-
@Rembrandt I wondered if they'd secured some extra funding via sponsors to help them settle this? I'm sure it would grate but perhaps they figured a settlement was the safer/faster/cheaper (eek) option.
Either way it's shitload of $$ - wonder where the leak came from... if that figure is accurate of course
-
@Rembrandt said in The Folau Factor:
$8m makes sense. Didn't they up the request to $14m a few days ago? Sounds like Folau had them over a barrel and scared them into submission.
Yeah. $8m may be high. But I doubt I couldn't see Folau settling for a penny less than his contract.
-
@Paekakboyz @rotated Maybe the firefighters union chipped in, given that god will surely now put all the fires out?
-
@rotated said in The Folau Factor:
@voodoo said in The Folau Factor:
@rotated I don't think he did sign anything extra, but he did publicly state he wouldn't repeat his past efforts, then did so anyway.
Are you referrning to the quote:
"After we'd all talked, I told Raelene [Castle] if she felt the situation had become untenable – that I was hurting Rugby Australia, its sponsors and the Australian rugby community to such a degree that things couldn't be worked through – I would walk away from my contract, immediately,"
In which case you may have an argument, however there is also a strong case that the ARU made no effort to 'work through' the sitaution. Also it's a slippery slope when we start legally terminating people on broad platitudes they may have said a year ago.
He also said this whilst under his previous contract (which was nearly up). He was on an entirely new 4 year contract when the latest issue blew up.
-
@Paekakboyz said in The Folau Factor:
@Rembrandt I wondered if they'd secured some extra funding via sponsors to help them settle this? I'm sure it would grate but perhaps they figured a settlement was the safer/faster/cheaper (eek) option.
Certainly would be interesting to see. I mean if a certain sponsor was to be implicated in Folau being fired without due process then it might be in their interest to see this go away. Guess we'll never know for sure.
-
Castle has got to go, dismal handling of this, and yet another example of get woke go broke.
-
I can't see how anyone really 'wins' here. RA loses their best player and endures a protracted, public legal stoush with a bill of unknown nature at the end (though the $8m figure is ridiculous).
Folau loses his career, and in some part his position in Wallaby folklore.
As much as his backers may cry victory, they don't get what they actually wanted - a circus in the High Court, where religious freedom in the workplace can be tested in the public spotlight. They wanted the photo of their cohort on the steps of the court, fists raised, fighting for their beliefs against their woke oppressors.
But now it all fizzles out, and they don't get the legal test case they were desperate for.
The only people with any small glimmer of good news are rugby fans, who get to move on from this mess and forget it all ever happened.
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
I can't see how anyone really 'wins' here. RA loses their best player and endures a protracted, public legal stoush with a bill of unknown nature at the end (though the $8m figure is ridiculous).
Folau loses his career, and in some part his position in Wallaby folklore.
As much as his backers may cry victory, they don't get what they actually wanted - a circus in the High Court, where religious freedom in the workplace can be tested in the public spotlight. They wanted the photo of their cohort on the steps of the court, fists raised, fighting for their beliefs against their woke oppressors.
But now it all fizzles out, and they don't get the legal test case they were desperate for.
The only people with any small glimmer of good news are rugby fans, who get to move on from this mess and forget it all ever happened.
I think the person who wins is the person who got millions of dollars.. and the losers are the ones who gave away millions of dollars. Spin be damned.
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
Assuming they paid out his contract (a fairly good guess at what happened), wasn't he going to get those millions from RA anyway?
Yeah. But he was going to have to work for it so at least RA was going to get something back
-
@canefan said in The Folau Factor:
Yeah. But he was going to have to work for it so at least RA was going to get something back
True. But in return for the cash, I'm not sure Folau is ever going to play meaningful rugby again.
So he's got his millions, but I'm still not sure he's a winner here.
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
@canefan said in The Folau Factor:
Yeah. But he was going to have to work for it so at least RA was going to get something back
True. But in return for the cash, I'm not sure Folau is ever going to play meaningful rugby again.
So he's got his millions, but I'm still not sure he's a winner here.
I doubt he settled for just his contract, so Raylene's comment about wildly inaccurate could be $6million and her weasle words would be accurate. Still a massive win for Folau, so two ways about it.
-
@Kirwan said in The Folau Factor:
I doubt he settled for just his contract, so Raylene's comment about wildly inaccurate could be $6million and her weasle words would be accurate.
Or it could be $2m. Really nobody knows anything here, so your guess is as good as mine.
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
@Kirwan said in The Folau Factor:
I doubt he settled for just his contract, so Raylene's comment about wildly inaccurate could be $6million and her weasle words would be accurate.
Or it could be $2m. Really nobody knows anything here, so your guess is as good as mine.
If it was less than his contract he would have gone to court, he's not shown any indication of backing down before this. And with all the cash to fund it, why would he take less?
-
@barbarian said in The Folau Factor:
Or it could be $2m. Really nobody knows anything here, so your guess is as good as mine.
To your point it is possible Folau has had a massive change of heart since this matter went private, but nothing from his actions at the start of the controvery would be consistent who would take 50 cents on the dollar and give up his chance of being a martyr on this one.
-
@Kirwan said in The Folau Factor:
If it was less than his contract he would have gone to court, he's not shown any indication of backing down before this. And with all the cash to fund it, why would he take less?
Of the two parties in this dispute, you could argue Israel is the more erratic. I admit I was surprised when the settlement was announced, as I was under the impression from his words that this wasn't about money at all, it was about religious freedom.
He wanted his day in court, and so did his backers. After all it wasn't just about him and his cash, it was about everyday religious people across the country and indeed the globe.
However, there's a chance that he just wanted to get on with his life. I've heard from people close to this saga that he genuinely wants to play for the Wallabies again, and until recently thought that there was a strong chance he could do that.
Clearly the court case affected his playing prospects, and maybe he just wanted it over with so he can get back on the field. So RA offers to pay out his contract and apologise, he can claim a victory of sorts and get on with his life.
Of course the flipside is that he was intent on fighting the fight until RA caved and offered him $6-8m. But given his initial claim was $14m, it was still a downgrade from what he wanted.
We will never really know how much it was, so all we can do is speculate.
Sports requiring athletes to support cultural positions