Tier 2 & 3 Rugby Forum

World Rugby politics

Posts: 1781
Joined: Tue, 27 May 2014, 20:40
Location: Europe
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Thomas » Sat, 25 Jul 2020, 15:25

He was never elected he was appointed to Rugby Americas same as the present president of Sudamerica Rugby, the conflict is his outside rugby interests which conflicted with MLR and is well document and his exclusive contract with ESPN Argentina.

Posts: 2397
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby sk 88 » Sat, 25 Jul 2020, 15:37

The document doesn't say Pichot should have won, or that he was without conflicts. It just lists the present conflicts as they are.

Agree I've always used the analogy that Finland and NZ should not have equal voting power, but Fiji and NZ should. Similarly I think NZ votes = Irish votes = Samoan votes = Spanish votes ... its here I think it breaks down.

I think a structure of (3?/)2/1 votes makes a lot of sense, but the criteria used at present it ridiculous. Another option would be to use a UN style permanent and temporary style for the council. NZ, SA, England and France could be permanent members, with the others elected every couple of years, potentially with some guaranteed spots on rotation for Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Italy, Australia, Argentina.

User avatar
Posts: 6221
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Canalina » Sat, 25 Jul 2020, 17:11

victorsra wrote:
So I wondered: what about Pichot? He was World Rugby vice-president, but also Rugby Americas president, very influencing counselor of the Sud America Rugby president, counselor of the Major League, counselor of SANZAAR, involved in the Argentina bid to the RWC. He was the incarnation of the conflict of interests and he was WR vice president until the 2020 election, but PRPW never cites him.


Sorry, but the Rugby Americas, Sudamerica Rugby and SANZAAR posts are not conflict of interests and absolutely needed. There is no conflict as he is basicaly a Argentina representative representing Argentina where Argentina is involved. And the WR vice president must be a Council member, which mean he was elected as Argentina's representative. You can't run as independent. So, how is this conflict? Maybe you can question only MLR's position. Pichot's conflicts are only releated to business outside rugby.

They (PRPW) explain in the document that they want that an independent WR vice-president, because the vice-president is a potential president (he takes the role of president when the titular one has not the possibility) and a president must be independent, id est with no roles in other federations. Pichot was bounded with many austral and american rugby organizations and he was at the same time World Rugby vice-president, so I was a bit surprised that they mention Laporte as example of conflict of interests (Laporte is FFR president and WR vice-president) and not or not also Pichot

User avatar
Posts: 6221
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Canalina » Sat, 25 Jul 2020, 17:19

sk 88 wrote:The document doesn't say Pichot should have won, or that he was without conflicts. It just lists the present conflicts as they are.

Agree I've always used the analogy that Finland and NZ should not have equal voting power, but Fiji and NZ should. Similarly I think NZ votes = Irish votes = Samoan votes = Spanish votes ... its here I think it breaks down.

I think a structure of (3?/)2/1 votes makes a lot of sense, but the criteria used at present it ridiculous. Another option would be to use a UN style permanent and temporary style for the council. NZ, SA, England and France could be permanent members, with the others elected every couple of years, potentially with some guaranteed spots on rotation for Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Italy, Australia, Argentina.

I can't understand why the current criteria are ridiculous. I think that or we have a perfectly democratic system (and in such case I think that all the nations, not only the member ones, should have their right of vote, because a system where just the member nations vote and decide who deserves the membership is not a democracy, it's more an oligarchy) or we have a meritocratic system. The meritocratic World Rugby electoral system is not bad to me; probably perfectible, but not ridiculous

Posts: 8091
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby victorsra » Sat, 25 Jul 2020, 17:34

Canalina wrote:
victorsra wrote:
So I wondered: what about Pichot? He was World Rugby vice-president, but also Rugby Americas president, very influencing counselor of the Sud America Rugby president, counselor of the Major League, counselor of SANZAAR, involved in the Argentina bid to the RWC. He was the incarnation of the conflict of interests and he was WR vice president until the 2020 election, but PRPW never cites him.


