I think the ARU really don't want anyone to come out - but it will and is.

According to experts in player behaviours and scandals who have examined all the available facts forensically....over lunch - the NRL boys at my work place (claimed they are very knowledgeable, experienced and qualified in this stuff), they concluded that without naming names, the redacted names of the Tah mates may be an easy one to work out. They have a theory, based on mungo logic, that players who don't know nothing usually don't have any thing to say, and don't talk unless thy have to. So, they suggest think who has come out and defended the behaviour!
 
vidiot

vidiot

John Solomon (38)
Braveheart81 said:
Absolutely.

It's not the tribunal's fault that the only party who brought any sort of forensic evidence was Beale's.

The ARU were the ones who wanted Beale's contract terminated. They were relying on the fact that all the messages were from Beale. When it unable to be proven that the second more offensive message originated from Beale they were left without their smoking gun.

Maybe the ARU needed to realise that the guy fighting for his career was going to go to some effort to defend himself and if they wanted to get their way, they'd probably have to do the same.
Click to expand...


Yes, but who knows what the ARU wants or even whether the ARU has a single cogent aim in this matter?

Perhaps BP is treading a tightrope here, and by not pushing any harder with Beale he has gotten Cheika on board, or maintained his tenure a little longer, or kept Folau.....
 
Chris McCracken

Chris McCracken

Jim Clark (26)
mst said:
I also wonder how much the ARU wanted to really find? So, they want to cut Beale loose and discover that there are others involved?

Can you imagine it? Think of the possible headlines and then fallout. Purely speculating, but in the public domain at the moment the banter is around the captain and VC's, which then would include medallists and highly capped players....new coach?

I think the ARU really don't want anyone to come out - but it will and is.

According to experts in player behaviours and scandals who have examined all the available facts forensically..over lunch - the NRL boys at my work place (claimed they are very knowledgeable, experienced and qualified in this stuff), they concluded that without naming names, the redacted names of the Tah mates may be an easy one to work out. They have a theory, based on mungo logic, that players who don't know nothing usually don't have any thing to say, and don't talk unless thy have to. So, they suggest think who has come out and defended the behaviour!
Click to expand...

It's worth noting that "Mungo Logic" is not an established science.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mst
Biffo

Biffo

Ken Catchpole (46)
vidiot said:
Yes, but who knows what the ARU wants or even whether the ARU has a single cogent aim in this matter? Perhaps BP is treading a tightrope here, and by not pushing any harder with Beale he has gotten Cheika on board, or maintained his tenure a little longer, or kept Folau...
Click to expand...


may i suggest that, in the matter of areas in which BillyPoo has some control, fuck-up is an extremely short-priced favourite over conspiracy in their two-horse race.
 
ShtinaTina

ShtinaTina

Alex Ross (28)
Brumby Runner said:
I am thinking you mean that rugby hasn't lost its appeal. If that's the case, I applaud you. But my reference was to Beale losing his marketability. Just correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Rugby's appeal, not lost. His appeal, a little altered but not beyond reproach or lost.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top