news.sky.com/story/protests-at-ulster-ru...-rape-trial-11329708

The case - like the Chad Evans one - leaves a nasty taste.
The public do not like it.

Spot on ITK; on various levels. Those who feel these witch hunts are often misunderstandings and police should not be involved. Some who feel media often plays a malicious part, during their quest for a good story. And both extremes - those who feel people should not have sex with others and those who feel any kind of sex is natural. And then there is the majority, like most on here, who do not like the way society is going.

Texts between the players sealed their fates; they were found not guilty of any sexual offences.

'Spit roast' sexual activities were mentioned and 'we are all top shaggers' - as well as many other obnoxious messages.

Rugby authorities in Ireland decided that the players did not meet the high standards required of players representing their club and country.

And they're right. The texts were vile.

Sadly vile comments have been around forever and will be forever; whether or not such things should affect sports careers are another matter.

Please read the texts - now widely available in the media, and clearly illustrating the very low calibre of people involved.

Such players are revered in the small province in Northern Ireland and serve as much need non-political role models, to children on both sides of the divide.

Middle-class and smug, these players oused entitlement; they thought they were untouchable. At least, their valedictory statements showed some remorse.

Lager louts have been around forever. Levels of insults go up and down. Remorse means nothing either way.

Is it actually legal to sack someone for having a horrible personality?

The Sunday Times reports that one of the two rugby players (Jackson) is to be offered a contract with a major French club - following the cancellation of his IRFU contract!

Spee wrote:
'Spit roast' sexual activities were mentioned and 'we are all top shaggers' - as well as many other obnoxious messages.

Rugby authorities in Ireland decided that the players did not meet the high standards required of players representing their club and country.

And they're right. The texts were vile.


I strongly disagree.

These were private messages between close friends. They were therefore more explicit, more coarse, less tempered and less discreet than comments one would make in wider company. Within the social context in which they were made - a close-knit group of young, male friends - they were not obnoxious. If outsiders eavesdrop on the conversation, we might find it distasteful, but that doesn't mean the comments in themselves were obnoxious.

I also question how the men have fallen below any required standards of behaviour. These are young, red-blooded heterosexual men. Sometimes they go out and have some drinks and have an active sex life. So do I. So do my friends and colleagues. Sometimes we crack a joke or two about it: a joke we wouldn't share outside our social circle. Going out partying and hooking up with members of the opposite sex is well within social norms in the Western World. Or, it was until recently. In recent years, it's been misrepresented as a manifestation of "toxic masculinity" which seeks to present male heterosexuality as a psychological disorder that must be cured or eliminated. Meanwhile, the same behaviour from females and homosexuals is brave, empowered, strong and independent.

Young ladies come regularly and often to my place to be entertained. I make it crystal clear in very direct language - also on Whatsapp, usually - why they are coming over and what I'm planning to do to, in, or on, them. And I also seek, in reply, an expression of willingness and enthusiasm to participate in the described programme of events. Sometimes there's a little negotiation about what's going to be on the menu. Result is, everyone gets what they want and goes away with a smile on their face. These days, that makes me some kind of Jack the Andrei Chikatilo Ripper

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Is it actually legal to sack someone for having a horrible personality?

Yes ... if they are bringing disrepute on a firm / venture.
Gross misconduct.

Randall wrote:
Spee wrote:
'Spit roast' sexual activities were mentioned and 'we are all top shaggers' - as well as many other obnoxious messages.

Rugby authorities in Ireland decided that the players did not meet the high standards required of players representing their club and country.

And they're right. The texts were vile.


I strongly disagree.

These were private messages between close friends. They were therefore more explicit, more coarse, less tempered and less discreet than comments one would make in wider company. Within the social context in which they were made - a close-knit group of young, male friends - they were not obnoxious. If outsiders eavesdrop on the conversation, we might find it distasteful, but that doesn't mean the comments in themselves were obnoxious.

I also question how the men have fallen below any required standards of behaviour. These are young, red-blooded heterosexual men. Sometimes they go out and have some drinks and have an active sex life. So do I. So do my friends and colleagues. Sometimes we crack a joke or two about it: a joke we wouldn't share outside our social circle. Going out partying and hooking up with members of the opposite sex is well within social norms in the Western World. Or, it was until recently. In recent years, it's been misrepresented as a manifestation of "toxic masculinity" which seeks to present male heterosexuality as a psychological disorder that must be cured or eliminated. Meanwhile, the same behaviour from females and homosexuals is brave, empowered, strong and independent.

Young ladies come regularly and often to my place to be entertained. I make it crystal clear in very direct language - also on Whatsapp, usually - why they are coming over and what I'm planning to do to, in, or on, them. And I also seek, in reply, an expression of willingness and enthusiasm to participate in the described programme of events. Sometimes there's a little negotiation about what's going to be on the menu. Result is, everyone gets what they want and goes away with a smile on their face. These days, that makes me some kind of Jack the Andrei Chikatilo Ripper


Both main protagonists accepted the IRFU view that their actions and behaviour was below acceptable levels.

In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Is it actually legal to sack someone for having a horrible personality?

Yes ... if they are bringing disrepute on a firm / venture.
Gross misconduct.

But how could that happen if it was private messages?
It seems wrong to blame them for something that would never have been seen had they not been falsely accused.