[Law] Folau’s online comments have taken a turn for the worse.

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Go on. What is the grey area on slurs? I'm interested. This sounds like old white men trying to find excuses to call people whatever the hell they like.

Well you've managed to use age, colour, and sex to describe your subject. If was directed to me you could have included fat, balding, and myoptic.

Go on. What is the grey area on slurs? I'm interested. This sounds like old white men trying to find excuses to call people whatever the hell they like.

I can't speak for Dickie, but for me, this is one old white man who doesn't want to stop people from speaking freely. I will argue with them if necessary, but I will not silence them.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

So you wouldn't card the 9 who disagrees with your call with a full-throated "f*** you, you cheating c***"? It's freedom of expression after all.

TBH, IDK, I'd like to think I come up with a quick retort. "I don't have a cunght", for instance. I suppose I'd like to laugh at him and say STFU. but in anger, I'd probably do something I'd regret in hindsight.

Or does your spirit only extend to protecting the players' rights to insult others on the basis of their race and sexuality?

Yes of course, I'd also add religion. Not all religions, just scientology. But race and sexuality are my favorites. What are yours?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I think there are some words, that if used, are clearly RC-worthy.

yep, but a ref is 3rd party to some words. let the players sort it out. if we try to silence speech, it only comes back stronger. let the vulgar player look like an ass on his own

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

rugby is a game of standards

Do you me high or low standards?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Go on. What is the grey area on slurs? I'm interested.

Here's one grey area that gets **** out on rugbyrefs. The **** is wonker with an a.

I've always found ****** to be funny, since it was explained to me by a Kiwi with which I was stationed. I had zero idea that it is an insult.
It seems a bit liberating to me.

I am a ******. NKW

 

[SimonSmith]

yep, but a ref is 3rd party to some words. let the players sort it out. if we try to silence speech, it only comes back stronger. let the vulgar player look like an ass on his own

So, to be clear, you're avoiding your responsibilities under Law 9.27, and for offences which are specifically called out under Regulation 17?

And by "let the players sort it out" you mean?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

And by "let the players sort it out" you mean?

Find a solution to the problem.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

So, to be clear, you're avoiding your responsibilities under Law 9.27,

My threshold is different than yours. I'm not a nannie.

and for offences which are specifically called out under Regulation 17?

I do think the specifics in regulation 17 are accurate examples of types of verbal abuse that may occur. Reg 17 is the source/reference to indicate discipline measures, not a description or list of offences.

 

[L'irlandais]

In the linked interview he’s taking the P.....

That’s where I beg to differ, he isn’t taking the proverbial. He is talking bollox, it’s not the same thing; this is most probably why he is on the end of much aggression on the pitch, he himself doesn’t know the distinction between the two. I am sure he thought his interview very witty, but in reality it was nonsense.

 

[Toby Warren]

That’s where I beg to differ, he isn’t taking the proverbial. He is talking bollox, it’s not the same thing; this is most probably why he is on the end of much aggression on the pitch, he himself doesn’t know the distinction between the two. I am sure he thought his interview very witty, but in reality it was nonsense.

Your position is confused - you say he’s not taking the P but next sentence you acknowledge he’s trying to be witty. He is talking absolute nonsense that’s the point.

This interview made national news in England - in the news/sports stations - the general opinion was it was funny (and deliberately so)

You don’t like him - maybe you’ll get your bar confrontation and you can then make your mind up again.

 

[L'irlandais]

It must be cultural then; if the British TV license paying public thought it funny. A fair few probably found his gypsy remark quite understandable too.

”Even if everyone agrees, everyone can be wrong."

I wonder if any referees, other than English refs, think the mixed metaphor interview funny.

 

[crossref]

That clip is just supposed to be amusing.
I thought it was quite funny. It made Radio 4 PM programme ..

 

[Rich_NL]

There were some Dutch refs who appreciated it.

"They have an odd sense of humour, so they're probably bigots too" is a piece of delightfully unreflective irony.

 

[L'irlandais]

Bizarre in the extreme. Not in the slightest bit hilarious.

A liability, both on and off the field of play. Anybody who laughs at their own jokes, is already unfunny.

 

[crossref]

Good old Joe
See if you can find the recent Jonathan Ross appearance , that made me smile

 

[Dickie E]

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&...-p53gr6.html&usg=AOvVaw122s8vMkVGr8w8gzZfFaRn

Izyy gets apology [lights fuse and runs away]

 

[crossref]

So it turned out it was quite complicated after all ?

 

[Rich_NL]

So both parties sincerely apologise, but wholeheartedly stand by their original comments/decisions and hope that no-one was offended or hurt by them?

That's quite complicated.

 

[Dickie E]

and, allegedly, $14M changed hands.

 

[crossref]

Or possibly 300k I read somewhere else !