rugbyunion
Latest News:

Opinions expressed on this message board are solely those of the individual author. No endorsement of such opinions by the editors, Sportnetwork or Sale Sharks can or should be inferred.


Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
 
Re: Solomona banned
iBozz (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 13:32
Quote:
RugbyMarvel
Quote:
iBozz
Quote:
RugbyMarvel
I know this has been discussed but despite being part of the ‘snowflake’ generation, I still don’t see a rugby player using this as part of their vocabulary in the heat of the moment.

No matter how cool, calm and collected we are, RM, we are all guilty of sometimes losing our cool and saying things or using words that we later regret. The correct response is o apolgies as soon as we realise what we said or had it drawn to our attention.

Sorry iBozz, what I meant was I can’t see Shillcock using ‘homophobic slur’ in the heat of the moment, or neglecting to mention the expletive because it’s disrespectful. I can see I was unclear though.

The whole reaction of Shillcock just seemed a little contrived to me.

I’m with you, that makes a bit more sense to me and I agree with your assessment. The whole affair stinks like a barrel of rotten fish.

Maybe RFU actually stands Rotten Fish Union? (Sm14)



No matter what you say, or how you say it, someone somewhere will deliberately go out of their way to be offended.

In loving memory of Her Ladyship - d: 29/12/2007.

You don't know what you've got 'till it's gone. RiP

Please help medical research by Folding@Home and join Swanny's Irregulars - PM me for details. Please!


South Stand with The New Birtles Faithful.

 
Re: Solomona banned
MartWhit (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 14:36
The RFU clearly doesnt want to be seen to be on the wrong side of a homophobia discussion. And are willing to accept the accusation of poor justice and process in order to occupy that ground.

 
Re: Solomona banned
RugbyMarvel (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 14:40
Agreed, they’ve essentially said yes we believe everything Shillcock has said and therefore anything Solomona has said we don’t believe. It’s very worrying.

 
Re: Solomona banned
ageinghoody (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 15:30
Quote:
rossett shark
...
The employee responsible for social media posted on social media that her target audience were f***wits ...

Not quite! She ascribed the term to those among her target audience who appeared to think she had some influence on coaching. A very small proportion I'd hope.

I'll agree that it did seem to suggest a lack of awareness of the potential impact of her "specialism", and maybe that's enough to say she shouldn't have been doing that job.

I still maintain that the reaction to the flippant comment itself was grotesque.

 
Re: Solomona banned
Grumpy Old Shark (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 15:43
Quote:
RugbyMarvel
Quote:
iBozz
Quote:
RugbyMarvel
I know this has been discussed but despite being part of the ‘snowflake’ generation, I still don’t see a rugby player using this as part of their vocabulary in the heat of the moment.

No matter how cool, calm and collected we are, RM, we are all guilty of sometimes losing our cool and saying things or using words that we later regret. The correct response is o apolgies as soon as we realise what we said or had it drawn to our attention.

Sorry iBozz, what I meant was I can’t see Shillcock using ‘homophobic slur’ in the heat of the moment, or neglecting to mention the expletive because it’s disrespectful. I can see I was unclear though.

The whole reaction of Shillcock just seemed a little contrived to me.

Agreed

 
Re: Solomona banned
Yareet (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 16:55
Quote:
RugbyMarvel

Sorry iBozz, what I meant was I can’t see Shillcock using ‘homophobic slur’ in the heat of the moment, or neglecting to mention the expletive because it’s disrespectful. I can see I was unclear though.

The whole reaction of Shillcock just seemed a little contrived to me.

Disagree. Not least as there’s no coherent motive to lie.

The game was lost already so a red card is unlikely to change the result.

Plus to have any impact at all, Shilcock was also relying on ref showing a red card purely on his (Shilcock’s) say so. Given the subsequent disciplinary panel decision, perhaps this wasn’t an unreasonable assumption but would Shilcock (anyone) have thought that possible before this case?

 
Re: Solomona banned
RugbyMarvel (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 17:04
Quote:
Yareet
Quote:
RugbyMarvel

Sorry iBozz, what I meant was I can’t see Shillcock using ‘homophobic slur’ in the heat of the moment, or neglecting to mention the expletive because it’s disrespectful. I can see I was unclear though.

The whole reaction of Shillcock just seemed a little contrived to me.

Disagree. Not least as there’s no coherent motive to lie.

