Quote: bren2k " a decent employer, aware of the concept of vicarious liability, will have a view about that, and be entitled to act on that view."'"
Quote: bren2k "
What a bizarre comment.
He was sacked by the ARU and not given a gig by any club in the NRL and yet you think that we "need" such players.
His PUBLICISED views are the polar opposite to the stated aims of "inclusivity" in the sport of RL.
You are right that there are plenty of players who may be equally as "daft" in their views but, they have the good sense to keep them private and well away from the media (especially social media).
It's strange how our wealthier competitors in Union and the NRL can manage without but we (most notably Catalan) cant.'"
Of course, when you cut through all the guff and bluster around this, the idiocy and nonsense of what Folau posted , halfway down , in response to a direct question , on a many commented Instagram post , that could be read by 0.002% of the population(and that he publicised himself no further and that you would have to want to search or look for to be aware of , and of course make a special effort to be offended by), and the rush of virtue signalling on the other side, then the middle ground of the law and reasonable people is left.
Mr Folau of course sued the Australian Rugby Union, for $14million (£7.5 m) over the termination of his contract as they had no leg to stand on. The ARU, of course "aware" of the law, settled with Mr Folau and he, himself, received an apology from THEM.
How many settlements do you think it would take to drain the much less rich SL or RFL of all funds??? We are not a rich sport by any stretch, reliant on TV money for the present full time status. It would be bleak. I am more than certain that Mr Hudgell et al know this and it is all bluff and bluster. Perhaps a blanket ban on social media for all players is the only way to prevent any future occurrence of any thought crime of any kind and the subsequent displays of jellyfish behaviour.
