• 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.

The Israel Folau saga

Status
Not open for further replies.

Forcefield

Ken Catchpole (46)
I really like that topics like this can be discussed and fleshed out. I am curious, though, as to how many people on here have changed their point of view on the issue over time. Any chance we could have a poll on that (no change, small change, big change, original view strengthened or something).

Scariest thing for me in all this is how much sense Slim is making. Maybe I need to go back to a Brumbies thread for a dose of normalcy. ;)
 

Derpus

Nathan Sharpe (72)
I really like that topics like this can be discussed and fleshed out. I am curious, though, as to how many people on here have changed their point of view on the issue over time. Any chance we could have a poll on that (no change, small change, big change, original view strengthened or something).

Scariest thing for me in all this is how much sense Slim is making. Maybe I need to go back to a Brumbies thread for a dose of normalcy. ;)
It's too easy to rationalise your position. It's essentially just a thread discussing conflicting beliefs, and no one ever changes those based on rational arguments.

Edit: which doesn't mean it's not worth having the discussion.
 

Adam84

Rod McCall (65)
Exactly. The sponsors didnt like his post which brings up questions of basic rights.
Therefore corporations assume the right to set social standards, which in itself is a bone of contention.

Society sets social standards, sponsors follow the trend based on their target demographic and monetary exposure.

Again, your issue is with social standards, not an individual in a company..
 

Joe Blow

John Hipwell (52)
OK, I'll play along.
What is Folau's legal team arguing then?
They will argue that Folau has been fired because of his religious beliefs. In turn RA will maintain that this has never been about religion and that his contract was terminated because he repeatedly broke the code of conduct and received warnings for the same. They will also throw in that many of the contracted players practice their religion(christianity for the most part) happily and that there is no issue with any of them
This will effectively shoot down that argument. They might also add that posting on social media is not a requirement of any religion but that there are specific clauses in their code of conduct relating to it.
After that who knows.

Does IF have some type of liability insurance in case he loses and is facing a multi million dollar legal bill?
 

Adam84

Rod McCall (65)
Did you not also speculate by saying he didn’t do that hmmmm.

Google qantas emirates hypocrisy and tell me if you get zero search results

And again I don’t have an issue I fly qantas and emirates all the time and will continue to do so I just don’t agree it’s a social norms problem just it’s hypocritical

Who said I would get zero results? Not me.
How many hits do you get if you google the two issues separately?
 
S

sidelineview

Guest
They will argue that Folau has been fired because of his religious beliefs. In turn RA will maintain that this has never been about religion and that his contract was terminated because he repeatedly broke the code of conduct and received warnings for the same. They will also throw in that many of the contracted players practice their religion(christianity for the most part) happily and that there is no issue with any of them
This will effectively shoot down that argument. They might also add that posting on social media is not a requirement of any religion but that there are specific clauses in their code of conduct relating to it.
After that who knows.

Does IF have some type of liability insurance in case he loses and is facing a multi million dollar legal bill?

In other words they'll argue for his basic rights.
 
S

sidelineview

Guest
Society sets social standards, sponsors follow the trend based on their target demographic and monetary exposure.

Again, your issue is with social standards, not an individual in a company..

Corporations influence standards such as supporting the SSM vote.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I don't think it's been posted, but this was RA's statement from the other day.........

“Rugby Australia and the NSW Rugby Union made the decision to pursue the termination of Israel Folau’s contract because of a serious breach of the Professional Players Code of Conduct.

“This is an issue of an employee and his obligations to his employers within the contract that he signed. He was bound by a Code of Conduct for all professional players in Australia that spells out clear guidelines and obligations regarding player behaviour, including respectful use of social media.

“An independent panel, having sat for 22 hours and heard testimony from several witnesses and reviewed over 1000 pages of evidence, determined that Israel’s conduct constituted a high-level breach of the Code of Conduct and ordered termination of his playing contract.

“It is important to make clear that Rugby Australia and NSW Rugby did not choose to be in a position where they are forced to divert significant resources to defend the ongoing legal action taken by Israel, but his action leaves the game with no choice.

“As a sport that is proud of the values of inclusion, passion, integrity, discipline, respect and teamwork that underpin our game globally and our Code of Conduct, we will defend those values and the right for all people to feel safe and welcome in our game regardless of their gender, race, background, religion or sexuality.

“We are grateful for the support from so many people from within our Rugby community, including the volunteers who are the guardians of the game’s values, from other sports and from the wider community here and around the world, who have supported our stance.

“We will remain focused on getting on with the job of building our game, supporting our teams, encouraging more people to play Rugby and upholding the values that generations of Wallabies and Waratahs have represented with pride."
 

Joe Blow

John Hipwell (52)
In other words they'll argue for his basic rights.
No one has denied him or the other christians or any of the players their basic rights. RA would have to be pretty stupid to single out arguably their best player and sabotage their relationship with him.
RA and the ARU before them have been pretty terrible at times but not even they could be that bad.
 
S

sidelineview

Guest
No one has denied him or the other christians or any of the players their basic rights. RA would have to be pretty stupid to single out arguably their best player and sabotage their relationship with him.
RA and the ARU before them have been pretty terrible at times but not even they could be that bad.

I think that's a significant point of the legal argument mate.
 

Ignoto

Peter Sullivan (51)
Corporations influence standards such as supporting the SSM vote.


The Churches have also influenced society in the past and also had an impact on the SSM vote, the only difference between the Church and those big bag corporations is, one is exempt from paying taxes the other contributes to society.
 

Adam84

Rod McCall (65)
Corporations influence standards such as supporting the SSM vote.

Society sets social standards, boards will support whichever agenda best supports their corporation, they are capitalising on the positive publicity of the SSM not setting the agenda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top