The game was lost already so a red card is unlikely to change the result.

Plus to have any impact at all, Shilcock was also relying on ref showing a red card purely on his (Shilcock’s) say so. Given the subsequent disciplinary panel decision, perhaps this wasn’t an unreasonable assumption but would Shilcock (anyone) have thought that possible before this case?

He may well have thought he heard something, but the whole choice of language is strange in my opinion.

A motive could be that you’re being beaten heavily, you’ve dragged someone out of a ruck and had a bit of a set to, you hear something and you’re not quite sure what it is but hell, maybe it was similar to what Bastereaud said to Negri that made the news.

The whole incident and the whole judgement is just so strange and makes no sense.

 
Re: Solomona banned
Pappje Shark (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 17:32
I’d also add that it is a bit odd, especially in the current era of society, to make an instant and vocal allegation of homophobic abuse, but then decide half an hour later that you’re quite happy to forget about it.

 
Re: Solomona banned
RugbyMarvel (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 17:38
Quote:
Pappje Shark
I’d also add that it is a bit odd, especially in the current era of society, to make an instant and vocal allegation of homophobic abuse, but then decide half an hour later that you’re quite happy to forget about it.

Imagine the moment that you realise ‘they want me to make a statement, what did I say to the AR again? What did I say to the ref? How many times did he say it? Ermmm.... ermmmmm. ‘.

Going from ‘Sir, he used a homophobic slur, twice, he called me xxxxxx’ but whilst being hugely respectful and not using th expletive, to going actually nahhhh we can shake hands and crack on, it’s only a homophobic comment which has no place in this sport, is weird.

If Denny said it and Shillcock is sure of it, then he should have been willing to make a statement there and then and not suddenly changed his mind.

 
Re: Solomona banned
Chris1850 (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 17:49
The more you think about this, the more you have to question Shilcock's actions and motives, regardless of what was (allegedly) said.

He complains of a 'homophobic slur' to the referee and linesman.
He then thinks again, after the match, and says he doesnt want to pursue a complaint.
He is then asked to give evidence to the disclipinary panel that is investigating his initial allegation (even though he is apparently not now making a complaint) and he repeats his complaint.

Either he has taken offence at the alleged comment or he hasnt. Time he made up his mind

All the above is notwithstanding the fact that he is the only person to have heard an alleged homophobic slur anyway!!

 
Re: Solomona banned
RugbyMarvel (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 17:52
Quote:
Chris1850
The more you think about this, the more you have to question Shilcock's actions and motives, regardless of what was (allegedly) said.
He complains of a 'homophobic slur' to the referee and linesman.
He then thinks again, after the match, and says he doesnt want to pursue a complaint.
He is then asked to give evidence to the disclipinary panel that is investigating his initial allegation (even though he is apparently not now making a complaint) and he repeats his complaint.

Either he has taken offence at the alleged comment or he hasnt. Time he made up his mind

All the above is notwithstanding the fact that he is the only person to have heard an alleged homophobic slur anyway!!

Not even Dean Hammond who was immediately next to the scuffle (wasn’t even called by panel) nor the AR heard the insult.

To top it off, from 8 metres Shilcock can lip read and confidently say he say Solomona mouth it.

Remember ‘elephant juice’ vs ‘I love you’. The brain sees what it 1) expects or 2) wants to see. It’s why lip reading is not often used in criminal trials.

 
Re: Solomona banned
ale shark (IP Logged)
11 April, 2018 19:43
Whilst I understand the club’s rationale for not appealing the charge will now stick with Denny for the rest of his career and will be used against him in any future disciplinary hearings.

I’ve yet to see an article in the mainstream media that hasn’t referenced his ejection from the England training squad, things like this will stick with him forever so it should be challenged.

 
Re: Solomona banned
PoyntonShark (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 03:26
Whilst I largely agree ale shark, I don' think the club can achieve anything by appealing through the regular channels. It seems obvious to me that RFU were set on stamping down on this from the offset, once the opportunity presented itself then Denny was going to made an example of. RFU insisted on this going ahead despite no charge being laid by anyone involved in the incident. The only outcome I can see from an appeal is an extension on the ban.

The only option I can see to clear Denny's name would be to raise a claim against this ruling that somehow makes it a legal matter, with a burden of proof. That seems OTT to me and whilst it might clear Denny, the club would likely suffer long term from making such a stance against RFU.

