RWC SF2 England vs Springboks on 21/10 @ 21h00

[Biffer]

Can we all stop being so innocent as to pretend that Rassie wouldn't play on wyt kant sounding like white cunt, and encourage his players to shout it loud and often? I mean the RFU have taken the bait obviously, but let's be clear, Rassie is a wyt kant.

[sockwithaticket]

No no, remember 2022 that urgently needs to be brought up after England lose a semi final to the Boks?!

Both here and on reddit it is bizarre seeing some Saffas so incapable of grasping why the same thing happening with the same two players the last time these teams played might be relevant to an allegation being made the next time it happens.

It's just as weird as the suggestion or implication that this is being done to try and disrupt SA's prep for a final and not simply an issue being raised as and when it occurred. When would you like it to be brought up? Because if Curry and the RFU waited until after the final I'm sure some of you would be castigating both for trying to rain on your parade/rub salt into the wounds depending on the outcome and/or questioning why it wasn't raised at the time.

If it happened and it's serious stuff etc, then why not bring it when it happened.

It looks incredibly bad to being it up after losing a RWC semi, and to come with no evidence.

You lot would be going ape shit if SARU were doing this and accusing one of your players of racism without evidence. Absolutely none of us would want to be accused of racism in their workplace without there even being any evidence to action anything, but with those accusations somehow still standing and being supported by those in more powerful positions.

Once can be written off as misinterpretation, heat of the moment, not worth it etc., but if you believe someone has racially abused you twice in two games then of course you're going to bring it up.

Again, when would you like all this to be raised if it can't be done so immediately after it happened? In 3 months when the world cup is completely in the rear view? Curry raised it in the game and pursued it afterwards. That is entirely right and proper. He and the RFU clearly felt there was enough evidence to support, World Rugby disagree. That's not the same thing as being without evidence.

'Shut up if you don't think you can prove it' is certainly an interesting approach. Basically carte blanche for anything goes if players are fairly certain they're sufficiently far from the ref mic or obscured from cameras.

[_Os_]

Both here and on reddit it is bizarre seeing some Saffas so incapable of grasping why the same thing happening with the same two players the last time these teams played might be relevant to an allegation being made the next time it happens.

It's just as weird as the suggestion or implication that this is being done to try and disrupt SA's prep for a final and not simply an issue being raised as and when it occurred. When would you like it to be brought up? Because if Curry and the RFU waited until after the final I'm sure some of you would be castigating both for trying to rain on your parade/rub salt into the wounds depending on the outcome and/or questioning why it wasn't raised at the time.

If it happened and it's serious stuff etc, then why not bring it when it happened.

It looks incredibly bad to being it up after losing a RWC semi, and to come with no evidence.

You lot would be going ape shit if SARU were doing this and accusing one of your players of racism without evidence. Absolutely none of us would want to be accused of racism in their workplace without there even being any evidence to action anything, but with those accusations somehow still standing and being supported by those in more powerful positions.

Once can be written off as misinterpretation, heat of the moment, not worth it etc., but if you believe someone has racially abused you twice in two games then of course you're going to bring it up.

Again, when would you like all this to be raised if it can't be done so immediately after it happened? In 3 months when the world cup is completely in the rear view? Curry raised it in the game and pursued it afterwards. That is entirely right and proper. He and the RFU clearly felt there was enough evidence to support, World Rugby disagree. That's not the same thing as being without evidence.

'Shut up if you don't think you can prove it' is certainly an interesting approach. Basically carte blanche for anything goes if players are fairly certain they're sufficiently far from the ref mic or obscured from cameras.

People would be less dismissive if it was raised at the time. Not a year later after losing a RWC semi.

There isn't the evidence to charge Bongi with anything. That is a fact.

[Sards]

Geez. Engl8sh Sport is in a really bad place atm. I am actually feeling sorry for them

[assfly]

Basically carte blanche for anything goes if players are fairly certain they're sufficiently far from the ref mic or obscured from cameras.