Sorry, but the Rugby Americas, Sudamerica Rugby and SANZAAR posts are not conflict of interests and absolutely needed. There is no conflict as he is basicaly a Argentina representative representing Argentina where Argentina is involved. And the WR vice president must be a Council member, which mean he was elected as Argentina's representative. You can't run as independent. So, how is this conflict? Maybe you can question only MLR's position. Pichot's conflicts are only releated to business outside rugby.

They (PRPW) explain in the document that they want that an independent WR vice-president, because the vice-president is a potential president (he takes the role of president when the titular one has not the possibility) and a president must be independent, id est with no roles in other federations. Pichot was bounded with many austral and american rugby organizations and he was at the same time World Rugby vice-president, so I was a bit surprised that they mention Laporte as example of conflict of interests (Laporte is FFR president and WR vice-president) and not or not also Pichot

Yes, but Píchot couldn't be vice president without being Argentina's representative. We can question it should be independent, but this isn't Pichot's (or Laporte's) fault. If they want changes, they need to follow the system. However, you are right, they could have mentioned Pichot, but Pichot said he wanted changes in the system, while Laporte ran supporting Beaumont's reelection. The question here is: was Pichot wanting exactly this change and Beaumont isn't? If so, they are right to mention Laporte and not Pichot.

Posts: 8091
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby victorsra » Sat, 25 Jul 2020, 17:38

Canalina wrote:
sk 88 wrote:The document doesn't say Pichot should have won, or that he was without conflicts. It just lists the present conflicts as they are.

Agree I've always used the analogy that Finland and NZ should not have equal voting power, but Fiji and NZ should. Similarly I think NZ votes = Irish votes = Samoan votes = Spanish votes ... its here I think it breaks down.

I think a structure of (3?/)2/1 votes makes a lot of sense, but the criteria used at present it ridiculous. Another option would be to use a UN style permanent and temporary style for the council. NZ, SA, England and France could be permanent members, with the others elected every couple of years, potentially with some guaranteed spots on rotation for Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Italy, Australia, Argentina.

I can't understand why the current criteria are ridiculous. I think that or we have a perfectly democratic system (and in such case I think that all the nations, not only the member ones, should have their right of vote, because a system where just the member nations vote and decide who deserves the membership is not a democracy, it's more an oligarchy) or we have a meritocratic system. The meritocratic World Rugby electoral system is not bad to me; probably perfectible, but not ridiculous

It isn't democratic, Canalina, most countries don't vote and the T1s have the majority. T1s can't lose their votes on a merit basis. You saw the bye-law, they have 2 votes as "founders" (only 1 by merit).

The system doesn't give T3s indirect votes through the continental unions either, because there is no rule of how continental unions should determine their votes. It would be indirect vote if the continents votes were determined by regional democratic vote. It isn't. It should be in the bye-law.

If the majority of countries don't vote not even inderectly, it isn't democractic or meritocratic. It would be democratic and meritocratic only if everybody voted, at least indirectly and with different weights. But not ZERO weight. Which is absolutely ridiculous and a cartel.

Posts: 162
Joined: Thu, 19 Oct 2017, 21:52
National Flag:
New ZealandNew Zealand

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Immenso » Sun, 26 Jul 2020, 07:37

Canalina wrote:It's a lazy question because I could try inform by myself, but do someone of you know why there's a military dictatorship in the Fiji? I mean, they are just about 800K inhabitants, if I recall correctly, they are seen as a sort of Paradise islands, they should not be very poor thanks to Commonwealth and tourism, they are part of a rich and democratic union as Commonwealth... you don't associate all that to a military dictatorship. I suspect that maybe it could be the result of some violent tension between different tribes or/and different islands.
Maybe the national "warrior spirit" viewable in rugby push them to not love so much the democracy?