I would like to add that I think we are getting dangerously close to demonising Shilcock here. Whilst I do have a couple of small nagging doubts about the events as reported, I am happy to believe that he acted in good faith. He believed he heard something and reported as such. I don't think the use of the phrase 'homophobic slur' is so unusual, as it is a phrase that has likely 'done the rounds' at clubs recently along with warnings about how seriously it would be treated. That seriousness probably what prompted the complaint to the ref, rather than the oldschool approach which in my case would obviously be to reply with something witty and profound like Yeah....well........F*ck off!



Unhappiness, where's when I was young
And we didn't give a damn
'Cause we were raised
To see life as a fun and take it if we can

 
Re: Solomona banned
ukms (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 05:48
I’ve got a very open mind about the whole thing, but I don’t suppose anyone has considered that Shilcock heard correctly and that Solomona didn’t want to own up to what he’d said and made up the f*ckwit remark as a covenient defence ? As we all know many people lie in situations where they have been caught out. .... personally I’d say there’s more chance that Solomona snapped in the heat of the moment and said what he said than there is of Shilcock making the whole thing up. Of course there are many other scenarios in between hence why I’m open minded.

 
Re: Solomona banned
Chris1850 (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 07:26
Quote:
ukms
I’ve got a very open mind about the whole thing, but I don’t suppose anyone has considered that Shilcock heard correctly and that Solomona didn’t want to own up to what he’d said and made up the f*ckwit remark as a covenient defence ? As we all know many people lie in situations where they have been caught out. .... personally I’d say there’s more chance that Solomona snapped in the heat of the moment and said what he said than there is of Shilcock making the whole thing up. Of course there are many other scenarios in between hence why I’m open minded.

Of course that scenario is a possibility. I don't think anyone on this board refutes that and indeed, it is what the panel chose to believe.

The issue that raises the doubt is that they chose to believe that scenario without any corroborating evidence whatsoever.

 
Re: Solomona banned
Yareet (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 07:45
Quote:
ukms
I’ve got a very open mind about the whole thing, but I don’t suppose anyone has considered that Shilcock heard correctly and that Solomona didn’t want to own up to what he’d said and made up the f*ckwit remark as a covenient defence ? As we all know many people lie in situations where they have been caught out. .... personally I’d say there’s more chance that Solomona snapped in the heat of the moment and said what he said than there is of Shilcock making the whole thing up. Of course there are many other scenarios in between hence why I’m open minded.

Much like the disciplinary panel, I’m trying to look at the balance of probabilities (and acknowledging that we probably don’t know as much as the panel did about process, etc).

With this in mind, it would be a bold (reckless) move from Denny and the club to contest a charge which could be proven by something as simple as a pitchside mic or corroboration from a neutral party (touch judge, etc).

Either he knew he didn’t say it or he knew absolutely nobody heard.

On balance I’d say the former is more likely.

Conversely, I’m still of the opinion that Shilcock heard “fa**ot”.

 
Re: Solomona banned
ukms (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 08:45
Quote:
Yareet

Much like the disciplinary panel, I’m trying to look at the balance of probabilities (and acknowledging that we probably don’t know as much as the panel did about process, etc).

With this in mind, it would be a bold (reckless) move from Denny and the club to contest a charge which could be proven by something as simple as a pitchside mic or corroboration from a neutral party (touch judge, etc).

Either he knew he didn’t say it or he knew absolutely nobody heard.

On balance I’d say the former is more likely.

Conversely, I’m still of the opinion that Shilcock heard “fa**ot”.

I think you might find all the evidence is disclosed to the defence team before they make any plea much like other forms of hearing. So it wouldn’t be particularly bold or reckless to give it a run once he knew it was his word against Shilcock. Remember there was a delay in the club submitting his statement, someone cynical might say a wise tactic ! smiling smiley

 
Re: Solomona banned
ukms (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 08:55
Quote:
Chris1850

Of course that scenario is a possibility. I don't think anyone on this board refutes that and indeed, it is what the panel chose to believe.

The issue that raises the doubt is that they chose to believe that scenario without any corroborating evidence whatsoever.