Which probably happens in every game.

But it would be a different story if players were racially abusing each other.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Witness testimony is evidence.

From the plaintiff? I think you'll need someone else too, mate.

Why?

You might reasonably consider it's not sufficient to find a party guilty, but if they have evidence it's still evidence. It just seems Oz was having a little difficulty with the concept of 'evidence'

[TheNatalShark]

Maybe Curry and the RFU are just thick.


A lot of dumb things happening around this world cup.

[TedMaul]

Not sure you've quite grasped what the word spiv means.

Car salesman my Scot broers told me. Its the perfect job for him. Selling white cars.

This is fantastic comedic stuff.

[sockwithaticket]

If it happened and it's serious stuff etc, then why not bring it when it happened.

It looks incredibly bad to being it up after losing a RWC semi, and to come with no evidence.

You lot would be going ape shit if SARU were doing this and accusing one of your players of racism without evidence. Absolutely none of us would want to be accused of racism in their workplace without there even being any evidence to action anything, but with those accusations somehow still standing and being supported by those in more powerful positions.

Once can be written off as misinterpretation, heat of the moment, not worth it etc., but if you believe someone has racially abused you twice in two games then of course you're going to bring it up.

Again, when would you like all this to be raised if it can't be done so immediately after it happened? In 3 months when the world cup is completely in the rear view? Curry raised it in the game and pursued it afterwards. That is entirely right and proper. He and the RFU clearly felt there was enough evidence to support, World Rugby disagree. That's not the same thing as being without evidence.

'Shut up if you don't think you can prove it' is certainly an interesting approach. Basically carte blanche for anything goes if players are fairly certain they're sufficiently far from the ref mic or obscured from cameras.

People would be less dismissive if it was raised at the time. Not a year later after losing a RWC semi.

There isn't the evidence to charge Bongi with anything. That is a fact.

If I punched someone and they chose not to do anything about it at the time, they aren't in the wrong for bringing it up if I punch them a year later.

You keep getting hung up on the 2022 incident. If it was being brought up in isolation you might have a point, but it's not. It's being raised in context of another incident of the same nature, involving the same players happening during the semi-final.

Rhubarb has already covered your issue with the evidence.

[_Os_]

Once can be written off as misinterpretation, heat of the moment, not worth it etc., but if you believe someone has racially abused you twice in two games then of course you're going to bring it up.

Again, when would you like all this to be raised if it can't be done so immediately after it happened? In 3 months when the world cup is completely in the rear view? Curry raised it in the game and pursued it afterwards. That is entirely right and proper. He and the RFU clearly felt there was enough evidence to support, World Rugby disagree. That's not the same thing as being without evidence.

'Shut up if you don't think you can prove it' is certainly an interesting approach. Basically carte blanche for anything goes if players are fairly certain they're sufficiently far from the ref mic or obscured from cameras.

People would be less dismissive if it was raised at the time. Not a year later after losing a RWC semi.

There isn't the evidence to charge Bongi with anything. That is a fact.

If I punched someone and they chose not to do anything about it at the time, they aren't in the wrong for bringing it up if I punch them a year later.

You keep getting hung up on the 2022 incident. If it was being brought up in isolation you might have a point, but it's not. It's being raised in context of another incident of the same nature, involving the same players happening during the semi-final.

Rhubarb has already covered your issue with the evidence.

You allegedly punched someone a year ago, it then gets brought up in a independent (World Rugby isn't SARU or the RFU) disciplinary process and it's found there isn't evidence you punched someone. The whole time you maintained you hadn't punched anyone.

Then those more powerful than you who made the accusation and did not oppose the independent disciplinary process, still claim you punched someone without the evidence to do anything.

You would then have to decide if it was worth your time pursuing it further, or moving on and forgetting about it.