The first coup, in 1987, the native Fijians had become ethnic minority, and indian dominated party won the 1987 election.

That first coup, has created instability, and there have been several coups since.

Ethnic Indian migration out of Fiji since 87, mostly to Australia a d NZ. Indian population gone from 52% to 38%.

I think current Baininarama military govt seen as reasonably positive by ethnic Indians. It was a counter-coup to a political win by a party linked to a former failed coup by Speight - which was anti-Indian, and hell bent on some political vendettas.

Also. Fiji army is very outsized compared to its population. Fiji permanently have 2 battalions on UN service. One in Sinai and 1 in Golan. Source of foreign income for the country. Many Fijian soldiers move through Fijian army to better paying positions in e.g. British Army . So it is large and prominent in Fiji society and now for last 30 years in politics.

Other south Pacific countries have tiny militaries.

^^ That is just roughly from my memory , may have some details being on the Speight/Baininarama dynamics. Havent looked it up.
Last edited by Immenso on Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 05:25, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 6221
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Canalina » Sun, 26 Jul 2020, 08:18

Thanks. I don't know if all this Pacific Players Welfare is saying is right but they seem pushing in the right direction asking for more clearness in these islands rugby administration

Posts: 1760
Joined: Thu, 06 Apr 2017, 17:09
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Tobar » Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 02:29

What’s this about Pichot serving as counselor to Major League Rugby? Do you mean his board position on USA Rugby?

Posts: 3697
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby RugbyLiebe » Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 06:37

victorsra wrote:
"
"create a 1 Member = 1 Vote system for the Council" is naive. It sounds cool and democratic, but is isn't in a sport where most countries have only a handful of clubs. We have discussed this before. It must be a open system, with everybody participating more, but not 1 country 1 vote. This also might damage women participation in the Council.


I concur. But there must be other ways to differentiate. Votes based on numbers of active clubs/leagues could be one way - if attached to a must of publishing statistics of all matches played it might even enhanced visibility of the sport in smaller nations. In the age of internet claims like this are easy to prove true or false.
Last edited by RugbyLiebe on Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 09:17, edited 1 time in total.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

User avatar
Posts: 6221
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Canalina » Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 08:31

Tobar wrote:What’s this about Pichot serving as counselor to Major League Rugby? Do you mean his board position on USA Rugby?

I don't know, I've read something about in this forum... But if I write that he was member of USA Rugby someone promptly answers "he never was! He was just counseling the MLR"; and if I write that he was MLR counselor you answer that he was just a USA Rugby board member...
I don't want to attack at every cost Pichot, it's just that I don't like the "double standards". If an action is wrong, it's wrong whoever commits it. If Laporte having both the vice-presidency of WR and the presidency of FFR is in a conflict of interests, it was (moreover) a conflict also the one of Pichot. If it's a scandal that WR has few women in its ExCo, it's a scandal too that Oceania Rugby and Sudamerica Rugby and UAR and I don't know how many other rugby boards have even less women in their ExCo

Posts: 2397
Joined: Sun, 20 Apr 2014, 16:57
Location: Leicester
National Flag:
Great BritainGreat Britain

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby sk 88 » Mon, 27 Jul 2020, 09:36

RugbyLiebe wrote:
victorsra wrote:
"
"create a 1 Member = 1 Vote system for the Council" is naive. It sounds cool and democratic, but is isn't in a sport where most countries have only a handful of clubs. We have discussed this before. It must be a open system, with everybody participating more, but not 1 country 1 vote. This also might damage women participation in the Council.


I concur. But there must be other ways to differentiate. Votes based on numbers of active clubs/leagues could be one way - if attached to a must of publishing statistics of all matches played it might even enhanced visibility of the sport in smaller nations. In the age of internet claims like this are easy to prove true or false.