There’s always doubt in many non criminal hearings .... there can be 49% doubt, no different to many other civil scenarios. It’s not always just cold hard facts that sway things (a recording or witness account maybe) but the circumstances play a big part too as well as the conduct and credibility of witnesses etc etc

Reality is the only person that knows is Solomona smiling smiley

 
Re: Solomona banned
Chris1850 (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 09:29
Quote:
ukms
Quote:
Chris1850

Of course that scenario is a possibility. I don't think anyone on this board refutes that and indeed, it is what the panel chose to believe.

The issue that raises the doubt is that they chose to believe that scenario without any corroborating evidence whatsoever.

There’s always doubt in many non criminal hearings .... there can be 49% doubt, no different to many other civil scenarios. It’s not always just cold hard facts that sway things (a recording or witness account maybe) but the circumstances play a big part too as well as the conduct and credibility of witnesses etc etc

Reality is the only person that knows is Solomona smiling smiley

Agreed. However the burden of proof is considerably higher in a criminal court (beyond reasonable doubt) as opposed to the balance of probabilities. There is absolutely no way at all that this would have been a guilty verdict in a criminal court, simply because there is insufficient evidence upon which to safely convict.

However, this is a civil matter and the panel only has to be 51% sure. Hence the finding.

 
Re: Solomona banned
iBozz (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 10:03
Quote:
PoyntonShark
That seriousness probably what prompted the complaint to the ref, rather than the oldschool approach which in my case would obviously be to reply with something witty and profound like Yeah....well........F*ck off!

There's still a place for that sort of response, Poynters, within reason of course. They are professional "hard men" playing a hard contact sport and, from time to time may get a little bit irked - take it on the chin (not literally, of course, if Sirs are looking!) and move on. Everyone these days is far too precious.

"I know that you believe that you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure that what you heard is what I meant".



OK, here's something to offend anyone younger than, say, 50!

If you are offended then my work is done, if you aren't then I need to try harder!


https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-W16pcwqkNPM/Wh_milpBxLI/AAAAAAAAf78/MSZ7AflQ4eYGQa2zXjnearASTrdDiT7agCLcBGAs/s1600/working.jpg

https://pics.me.me/the-world-is-getting-too-sensitive-soon-i-wont-be-30613345.png




No matter what you say, or how you say it, someone somewhere will deliberately go out of their way to be offended.

In loving memory of Her Ladyship - d: 29/12/2007.

You don't know what you've got 'till it's gone. RiP

Please help medical research by Folding@Home and join Swanny's Irregulars - PM me for details. Please!


South Stand with The New Birtles Faithful.

 
Re: Solomona banned
WillC (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 10:12
Quote:
ukms
I think you might find all the evidence is disclosed to the defence team before they make any plea much like other forms of hearing. So it wouldn’t be particularly bold or reckless to give it a run once he knew it was his word against Shilcock. Remember there was a delay in the club submitting his statement, someone cynical might say a wise tactic ! smiling smiley

Not sure I buy that ukms. These disciplinary hearings seem to put quite a lot of weight on remorse. If he did actually say it the sensible option is to own up and show that you apologised to the other guy. That may have resulted in a slightly longer ban (but maybe not) but either way his season is over.

I'm pretty sure that shillcock thought that he heard what he said he heard, I'm just not convinced that Solomona actually said it and now you have a guy who's reputation has been permanently tarnished based solely on what one guy thinks he heard on a noisy pitch in the middle of the match.

 
Re: Solomona banned
H's Dad... (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 11:51
One wonders whether calling someone a "dick-head" would incurr such an OTT response......it is presumably a similar sort of heterosexual slur.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/2018 11:52 by H's Dad....

 
Re: Solomona banned
12 April, 2018 12:26
It does seem strange that a New Zealander who's been in the UK for a number of years has used a particular Americanism for a homosexual. I'd estimated in this country the overwhelming majority of slurs use words beginning with "p" as name calling.



https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4248/34452231260_b77f3695e4_t.jpg
Dis mus be da place

 
Re: Solomona banned
Siggy89 (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 19:13
In summary we don't know what happened or what caused the tribunal to reach the decision it did but some of the interpretations to offer a defence are frankly laughable.

 
Re: Solomona banned
ukms (IP Logged)
12 April, 2018 23:20
Quote:
Siggy89
In summary we don't know what happened or what caused the tribunal to reach the decision it did but some of the interpretations to offer a defence are frankly laughable.

