Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Izzy Folau
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cruz_del_Sur" data-source="post: 941594" data-attributes="member: 55747"><p>This is what i am not convinced about. You present it as a fact. I said i didnt know, but the more i read about this subject, the more the evidence leads me to believe it is just not true. </p><p></p><p><em>Folau's defence will rely on two key elements; that his social media posts were not his own words but that he was quoting scripture, and that there is no specific social media clause in his contract stopping him from doing so.</em></p><p></p><p>Source: <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/rugby/israel-folau-to-officially-fight-rugby-australia-over-contract-termination/news-story/8a6a6300e373f2f8c6bd13c58248df20" target="_blank">https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/rugby/israel-folau-to-officially-fight-rugby-australia-over-contract-termination/news-story/8a6a6300e373f2f8c6bd13c58248df20</a></p><p></p><p></p><p>If that belief is protected by law and the right of free speech is protected by law then, no, the difference ain't big. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Then those bodies should have placed a clause in his contract, which is what i said in the first place to which you replied. </p><p></p><p>Read the article in the link i posted above. His lawyers seem to think otherwise. </p><p></p><p></p><p>For the 26th time, we all agree what he did was not just stupid but wrong, idiotic, so lets try to keep it civil (me included, apologies if i insulted any of you, my bad). </p><p></p><p>The difference is i believe that, from what i've read, although stupid and discriminatory, his actions are within the law and are not enough to unilaterally terminate his contract.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cruz_del_Sur, post: 941594, member: 55747"] This is what i am not convinced about. You present it as a fact. I said i didnt know, but the more i read about this subject, the more the evidence leads me to believe it is just not true. [i]Folau’s defence will rely on two key elements; that his social media posts were not his own words but that he was quoting scripture, and that there is no specific social media clause in his contract stopping him from doing so.[/i] Source: [URL]https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/rugby/israel-folau-to-officially-fight-rugby-australia-over-contract-termination/news-story/8a6a6300e373f2f8c6bd13c58248df20[/URL] If that belief is protected by law and the right of free speech is protected by law then, no, the difference ain't big. Then those bodies should have placed a clause in his contract, which is what i said in the first place to which you replied. Read the article in the link i posted above. His lawyers seem to think otherwise. For the 26th time, we all agree what he did was not just stupid but wrong, idiotic, so lets try to keep it civil (me included, apologies if i insulted any of you, my bad). The difference is i believe that, from what i've read, although stupid and discriminatory, his actions are within the law and are not enough to unilaterally terminate his contract. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Izzy Folau
Top