Agree, there should be one vote for genuinely playing the game widely. Then another for being part of the professional set up, even if that is exporting players for others like Fiji, Samoa, Tonga. Then I could see a merit based one, but the current rules solely rewards Men's XVs when the council also governs 7s and both Women's XVs and 7s. Perhaps a vote for achieving something in any single one category.

Posts: 2105
Joined: Thu, 23 Feb 2017, 01:37
National Flag:
United StatesUnited States

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby TheStroBro » Tue, 28 Jul 2020, 00:28

Canalina wrote:
Tobar wrote:What’s this about Pichot serving as counselor to Major League Rugby? Do you mean his board position on USA Rugby?

I don't know, I've read something about in this forum... But if I write that he was member of USA Rugby someone promptly answers "he never was! He was just counseling the MLR"; and if I write that he was MLR counselor you answer that he was just a USA Rugby board member...
I don't want to attack at every cost Pichot, it's just that I don't like the "double standards". If an action is wrong, it's wrong whoever commits it. If Laporte having both the vice-presidency of WR and the presidency of FFR is in a conflict of interests, it was (moreover) a conflict also the one of Pichot. If it's a scandal that WR has few women in its ExCo, it's a scandal too that Oceania Rugby and Sudamerica Rugby and UAR and I don't know how many other rugby boards have even less women in their ExCo


Pichot was a member of the USA Rugby Board. That is very true, which was a part of the oversight agreement with World Rugby for the loan the paid for the overruns of Rugby World Cup 7s. He was never on the MLR Board. Did he attend some of their board meetings? That I have no idea. (But wouldn't be unusual) But the only way to be on MLR's board of Governors is to be a team owner and he is not a team owner. No one has refuted that he was on the board of USAR, because that would be dumb since he was. He left the board in December.

Posts: 8091
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby victorsra » Thu, 30 Jul 2020, 17:39

Rizzi replaces Pichot as one of Argentina's representative in the WR Council https://espndeportes.espn.com/rugby/not ... orld-rugby

User avatar
Posts: 6221
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Canalina » Sun, 16 Aug 2020, 09:09

About rugby and politic, two recent news

In Belarus the local federation suspended trainings and competitions (the national team, "The storks", is inserted in a minor category of the Russian championship) in sign of protest versus the police violence against the civilians
https://www.facebook.com/belarusrugby/p ... 9135380134

In Sri Lanka the former hooker and captain of the rugby national team, Namal Rajapaksa, became the youngest ever Minister of Sport of the nation, at the age of 34 years. It's just a coincidence but Namal is son of the prime minister and nephew of the President of the Republic. He has a very bad curriculum, with pending trials due to accusations of money laundering and even the suspect of an involvement in the state murder of an other rugby player (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namal_Rajapaksa). What surprised me most is that all the comments under the news of his election, in the Papare facebook page and in the Rugby federation fb page, were congratulations; not even one protest, no one critic. In Italy the comments would have been plenty of crossed accusations and insults between the pro- and anti- partisans. Are in Sri Lanka just more polite than us? Or are they all really supporting the dominating Rajapaksa clan? Or maybe they are fearing a police reaction in case of negative comment?
https://www.facebook.com/thepaparerugby ... 311575334/

Posts: 363
Joined: Tue, 29 Apr 2014, 14:51
National Flag:
Sri LankaSri Lanka

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby gibbs » Wed, 19 Aug 2020, 05:41

Canalina wrote:About rugby and politic, two recent news

In Sri Lanka the former hooker and captain of the rugby national team, Namal Rajapaksa, became the youngest ever Minister of Sport of the nation, at the age of 34 years. It's just a coincidence but Namal is son of the prime minister and nephew of the President of the Republic. He has a very bad curriculum, with pending trials due to accusations of money laundering and even the suspect of an involvement in the state murder of an other rugby player (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namal_Rajapaksa). What surprised me most is that all the comments under the news of his election, in the Papare facebook page and in the Rugby federation fb page, were congratulations; not even one protest, no one critic. In Italy the comments would have been plenty of crossed accusations and insults between the pro- and anti- partisans. Are in Sri Lanka just more polite than us? Or are they all really supporting the dominating Rajapaksa clan? Or maybe they are fearing a police reaction in case of negative comment?
https://www.facebook.com/thepaparerugby ... 311575334/


