WOULD IZZY ADD VALUE TO WESTS TIGERS

[jirskyr]

He has criticised the ceo of rugby. The guy has nfi what is going on and is totally disrespectful of his employers. I would be tearing his contract up and saying thx and good luck.

Honestly I think he knows exactly what he is doing. Maybe the religious comment was innocuous or not, but in publicly challenging the CEO, he's challenged Raylene's authority and… the ARU have done nothing about it, totally overlooked it.

So he now knows he is in the position of power, not the ARU, and with potential contracts available from other rugby competitions plus NRL, he's in demand.

I agree he is tactically disrepectful to the ARU and I think he's doing it on purpose. The words he uses are fine, the language is fine, but the intent is something else.

 

[magpiesteve]

After his statements on Instagram/Twitter, No I don't want him at the club.

Goes against the no DH policy.

We have a number of fiercely religious guys in our team.

It's likely some will hold the same views as Izzy.

You're living under a rock if you think that everyone is love and mung beans when it comes to this topic.

To say Folau is a DH for expressing a view is the same of saying you're a DH for expressing your view isn't it?

Let's keep politics out of sport….

Agree well said.

 

[Pawsandclaws]

Personally I couldn't care less which god he believes in.

Considering the public stance of the ARU towards being inclusive of homosexuals, the fact that the CEO of the major sponsor of the Wallabies is an open homosexual, and also the clear desire of the ailing ARU not to upset him; Folau has revealed that he is either too stupid, too stubborn or too convinced of his own importance to follow the game plan.

For me that is enough not to want him anywhere near my football team - a team which has, despite the sidelining of their highest-paid and most famous player, continued to succeed with the attitude that if a man falls in the front line, there is a willing and able man there to replace him.

Look at how Hayne derailed not only the Gold Coast but also Neil Henry in 2017.

Perfectly said.

All gays are going to hell and the CEO of your major sponsor is one of them. What a clever thing to say. Wait - "God made me do it".

The link between Qantas and Emirates makes the stance by the former against Folau to be not a good look. And the ARU inclusiveness provision not only applies to sexual orientation but also religious beliefs.

Ch9 reported this is the hot topic among fellow church members in the Eels' dressing sheds. Gallen's criticism of Folau on Ch9 last Sunday perhaps would not have gone down well with team mates who are members of the same Church (huge church).

 

[larrycorowa]

He has criticised the ceo of rugby. The guy has nfi what is going on and is totally disrespectful of his employers. I would be tearing his contract up and saying thx and good luck.

Honestly I think he knows exactly what he is doing. Maybe the religious comment was innocuous or not, but in publicly challenging the CEO, he's challenged Raylene's authority and… the ARU have done nothing about it, totally overlooked it.

So he now knows he is in the position of power, not the ARU, and with potential contracts available from other rugby competitions plus NRL, he's in demand.

I agree he is tactically disrepectful to the ARU and I think he's doing it on purpose. The words he uses are fine, the language is fine, but the intent is something else.

I think you are giving him way too much credit. If anything he has devalued himself and attached a risk factor to any futures contracts he enters. I employ people whose views I don’t necessarily agree with. Because they don’t impact on my business I treat these employees on merit. As soon as their views impact my business, I’ll firstly give them the option to keep them private and if they do not adhere, I’ll say thx but no thx. I can’t see why this would be handled any differently.

 

[Abraham]

He has criticised the ceo of rugby. The guy has nfi what is going on and is totally disrespectful of his employers. I would be tearing his contract up and saying thx and good luck.

So the CEO can lie about what was said during their highly publicised meeting, and Folau has to just sit back and allow himself to be misrepresented?

Yeah, nah.

 

[Abraham]

I wonder what anyone who thinks Folau can say whatever he likes and be left alone, I wonder what they think about Joel Monaghan or Pearcey simulating sex with dogs, or Todd Carney pretending to wee in his own mouth? Neither of those things are illegal and yet look at the consequences. What about a man's freedom to pee in his own bloody mouth? How dare you persecute such a freedom of artistic expression?

So just to be clear, in your eyes simulating bestiality and quoting the Bible are the same thing?

While i understand your point about the consequences of freedoms (and agree with the general point), i think you can do better job of illustrating it.

I don't think Folau should be left alone for his comments, to the contrary everyone should be allowed to voice their opinions on every topic they like, without being shut down or shouted down.

Out of curiosity, do you think the opinion of the Qantas CEO is more valid than the opinion of Israel Folau ?

 

[larrycorowa]

He has criticised the ceo of rugby. The guy has nfi what is going on and is totally disrespectful of his employers. I would be tearing his contract up and saying thx and good luck.

So the CEO can lie about what was said during their highly publicised meeting, and Folau has to just sit back and allow himself to be misrepresented?

Yeah, nah.

I think the ceo was allowing falou to take a position that worked for both parties. He obviously is sharp enough to take the tip. As soon as he affects sponsorship it becomes a very easy decision.