[Sards]

Interesting. The RFU wants Curry to be heard. It's clear that Curry is involved in this or they would not make the statement. So don't go claiming innocence for Curry and its not him pursuing the matter but the RFU. Also the matter of the " alleged " previous accusation must have come from Curry

[JM2K6]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

[_Os_]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

[JM2K6]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

No, you lot deserve every criticism you get and have earned it tenfold.

World Rugby have hung Curry out to dry by not following that same process that every union has followed in previous cases like this. There's nothing to undermine because they've done nothing.

[Margin__Walker]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

Doesn't sound like much of a disciplinary process. Any other serious workplace with a similar accusation and you'd have all of the participants interviewed and a considered (and fully recorded) conclusion. Even if the end result is the same with insufficient evidence of an offence.

[_Os_]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

No, you lot deserve every criticism you get and have earned it tenfold.

World Rugby have hung Curry out to dry by not following that same process that every union has followed in previous cases like this. There's nothing to undermine because they've done nothing.

Bad when we do it.

All excellent and very clever when you do it.

[_Os_]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

Doesn't sound like much of a disciplinary process. Any other serious workplace with a similar accusation and you'd have all of the participants interviewed and a considered (and fully recorded) conclusion. Even if the end result is the same with insufficient evidence of an offence.

Hmm ...

Why would Curry moan during the game about something that happened a year ago.

Any why would the RFU take issue with it now rather than then?

[assfly]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

WTF do you mean by lack of due process? It was investigated by World Rugby immediately after the allegation surfaced.

I find this all very rich coming from such an inept sporting body such as the RFU. Where was their due process when they were agreeing Eddie Jones' contract extension that backfired so badly? Where was their due process when Worcester and Wasps went under? Where is their due process when the England team regularly have such bad 6N results? The RFU is a complete joke, they're in no position to judge due process.

[JM2K6]

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

No, you lot deserve every criticism you get and have earned it tenfold.

World Rugby have hung Curry out to dry by not following that same process that every union has followed in previous cases like this. There's nothing to undermine because they've done nothing.

Bad when we do it.

All excellent and very clever when you do it.

It's so incredibly asinine that you are trying to compare Rassie's behaviour with the RFU expressing dismay at Curry not even being interviewed after reporting being racially abused. I don't know what it is about rugby that makes you such a disingenuous prick to converse with but it's genuinely weird.

[JM2K6]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

WTF do you mean by lack of due process? It was investigated by World Rugby immediately after the allegation surfaced.

I find this all very rich coming from such an inept sporting body such as the RFU. Where was their due process when they were agreeing Eddie Jones' contract extension that backfired so badly? Where was their due process when Worcester and Wasps went under? Where is their due process when the England team regularly have such bad 6N results? The RFU is a complete joke, they're in no position to judge due process.

Fuck me, the state of that whataboutery.

I don't know about you but at work if I went to the relevant people to report being racially abused and was told there was a process that would be followed, I would expect to actually be given the opportunity to explain in detail what happened (and the same opportunity afforded to the accused) before they decided there was no case to answer

[Margin__Walker]

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

Doesn't sound like much of a disciplinary process. Any other serious workplace with a similar accusation and you'd have all of the participants interviewed and a considered (and fully recorded) conclusion. Even if the end result is the same with insufficient evidence of an offence.

Hmm ...

Why would Curry moan during the game about something that happened a year ago.

Any why would the RFU take issue with it now rather than then?

I know you're not stupid Os, so why pretend to be on here?

During the game he was complaining about the incident that happened during the same game.

This post this was in response to was the one where both the tweet you quoted and your comment stated that the entire complaint was about an incident from a year ago, rather than the semi. Which was clearly incorrect. Suggesting that he picked that exact moment to complain to BoK about something that happened a year before.

[Simian]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

Doesn't sound like much of a disciplinary process. Any other serious workplace with a similar accusation and you'd have all of the participants interviewed and a considered (and fully recorded) conclusion. Even if the end result is the same with insufficient evidence of an offence.