Well there are pro's and Cons to this development, Starting with Cons

Rajapaksas's are notorious for politicization of every sphere of Sri Lankan society, Including sports where they will appoint their cahoots in to sports bodies directly and indirectly

They 're corrupt to the hilt with many family members accused allegedly of what you rightly said money laundering and even murder (In this case it was Namal's brother Yoshita is under suspicion)

And nepotism is rife, With the extended family basically running the whole country but then again they were elected by large majorities in relatively free elections, So it's a catch 22 situations with the majority of the population getting what they vote for

Now to Pro's,

Perhaps first time in Sri Lanka's history they have appointed a young person and a former semi professional sportsman to head both youth affairs and sports in the country, Previously both these vital area's were neglected by successive govts, Often appointing geriatric ministers and people who have had no experience in playing a sport even at school level

To his credit Namal Rajapaksa was a very decent Rugby player and was quite deserving of his place in the national team irrespective of his family connections

He was instrumental in establishing the now defunct Carlton Int 7's Which bought in a lot of money to the SL Rugby coffers, exposure to world class Rugby and actually elevated the national 7's squad to unprecedented heights in Asia at that time.. and the tri nations tournament in 15's (SL, Poland and Madagascar)..All this when he was a mere member of parliament

I guess these are the reasons why most people seem to be quite optimistic about his appointment as the minister of Sports and youth affairs, Despite holding different political ideologies or support base

User avatar
Posts: 6221
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Canalina » Wed, 19 Aug 2020, 10:46

Thanks for the "inside" view.
These dominating familiar clans sound intolerable, but if the elections are free and people choose them there's few room to complain

Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Wed, 19 Aug 2020, 11:08

In my opinion, politics should support sport, it should be transparent but it should also be kind of hidden from the events. If I want to watch a sports game I don't want to see any political slogans on shirts, on advertisement boards or written across the court. I want the coaches and players to talk about the sport, not their politics.
Sport should bring people together. Politics divides people. Right now politics in sport is dividing people and driving people away.

Posts: 8091
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby victorsra » Wed, 19 Aug 2020, 14:06

To hide politics from sport IS a political ideology. Everything you do is a product of how you see the world and this is politics. If we believe sports should unite people, well, this is a democratic approach of sports, therefore it is political as well.

Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Wed, 19 Aug 2020, 14:14

victorsra wrote:To hide politics from sport IS a political ideology. Everything you do is a product of how you see the world and this is politics. If we believe sports should unite people, well, this is a democratic approach of sports, therefore it is political as well.


I'm talking about banning political slogans, symbols and gestures from sports. This was the case in football until fairly recently. Even wearing the poppy was not allowed and players were fined for using their position to make political statements. I remember Jamie Fowler being fined for a t shirt he wore under his shirt. Society has become so politicised I would prefer it if sports games were out of bounds.

Posts: 8091
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby victorsra » Wed, 19 Aug 2020, 14:28

In a democratic society people have this right.

And you have the right to criticise them as well.

The question is if contracts can prevail. For exemple, a player going against what a contract he signed says. And also: is being anti-democratic part of democracy? :lol: Well, it would end! What a paradox.

Sport is not politicised. Nothing in human societies lies outside politics. Nothing. To want people to shut up is a political idea.

User avatar
Posts: 6221
Joined: Sun, 27 Apr 2014, 11:50
National Flag:
ItalyItaly

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Canalina » Thu, 20 Aug 2020, 08:21

A declaration from Beaumont about voting system, from three weeks ago, if it was still not known

“The voting system, it’s not very democratic, is it?” asked Muliaina. “When can we see it change so the likes of the Pacific Islands can have an equal vote … when can we see that change?”