Explain ? ..... if you don’t know what happened why are they laughable ? They could be true winking smiley

 
Re: Solomona banned
Monty9 (IP Logged)
13 April, 2018 19:09
[www.skysports.com]

Seems like The FA have got this spot on in a very similar case to Denny’s this week. One player making an accusation, another denying it, no evidence... case not proven.

 
Re: Solomona banned
ukms (IP Logged)
14 April, 2018 09:16
Quote:
Monty9
http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11698/11328942/jay-rodriguez-racism-charge-not-proven-after-gaetan-bong-incident
Seems like The FA have got this spot on in a very similar case to Denny’s this week. One player making an accusation, another denying it, no evidence... case not proven.

There was evidence.... he hired lip readers in his defence which I’m sure would swing the balance of probabilities in his favour .... perhaps Sale should have done the same.

 
Re: Solomona banned
Monty9 (IP Logged)
14 April, 2018 09:31
Unfortunately UKMS that’s not the case. Lip readers were hired, but they did not prove either guilt or innocence as his mouth was covered at the time of the alledged commenf. Hence case not proven, as no solid evidence could be found

As I said initially this is a case of 2 players reporting different words being used, as The FA couldn’t find any evidence to support either claim the case was not proven, just as Denny’s should have being.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 14/04/2018 09:38 by Monty9.

 
Re: Solomona banned
iBozz (IP Logged)
14 April, 2018 10:45
I work with someone who lip reads and I'm afraid that lip reading is not an exact science and can be misinterpreted as many sounds "look" the same even in a "one to one" conversation, let alone across a noisy and fast moving sports field - or so I am told by the lip-reader.

Such evidence may perhaps be admissible as circumstantial evidence, but I doubt that it would stand up as incontrovertible evidence in any formal setting.

The number of times, no matter how carefully and slowly I try to enunciate the words, Paul nearly always misinterprets the expressions "I need caffeine and biscuits, go and get me some" and "Don't just sit there, it's your round". He seems to interpret these as meaning "Sit there and do nothing as usual you idle git" but I cannot imagine why.

But I am no expert and am happy to be corrected.



No matter what you say, or how you say it, someone somewhere will deliberately go out of their way to be offended.

In loving memory of Her Ladyship - d: 29/12/2007.

You don't know what you've got 'till it's gone. RiP

Please help medical research by Folding@Home and join Swanny's Irregulars - PM me for details. Please!


South Stand with The New Birtles Faithful.

 
Re: Solomona banned
ukms (IP Logged)
14 April, 2018 12:24
Quote:
Monty9
Unfortunately UKMS that’s not the case. Lip readers were hired, but they did not prove either guilt or innocence as his mouth was covered at the time of the alledged commenf. Hence case not proven, as no solid evidence could be found
As I said initially this is a case of 2 players reporting different words being used, as The FA couldn’t find any evidence to support either claim the case was not proven, just as Denny’s should have being.

My apologies Monty .... I skimmed the article reading on my phone smiling smiley

 
Re: Solomona banned
ageinghoody (IP Logged)
15 April, 2018 14:26
Quote:
iBozz
...
The number of times, no matter how carefully and slowly I try to enunciate the words, Paul nearly always misinterprets the expressions "I need caffeine and biscuits, go and get me some" and "Don't just sit there, it's your round". He seems to interpret these as meaning "Sit there and do nothing as usual you idle git" but I cannot imagine why.
...

Would this be the Paul I know who volunteers at The Plaza?

 
Re: Solomona banned
iBozz (IP Logged)
15 April, 2018 20:27
Quote:
ageinghoody
Quote:
iBozz
...
The number of times, no matter how carefully and slowly I try to enunciate the words, Paul nearly always misinterprets the expressions "I need caffeine and biscuits, go and get me some" and "Don't just sit there, it's your round". He seems to interpret these as meaning "Sit there and do nothing as usual you idle git" but I cannot imagine why.
...

Would this be the Paul I know who volunteers at The Plaza?

If you mean our erstwhile Projectionist (he's staff, not a volunteer) with whom I have just spent a very long afternoon screening Gone With The Wind (he did bring me coffee and bisuits!), then indeedy doody.



No matter what you say, or how you say it, someone somewhere will deliberately go out of their way to be offended.

In loving memory of Her Ladyship - d: 29/12/2007.

You don't know what you've got 'till it's gone. RiP

Please help medical research by Folding@Home and join Swanny's Irregulars - PM me for details. Please!


South Stand with The New Birtles Faithful.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?