Yeah. It seems it’s this that the RFU take exception to.

It’s especially odd to me after it was WR who stepped in and disciplined Marler for abusing Samson Lee after the 6Ns decided no further action was necessary (Marler copping a ban and a fine).

[Paddington Bear]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

WTF do you mean by lack of due process? It was investigated by World Rugby immediately after the allegation surfaced.

I find this all very rich coming from such an inept sporting body such as the RFU. Where was their due process when they were agreeing Eddie Jones' contract extension that backfired so badly? Where was their due process when Worcester and Wasps went under? Where is their due process when the England team regularly have such bad 6N results? The RFU is a complete joke, they're in no position to judge due process.

Plenty to criticise the RFU for (not that any of this is relevant), but if you look at how they treat allegations of racist or homophobic abuse in our grassroots game it is a well managed clear and transparent process involving rugby people and legally qualified individuals.

[average joe]

Where does this accusation of "due process was not followed" come from? According to World Rugby they considered all the evidence including video footage, in game sound recordings and statements from both kante. So how as Currie not heard? Surly the statement they had included has accusation. You Brits look like real kante going on about this, agter kante.

[Sards]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

No, you lot deserve every criticism you get and have earned it tenfold.

World Rugby have hung Curry out to dry by not following that same process that every union has followed in previous cases like this. There's nothing to undermine because they've done nothing.

They asked for someone to bring evidence that is definitive. I am sure there are hacks somewhere amongst the English that can provide it. Otherwise it's he said and she said

[Sards]

Doesn't sound like much of a disciplinary process. Any other serious workplace with a similar accusation and you'd have all of the participants interviewed and a considered (and fully recorded) conclusion. Even if the end result is the same with insufficient evidence of an offence.

Hmm ...

Why would Curry moan during the game about something that happened a year ago.

Any why would the RFU take issue with it now rather than then?

I know you're not stupid Os, so why pretend to be on here?

During the game he was complaining about the incident that happened during the same game.

This post this was in response to was the one where both the tweet you quoted and your comment stated that the entire complaint was about an incident from a year ago, rather than the semi. Which was clearly incorrect. Suggesting that he picked that exact moment to complain to BoK about something that happened a year before.

I think you should take Curry's case.

[JM2K6]

The RFU statement as clear as day undermines the World Rugby disciplinary process. You just think it's good they're doing that.

Which is fine, it's your right to hold that view. But all the criticisms of Rassie and South African rugby start to ring a bit hollow.

No, you lot deserve every criticism you get and have earned it tenfold.

World Rugby have hung Curry out to dry by not following that same process that every union has followed in previous cases like this. There's nothing to undermine because they've done nothing.

They asked for someone to bring evidence that is definitive. I am sure there are hacks somewhere amongst the English that can provide it. Otherwise it's he said and she said

When it is a case of "he said she said" you generally at least make an effort to go through in detail what was said and the context/circumstances around it with both parties individually

Literally can't believe I'm having to explain this but heyho

[Sandstorm]

The RFU aren't angry that the Saffer wasn't found guilty. They're annoyed at the lack of due process. Not even interviewing Curry and Mbonambi, just going "eh it's unlikely we could prove it one way or another so let's just forget about it" is a dreadful look especially when Curry's copped such abuse and threats for reporting it in the first place.

The precedent for situations like this has always been to take it seriously and actually make an effort to determine the events on field by interviewing people. WR might think they're just trying to avoid drama in a scenario when they don't believe a definitive answer can be found, but all they're doing is feeding the conspiracy theorists and increasing the chance that abuse goes unpunished in future; who would risk reporting it in future if this is the likely response?

WTF do you mean by lack of due process? It was investigated by World Rugby immediately after the allegation surfaced.

I find this all very rich coming from such an inept sporting body such as the RFU. Where was their due process when they were agreeing Eddie Jones' contract extension that backfired so badly? Where was their due process when Worcester and Wasps went under? Where is their due process when the England team regularly have such bad 6N results? The RFU is a complete joke, they're in no position to judge due process.

