fortysix wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 8:32 pm
No it wont be a life ban. more like suspended 2 years and touchline / media ban 1 year..
In which case Sale will have to sack him.
Agreed. If they don't life ban the odious Calum Clarke for deliberately breaking an opponent's arm I doubt they will life ban a DOR for an altercation with a journalist.
Anyway if Sale do sack him aren't we looking for an experienced DOR to act as a consultant for Geordan?
Tigers for the premiership and European Cup. Get behind the team and make some noise!!
fortysix wrote: ↑Sun Dec 30, 2018 8:32 pm
No it wont be a life ban. more like suspended 2 years and touchline / media ban 1 year..
In which case Sale will have to sack him.
Agreed. If they don't life ban the odious Calum Clarke for deliberately breaking an opponent's arm I doubt they will life ban a DOR for an altercation with a journalist.
Anyway if Sale do sack him aren't we looking for an experienced DOR to act as a consultant for Geordan?
Short of nobby west I can’t imagine a more unpopular appointment
Sale wont sack him,he singlehandedly pulled them together when swapping his suit for tracksuit,he's done a good job too! Not condoning what he's done but Cockers was the same at times. Fiercely protective but overreactive?
"Rugby isn't a contact sport,ballroom dancing is a contact sport. Rugby is a collision sport" Heyneke Meyer
The journalist Diamond confronted with was being a classic wind-up merchant and some say he got what he deserved, he probably didn’t lodge a complaint because he knew he would end up in serious trouble too.
Formerly of Burbaaage (not Inkleh), now up north at uni
JP14 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 01, 2019 10:32 am
The journalist Diamond confronted with was being a classic wind-up merchant and some say he got what he deserved, he probably didn’t lodge a complaint because he knew he would end up in serious trouble too.
I doubt it otherwise the Independent wouldn't have published their most recent article with accompanying audio.
JP14 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 01, 2019 10:32 am... some say he got what he deserved, he probably didn’t lodge a complaint because he knew he would end up in serious trouble too.
Back it up JP14 with some facts here, and not with any heresay or pot stirring tittle tattle. The journo wrote a ‘substantiated’ article that is still online for all to read, constructively written and as he states, if there were any untruths then why haven’t Sale put their legal team on to him? And if anyone thinks aggressively calling anyone out is the correct response then try looking up the RFU code of conduct, it may help!
JP14 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 01, 2019 10:32 am
The journalist Diamond confronted with was being a classic wind-up merchant and some say he got what he deserved, he probably didn’t lodge a complaint because he knew he would end up in serious trouble too.
This is the point posted by several on other platforms, seems little sympathy for Peters. Yes Diamond is a :censored: but not the only one around
Leicester Tigers 1995-
Nottingham 1995-2000
Swansea (Whites) 1988-95
A game played on grass in the open air by teams of XV.
I suggest that those who believe that the journo is a wind up artist , read his original article in the Indy (no paywall).
Then read why Diamond picked on him - because he didn’t ask any questions in the post match press conference!
Peters states he didn’t need to ask questions since he was only reporting the match, and not doing a feature.
In any event Diamond behaved in a totally inappropriate manner, and to do it in a room full of other people only speaks to his belligerence and attitude to other people.
fortysix wrote: ↑Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:34 pm
If you live by the sword, you can die by it as well. 50/50 in this case.
Brilliant! so a journo criticises in writing someone for legitimate reasons and its ok to respond with threats of violence?
The article was a constructive and independent view with plenty of evidence to support it, and you're suggesting he should die by the sword? JP14 suggests he deserved to be threatened with violence, and Jgriffin also thinks it was well deserved to be threatened with violence, for what? for publicly criticising and exposing an alleged bully. Have you read the original article? And how do you suggest bullies should be challenged democratically?