Now, José wants the misconduct hearing to be open to the public. The request has, so far, been refused. Are the Boks becoming the sporting world's equivalent of the ANC? Is this the chord that is struck which resonates with the plastics? So bizarre.
It could be in the interest of the public to have an open hearing.
The interest of the publ ic ??? LOL
Interesting tactic. The request was never going to be accepted, which creates the impression that some dark deeds are intentionally being done, further painting him as a victim. Very manipulative little man.
Many court trials are made open because it is deemed to be in the public interest of Democracy-through transparency and accountability.
That would at least avoid some stuffed suits making a decision behind closed doors without a fair hearing. If the hearing is predetermined- which it is - what is the point of having a trial.
I’d say plenty of coaches were tempted….but they refrained out of respect for the game. If you’re intending to hunker down in the laager all you are risking is the increased adulation of those in the laager with you.
Rassies Hearing before World Rugby.
Advantages and disadvantages to being made Public: versus being held behind closed doors:
Advantages behind closed doors are:
1) Objectivity and rational judgement…less emotionalism. It must be judged by adjudi cators not influenced by emotions of public influencing loss of face to World Rugby board. Too many fragile ego’s of board members.
2) It’s an anomaly that this incident was indeed fueled in the first place by public exposure
3) At closer inspection this is indeed a storm in a teacup and because public tend to judge purely on emotions and bias (as can even be seen by reactions on this tiny rugby forum here and the hypocrisy that is displayed.
Actually I tried to think of one advantage for open disclosure but really could only think of perhaps one and that is openness, whilst I generally agree to this , it may be counter-productive to Rassie.
The accusers are there because of “lost face” and the attack on what they see, the integrity of referees but this is not what I believe Rassie intended…it was for transparency as to why certain rulings were made. Also it was ironically not the intention of the video being made public.
I just feel Rassie has a better chance of winning this if the public is left out. I want a fair and rational judgement and I’m sure all who believe in fairness and integrity do as well. Not screeching and bleating of frustrated masses do.
Josè has only himself to blame. He thinks he is the smartest person on the planet, but lands himself in hot water. Made to look even worse for the fact that the Boks are chief beneficiaries of bad reffing. If you don't want to fight the giant, don't throw stones at it. If Rassie didn't intend for this, as some think, then he really is thicker than I thought.
"As far as I’m concerned, transparency should be the default position."
Fully agree Plum, given the sensitive nature of everything surrounding this whole debacle... I see no reason why it should not be a default position from WR.
"The accusers are there because of “lost face” and the attack on what they see, the integrity of referees but this is not what I believe Rassie intended…it was for transparency as to why certain rulings were made."
Very well said Seb
