Naughty Ospreys being investigated

[Tircoeds]

If Januarie/Ospreys signed a three month contract knowing they would terminate it after two, that constitutes an off field contravention of the rules and is blatent cheating.

Well, mm, not quite according to the laws.

Of course, the contract, as far as I am aware, was not terminated after two months.

Where a player is whilst under contract is not covered within the laws, otherwise none could ever go on holiday.

[Tircoeds]

The issue (as I understand it and I may not) is whether Ospreys and others saught and received dispensation from ERC to bring Januarie and others in on what it is alleged to be two month contracts, when the rules stipulate they should be three month (minimum) contracts.

If that is the case, then surely the problem lies with the ERC and not the clubs being 'investigated'.

[Bill W (2)]

Of course, the contract, as far as I am aware, was not terminated after two months.

Where a player is whilst under contract is not covered within the laws, otherwise none could ever go on holiday.

Now we get to the nitty gritty.

He played for a SA team within the three month period. With what Union was he registered?

There are certainly issues where ERC are far from blameless - which I have pointed out frequently and often. They could not run a drinks party in a brewery or a gentlemens evening in a brothel IMHO.

[Noggs]

A number of posters have said it is totally unfair to recruit just for the HC. Okay, its a point of view. Others have said that teams should use their academy, okay, another point of view. Each time I have asked about the recruitment of Tuqiri, no one has responded .... I'm not badmouthing it, it made sense to do at the time given the injuries across your squad. Of course, if it is wrong to do so for the HC, then is it also wrong to do so for the GP ? No, not in my opinion.

There is no problem with recruiting a player on a short term contract for whatever reason.

If the rules of the competition gave no minimum contract period of the period was 2 months there would be no issue. However, the rules in this case give a minimum contract period of 3 months, presumably with the intention of stopping clubs bringing in 'ringers' on a game by game basis as required.

Hence, the issue in question is whether, knowing the 3 month rule a club deliberately flouted the rule or acted in a way that met the written letter of the rule whilst flouting the obvious intent. If the contracts in question were written as 3 month contracts in the tacit knowledge and agreement that the player would only serve a 2 month contract (be it by back dating the start date or early termination) it can only be seen as cheating. Simples.

After all, without rules where are we?

France

[Bill W (2)]

[Hence, the issue in question is whether, knowing the 3 month rule a club deliberately flouted the rule or acted in a way that met the written letter of the rule whilst flouting the obvious intent. If the contracts in question were written as 3 month contracts in the tacit knowledge and agreement that the player would only serve a 2 month contract (be it by back dating the start date or early termination) it can only be seen as cheating. Simples.

Back dating it won't work. Rules say must be 3 months from date of application for registration within the competition.

I am still not understanding why it is taking so long. A call to Ospreys, a call to WRU and a call to SARFU is surely all that is required.

[stevetelcom2000]

Wow Steve I'm really scared.

Not.

And I would happily debate the issues with someone rational.

I would however prefer someone rational and not someone who uses terms like terrorist in relation to a discussion about a game and its governance.

Tell me? What was rational regarding the drivel you spouted earlier about Flutey/IRFU/Munster/Flannery, which BTW had absolutely nothing to do with this thread?
Also what was it I said that you deem to be irrational?
I advise you look the word up before answering; you have enough egg on your face as it is. While you’re at it, look up the term one eyed as well. You don’t seem to have grasped that either.

[Bill W (2)]

ENOUGH!!!!

[bluntiger]

Tell me? What was rational regarding the drivel you spouted earlier about Flutey/IRFU/Munster/Flannery, which BTW had absolutely nothing to do with this thread?
Also what was it I said that you deem to be irrational?
I advise you look the word up before answering; you have enough egg on your face as it is. While you’re at it, look up the term one eyed as well. You don’t seem to have grasped that either.

Please go away and have this 'discussion' by PM, none of the rest of us are interested.

[Tircoeds]

Now look here (YOU WELSH GIT - ADDED BACK IN )! No I don't mean it but how dare you come on here being all reasonable!!

Where'd it go ?

Awesome, you cant call me a welsh git but I can call you a pompous oaf !!!!


Seriously though, Rizzo, Bills' post was meant in jest and he said so himself, was there any need to remove some of the words (Can't believe I am defending Bill here !) ?

[Noggs]

I am still not understanding why it is taking so long. A call to Ospreys, a call to WRU and a call to SARFU is surely all that is required.

Assuming that they have done what we all believe they have done (signed a 3 month contract with the prior tacit agreement that it would not be enforced) I suspect the problem is one of not knowing what they can do about it. The men in wigs will point to the wording of the rules and probably advise that you can drive a coach and horses through them. This being the case the cheats win

[Cicero]

Wow Steve I'm really scared.

Not.

And I would happily debate the issues with someone rational.

I would however prefer someone rational and not someone who uses terms like terrorist in relation to a discussion about a game and its governance.

Tell me? What was rational regarding the drivel you spouted earlier about Flutey/IRFU/Munster/Flannery, which BTW had absolutely nothing to do with this thread?
Also what was it I said that you deem to be irrational?
I advise you look the word up before answering; you have enough egg on your face as it is. While you’re at it, look up the term one eyed as well. You don’t seem to have grasped that either.

Godwin's Law.

[Bill W (2)]

Seriously though, Rizzo, Bills' post was meant in jest and he said so himself, was there any need to remove some of the words (Can't believe I am defending Bill here !) ?

Shucks Rizzo - now look what you have done!!

[Bill W (2)]

Assuming that they have done what we all believe they have done (signed a 3 month contract with the prior tacit agreement that it would not be enforced) I suspect the problem is one of not knowing what they can do about it. The men in wigs will point to the wording of the rules and probably advise that you can drive a coach and horses through them. This being the case the cheats win

Slap on wrists. Token fines (£100K ish). Rewording of rules.

[Noggs]

Bill, you may well be right; time will tell. ERC may not feel they can 'legally' hand out any punishment if the letter of the rule was followed.

If this does turn out to be the case I hope the management of the teams in question feel they can hold their heads high. It is still a cynical act of cheating even if it cannot be punished as such.

[Bill W (2)]

It is still a cynical act of cheating even if it cannot be punished as such.

You might think that Noggs. Many would agree with you.

Me? I could not possibly comment could I?