NPR

sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:34 am Basically carte blanche for anything goes if players are fairly certain they're sufficiently far from the ref mic or obscured from cameras.

Sandstorm wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:28 am

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:26 am Witness testimony is evidence.

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

Sandstorm wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 10:59 am

OomStruisbaai wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 10:57 am

SaintK wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 10:53 am
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.

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:37 am

sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:34 am

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:23 am
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.

sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 12:24 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:37 am

sockwithaticket wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 11:34 am

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.

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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.

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:30 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:32 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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.

Margin__Walker wrote: Wed Oct 25, 2023 10:00 am 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?

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:32 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:30 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm
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.

assfly wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:35 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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.

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:34 pm

Margin__Walker wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:32 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm
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 ...

Margin__Walker wrote: Wed Oct 25, 2023 10:00 am 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?

Margin__Walker wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:32 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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.

assfly wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:35 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:30 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:40 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:34 pm

Margin__Walker wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:32 pm

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 ...

Margin__Walker wrote: Wed Oct 25, 2023 10:00 am 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.

Sards wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:10 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:30 pm

_Os_ wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:21 pm
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

Paddington Bear wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:58 pm

assfly wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:35 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 1:14 pm 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 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:07 pm 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.

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:15 pm

average joe wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:07 pm 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 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:20 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:15 pm

average joe wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:07 pm 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 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:28 pm

Sandstorm wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:20 pm

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:15 pm

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

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:15 pm Oh, did they take statements from both players? Got a link to that info?

assfly wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 4:50 am

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:15 pm 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.

Chilli wrote: Mon Oct 23, 2023 7:23 pm

OomStruisbaai wrote: Mon Oct 23, 2023 6:47 pm All this kak after matches is so depressing.

It's terrible.

Uncle fester wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 6:32 am Imagine how bad it would be if SA lost.

assfly wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 6:33 am

Uncle fester wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 6:32 am Imagine how bad it would be if SA lost.

I tried to, but I can't.

Uncle fester wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 6:36 am Armbands for a full year.
Ref sent to camps.
Traditional eye gouging to commence at the anthems.

assfly wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 4:50 am

JM2K6 wrote: Thu Oct 26, 2023 2:15 pm 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.

JM2K6 wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 7:11 am "Spoke to them after the game, probably" is quite a bit different to the legal process that is followed when this happens in any other scenario. There was no hearing, no thorough gathering of evidence. It's not something that is a quick chat after a game.

These processes are pretty well understood, not least because the proceedings are recorded and usually released to the public, with dates of hearings announced and written judgements available regardless of the outcome.

So no, they did not "take statements" from both players.

assfly wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 7:24 am

JM2K6 wrote: Fri Oct 27, 2023 7:11 am "Spoke to them after the game, probably" is quite a bit different to the legal process that is followed when this happens in any other scenario. There was no hearing, no thorough gathering of evidence. It's not something that is a quick chat after a game.

These processes are pretty well understood, not least because the proceedings are recorded and usually released to the public, with dates of hearings announced and written judgements available regardless of the outcome.

So no, they did not "take statements" from both players.

You're really reaching now.

The Springbok lawyer, Attie Heyns, was involved throughout the process from beginning to end. He was joined by a visual specialist, a verbal specialist, a forwards specialist and a backs specialist.

I assume Curry was represented by a similar team.

You are making out like it was some sort of a kangaroo court.

Considering the abuse both players were receiving online, that is probably why they did not make it public as it would have made it worse. Perhaps they will release them after the final, when SARU are preparing their defamation lawsuit against the RFU.