0
Dear Lord, if you give us back Johnny Cash, we'll give you Justin Bieber.
While I agree with many here that it was a personal mistake by Lote and he showed a lack in character. I'm not privy to his personal marriage arrangements nor is anyone else. Thats an issue for him an his wife to deal with... But I still don't see it as a ARU sackable offense...
Both were adults and willing... all legal... and by the way Canberra is full of families or influence. Canberra is also full of many secrets held these people.
Furthermore he wasn't paid to play in that test match... he wasn't in the 22... Also I do feel it was a difficult position to put Brown his room mate in... that was selfish by Lote...
But its all done now... its a weird profession which sets juvenile behavioral rules treating adults as children on a school excursion... You never see this in any other corporate events...
I also understand Lote personal sponsors have chosen to stand by him...
If I was in temporary accomodations as provided by my employers so I would be available should I be required [at short notice] for work and I took someone back to my room - I'd likely get sacked. If I'd been put on notice several times before - I would definately get sacked, especially if I hadn't been pulling my weight around the office of late.
That's without being on a retainer as Lote was. As soon as he signed that contract and accepted his $1,000,000/year he was on notice.
Whatever his 'personal marriage arrangements', I'd be suprised if they included putting their livelyhood on the line.
I'd usually add a byline of "stepping down from high horse" to a post like this - but bugger it, there's a good view from up here at the moment...
Dear Lord, if you give us back Johnny Cash, we'll give you Justin Bieber.
Just call me old school. The rugby I remember and revere was played by real men. They got drunk without ever worrying about offending against team protocols and if they smuggled a sheila back to their rooms they got a round of applause. After hours they sprayed each other with the fire hose in the hallways, got falling-down drunk in seedy pubs and if they had a punch-up over a few beers, it was simply a case of shake hands and forget about it next morning. Any monkey business on the paddock was sorted out by the gorillas in the pack with a bit of biffo and no need for touch judges and citing commissioners to stick their pointy noses into it either. And after the game, have a beer together and sing a few dirty songs with gratuitous denigration of female genitalia, and no EEO legislation lurking around the corner.
Yes, I know, I'm living in the past. Well let me tell you, the past was not a bad place.
---------- Post added at 22:20 ---------- Previous post was at 22:16 ----------
And exactly what other professions in the corporate world abide by such stringent conditions? Most high fliers on big money are more likely to get plied with booze and hookers than treated like underage nuns.
All but the oldest profession would get sacked for shagging on duty.
However - I know what you're saying, and I do agree to a large extent.
Bottom line for my thinking (apart from any moralistic crudd) is that if you're gonna sign a contract and collect the $$$ promised in that contract, woe to you if you break it.
Dear Lord, if you give us back Johnny Cash, we'll give you Justin Bieber.
Any profession that involves the public eye (or ear ala Kyle Sandilands) has restrictions on behaviour that reflect their profile and the general public’s opinion on where the line is drawn. As Coach says, if you sign the contract then end of argument. You don't have to play Rugby, there are myriad of other careers available to fit young motivated boozy rooters.
"Bloody oath we did!"
Nathan Sharpe, Legend.
Mining for example....
Proudly bought to you by a brewery somewhere....
well heres the thing, in the past rugby was amateur, the governing bodies and teams didnt have sponsors to appease and PR was a very minor issue. When rugby union decided to go professional, it basically turned its back on what you mentioned, instead we get more rugby games and we get to keep the best players in the game. A fair trade-off, well everyones to there own
It's down to the simple fact that he agreed team rules and the commitment he made by agreeing to his generous contract. He has seen fit to not only break the team rules and the conditions of his contract but subsequent to that he completely denied any wrong doing creating an unnecessary stress in the Wallabies team.
How can you argue to continue to pay a guy millions of dollars if he has not got the respect or basic moral fibre to expect to have to follow some simple rules.
No argument as far as I can see.
Last edited by The EnForcer; 07-09-09 at 07:13.
Just happy to be here
Anyone remember that Telstra employee that had a "menage a plenty" in a Hotel room purchased with private funds but was still fired because she was on a Staff Junkett and was funking.. i mean bunking with Fellow staff and another Staff member complained...
Thats an extreme case i know, but its a perfect example of the extents an Employer can go to to ensure its image is kept clean to satify shareholders and the general public (in the case of Lote - Rugby Fans).
Working in a management role i have to be as impartial as possible when dealing with repeat offenders... If i say "next offence , youre out!" and then go on to say "aaah yeah you only broke a small rule never mind, ill look the other way this time... but next time youre out~" I doubt i would have a job for much longer.
good riddance to a REPEAT OFFENDER!
Even putting all those things aside: you have a senior player with a young woman, presumably not just watching telly, in the same year that there have been all sorts of negative publicity about League and AFL players, group sex, rape etc, etc. Just the risk that she might have regrets and claim she was drunk, forced, drugged or similar is worth a sacking for colossal stupidity.
who went running to management with the tale?
Apparently yes. The story, as it was told on Offsiders yesterday at least, is that the woman's Dad went to the ARU to complain.
How exactly in his mind this was the ARUs problem I don't know, and I wonder if the response from the family would have been the same regardless of the player involved.
suppose if his daughter was with an AFL star,it would have been ok