Beaumont replied: “Part of my manifesto was that there was going to be a complete review of the governance and that is taking place at the moment. I’m not involved in that but certainly every union has the right to write in to Hugh Robertson, who is an independent chairman of that group, and they will then make their recommendation. But if you think in the previous four years I was there, we had extra votes. We had Fiji, Samoa who came into the council, Japan got extra votes, Argentina got extra votes. There is an opportunity now for countries to get a seat at the table and get extra votes. But I’m not pre-judging what will happen in the governance review. Let’s look forward and see what that has to say there.”


So apparently there was in the past weeks or in this current period a review and a possible change of the voting system. I'm comfortable with the current system but it would be ok to me also a totally democratic one

https://nzupdates.com/world-rugby-chair ... ng-system/

Posts: 3697
Joined: Wed, 14 Oct 2015, 13:30
National Flag:
GermanyGermany

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby RugbyLiebe » Thu, 20 Aug 2020, 09:26

Good, that they are working on it.
To have another perspective of the downsides of a totally democratic system.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGvddW3WbmM

German short documentary about soccer in Tonga. They get 2Million USD per year :shock:
And it looks like a lot goes into private pockets.

But in the end, even with all the corruption this comes, FIFA is doing a very good job to grow their game everywhere.
A quite heretic thought: maybe it is better to have a system were you can buy a vote and must invest in a country, than a system were 80% are totally ignored, because it doesn't matter what they think.
How to grow rugby worldwide?
Look at the world ranking in July. Teams ranked 1-10 have to play one team from 11-20 (they don't play in a regular competition) away the next year. 11-20 play 21-30 away and so on. Yes, it really is that simple.

Posts: 8091
Joined: Thu, 17 Apr 2014, 02:51
Location: São Paulo
National Flag:
BrazilBrazil

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby victorsra » Thu, 20 Aug 2020, 18:02

World Rugby never did a proper X-Ray of rugby in the World. The shameful playing numbers they show only suggest this is not a serious work of understanding what's is the development situation of each of its members. It is much needed a serious study, with an holistic approach: the history, the sociology, the public awareness, the international connections each country has, the economy/finances/governance of local rugby, the clubs/local unions infrastructure and competition systems, the real playing numbers, the real coaching and refereeing numbers, the playing level from clubs to national teams, in all ages and both genders... everything. A study made by specialists in each area, not by consultants delivering whatever you want to hear.

That's an investment that can pay itself if used for a strong strategic plan that will help to define the best voting system and investment system World Rugby should have. The current voting system is a disgrace but is the product of a century neglecting the "periphery" of the sport. In a world with huge competition between sports and entertainment industry, this historically narrow view will likely impact rugby in a serious way.... the reform is much needed, but one with a strong plan behind, based on a comprehensive study of the sport worldwide.

Posts: 1431
Joined: Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 21:26
National Flag:
EnglandEngland

Re: World Rugby politics

Postby Chester-Donnelly » Thu, 20 Aug 2020, 19:44

victorsra wrote:In a democratic society people have this right.

And you have the right to criticise them as well.

The question is if contracts can prevail. For exemple, a player going against what a contract he signed says. And also: is being anti-democratic part of democracy? :lol: Well, it would end! What a paradox.

Sport is not politicised. Nothing in human societies lies outside politics. Nothing. To want people to shut up is a political idea.


I believe the majority of sports fans want professional sports to be a politics free zone. They want to go and watch their team play without kneeling, minutes silence, political slogans etc. If it can be proven that this is what the majority wants then it should be the right of the majority for that to be so. If the majority doesn't want that then that is their democratic right. The majority must be allowed to decide.

PreviousNext

Return to Rugby Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Scoob and 10 guests