 

[larrycorowa]

I wonder what anyone who thinks Folau can say whatever he likes and be left alone, I wonder what they think about Joel Monaghan or Pearcey simulating sex with dogs, or Todd Carney pretending to wee in his own mouth? Neither of those things are illegal and yet look at the consequences. What about a man's freedom to pee in his own bloody mouth? How dare you persecute such a freedom of artistic expression?

So just to be clear, in your eyes simulating bestiality and quoting the Bible are the same thing?

While i understand your point about the consequences of freedoms (and agree with the general point), i think you can do better job of illustrating it.

I don't think Folau should be left alone for his comments, to the contrary everyone should be allowed to voice their opinions on every topic they like, without being shut down or shouted down.

Out of curiosity, do you think the opinion of the Qantas CEO is more valid than the opinion of Israel Folau ?

It’s not just that the aru has an inclusion policy and falou, who is an employee of the aru, has publicly aired views that are totally opposed to his employer. It’s an untenable situation.

 

[Abraham]

He has criticised the ceo of rugby. The guy has nfi what is going on and is totally disrespectful of his employers. I would be tearing his contract up and saying thx and good luck.

So the CEO can lie about what was said during their highly publicised meeting, and Folau has to just sit back and allow himself to be misrepresented?

Yeah, nah.

I think the ceo was allowing falou to take a position that worked for both parties. He obviously is sharp enough to take the tip. As soon as he affects sponsorship it becomes a very easy decision.

No, she was taking a position that allowed an out for her with regards to the sponsors. In doing so she misrepresented Folau's position.

Folau has been resolute from the beginning that his views are solid and that he would not bend them for anybody. She disrespected that and he called her out for it.

To criticise a guy for being truthful is absurd.

 

[Abraham]

It’s not just that the aru has an inclusion policy and falou, who is an employee of the aru, has publicly aired views that are totally opposed to his employer. It’s an untenable situation.

Seems the **inclusion** policy **excludes** Christians.

Maybe if the ARU stuck to managing Rugby Union and stopped being wannabe Social Justice Warriors, they would avoid these situations more easily.

 

[cqtiger]

Wow poor old Izzy is now lower than Todd Carney, Matt Lodge and Donald Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon just because he is man enough to believe in something.

 

[HabboTiger]

Didn't hurt early on when Isaac was prepared to use the tigers large $$ pool by placing rumours in the hands on journalists. No proof as such but likely.

 

[larrycorowa]

It’s not just that the aru has an inclusion policy and falou, who is an employee of the aru, has publicly aired views that are totally opposed to his employer. It’s an untenable situation.

Seems the **inclusion** policy **excludes** Christians.

Maybe if the ARU stuck to managing Rugby Union and stopped being wannabe Social Justice Warriors, they would avoid these situations more easily.

No one said christians are going to Hell. It’s about tolerance. Would you be happy if he was spouting racist comments?

 

[larrycorowa]

It’s not just that the aru has an inclusion policy and falou, who is an employee of the aru, has publicly aired views that are totally opposed to his employer. It’s an untenable situation.

Seems the **inclusion** policy **excludes** Christians.

Maybe if the ARU stuck to managing Rugby Union and stopped being wannabe Social Justice Warriors, they would avoid these situations more easily.

No one said christians are going to Hell. It’s about tolerance. Would you be happy if he was spouting racist comments?

Maybe if Izzy concentrated on playing rugby that the aru pays him to do then there is no problem.

 

[Abraham]

It’s not just that the aru has an inclusion policy and falou, who is an employee of the aru, has publicly aired views that are totally opposed to his employer. It’s an untenable situation.

Seems the **inclusion** policy **excludes** Christians.

Maybe if the ARU stuck to managing Rugby Union and stopped being wannabe Social Justice Warriors, they would avoid these situations more easily.

No one said christians are going to Hell. It’s about tolerance. Would you be happy if he was spouting racist comments?

Is saying that Christians cannot publicly speak about their religion a show of tolerance?

See the problem you have when you jump on the SJW bandwagon… everything you say can be turned back against you.

 

[NT_Tiger]

This looks like a worthwhile discussion.

 

[larrycorowa]

Yeah we are not really getting anywhere. I guess we just see where it ends up.

 

[Abraham]

This looks like a worthwhile discussion.

It wasn't, until you showed up and made it worthwhile.

Sincerely, thank you.

 

[Abraham]

Yeah we are not really getting anywhere. I guess we just see where it ends up.

We are only going around in circles because your arguments about 'tolerance' and 'inclusion' are only buzzwords designed to shut people up.

When they are turned back on you, those same arguments implode.

The obvious answer is don't shut people up, and either beat them with a superior argument, or avert your gaze.

 

[NT_Tiger]

This looks like a worthwhile discussion.

It wasn't, until you showed up and made it worthwhile.

Sincerely, thank you.

Cheers. Thanks for your sincere recognition. I needed the affirmation.