Plenty to criticise the RFU for (not that any of this is relevant), but if you look at how they treat allegations of racist or homophobic abuse in our grassroots game it is a well managed clear and transparent process involving rugby people and legally qualified individuals.

Fine. Can you lot wait until Monday morning to lodge a formal complaint please? There are a couple of more important things happening at present than Curry's suspect hearing and knowledge of Afrikaans.

[JM2K6]

Where does this accusation of "due process was not followed" come from? According to World Rugby they considered all the evidence including video footage, in game sound recordings and statements from both kante. So how as Currie not heard? Surly the statement they had included has accusation. You Brits look like real kante going on about this, agter kante.

Oh, did they take statements from both players? Got a link to that info?

[Sandstorm]

Where does this accusation of "due process was not followed" come from? According to World Rugby they considered all the evidence including video footage, in game sound recordings and statements from both kante. So how as Currie not heard? Surly the statement they had included has accusation. You Brits look like real kante going on about this, agter kante.

Oh, did they take statements from both players? Got a link to that info?

Doubt they got anything from Bongi. He's practising throwing into the lineout on the middel kant.

[laurent]

Where does this accusation of "due process was not followed" come from? According to World Rugby they considered all the evidence including video footage, in game sound recordings and statements from both kante. So how as Currie not heard? Surly the statement they had included has accusation. You Brits look like real kante going on about this, agter kante.

Oh, did they take statements from both players? Got a link to that info?

Doubt they got anything from Bongi. He's practising throwing into the lineout on the middel kant.

Makes a good pizza though

[Sandstorm]

Oh, did they take statements from both players? Got a link to that info?

Doubt they got anything from Bongi. He's practising throwing into the lineout on the middel kant.

Makes a good pizza though

This place makes Turkey Sandwiches:

[OomStruisbaai]

Was at Struisbaai pharmacy this afternoon. The lady behind the till struggle to understand this kante storey. Probably have a wide kant.

[assfly]

Oh, did they take statements from both players? Got a link to that info?

From the World Rugby statement:

"Having considered all the available evidence, including match footage, audio and evidence from both teams"

I really don't get all this bullshit about Curry not being given a chance. He obviously spoke to them after the match when he raised the issue of the 2022 allegation.

[Guy Smiley]

Oh, did they take statements from both players? Got a link to that info?

From the World Rugby statement:

"Having considered all the available evidence, including match footage, audio and evidence from both teams"

I really don't get all this bullshit about Curry not being given a chance. He obviously spoke to them after the match when he raised the issue of the 2022 allegation.

It's pretty much standard that in any case like this involving two individuals, both would be interviewed individually. Suggesting otherwise is a bit ridiculous... a lack of due process is a fair claim.

[average joe]

There was no "case" to begin with, a berkeley hunt misinterpreted a word that was in a language he does not speak or understand and decided to throw around accusations of racism. We pointed and laughed at him, so he doubled down and said, "no actually it's not the first time, it happened before". He and his team decided to go cry-cry to daddy because they are stupid and sour about losing. Daddy looked at all the evidence and decided these fokon knobheads are beyond stupid.

And now you klomp dom agterkante are on here a week later still trolling Saffas with this non-event and you think it makes you look very clever. It makes you look just as stupid and sour as Curry and the RFU.

[Uncle fester]

All this kak after matches is so depressing.

It's terrible.

Imagine how bad it would be if SA lost.

[assfly]

Imagine how bad it would be if SA lost.

I tried to, but I can't.

[Uncle fester]

Imagine how bad it would be if SA lost.

I tried to, but I can't.

Armbands for a full year.
Ref sent to camps.
Traditional eye gouging to commence at the anthems.

[assfly]

Armbands for a full year.
Ref sent to camps.
Traditional eye gouging to commence at the anthems.

Meanwhile, back in the real world....