Naughty boy Lote
davy
* By Phil Rothfield
* From: The Sunday Telegraph
* September 06, 2009 12:00AM
FOOTBALL superstar Lote Tuqiri was sacked by the Australian Rugby Union
for breaking strict team rules for taking a woman to his Wallabies hotel
room.
At the time, Tuqiri was on his "last warning'' for previous behavioural
issues.
Tuqiri's $5 million contract was torn up by ARU boss John O'Neill for
taking the guest, a 20-year-old, into his room after a night out in
Canberra in the week leading up to a Test.
He met the girl, a university student and the daughter of a respected
Canberra family, at a nightclub in Canberra before the pair returned to
the Crowne Plaza Hotel.
The Wallabies were staying at the hotel in the second week of June to
prepare fora Test match against Italy.
Team management was made aware of Tuqiri's breach of rules the next day.
Tuqiri was not picked in the side for the Test and is believed to have
returned home to Sydney before the game. The former rugby league star
was sharing a room with team-mate Richard Brown, who was questioned by
an ARU disciplinary panel about the evening.
He was reluctant to co-operate because he did not want to dob in a mate.
There is no suggestion Brown had anything to do with the woman being in
the room.
When approached by The Sunday Telegraph yesterday, Tuqiri refused to
offer any comment, other than saying:
"I've signed a confidentiality thing. I'm not into legal stuff but I
can't say anything.''
An ARU spokesman said much the same: "We are not at liberty to discuss
the Lote Tuqiri termination issue. As Lote wrote in his Sunday Telegraph
column last week, a confidentiality clause exists as part of the
settlement.''
Tuqiri's shock sacking baffled fans. It is extremely rare for a player
in any football code to have a contract torn up in such a public way
without explanation.
As a result, rumours swept through rugby union and rugby league circles
regarding the circumstances of his dismissal.
In the early stages, ARU boss John O'Neill publicly stated Tuqiri, a
father of two, was free to disclose why he was dismissed.
Tuqiri maintained a stony silence. NRL boss David Gallop increased the
public pressure on Tuqiri to reveal why he was sacked, telling the
player he could not return to league unless he talked about what occurred.
During a painstaking investigation, The Sunday Telegraph discovered
O'Neill chose not to go public with details of the incident - despite
being accused of a cover-up - out of his respect for the woman and her
family.
Even most of O'Neill's senior staff at the ARU have been kept in the
dark because of his concerns over the woman being identified and
embarrassed.
Tuqiri launched legal action against the ARU for wrongful dismissal. The
case was settled out of court for a significant sum after both parties
argued at the initial hearing for details to be suppressed from the media.
Tuqiri had a long list of disciplinary breaches, including two major
incidents in 2005 and 2007, before he was labelled "Last Chance Lote''
when O'Neill took over as ARU chief executive.
In 2005, Tuqiri and Wendell Sailor were fined and received two-match
suspended sentences for being out late in a Cape Town nightclub. Tuqiri
was also involved in an argument with team-mate Matt Henjak, who was
later sent home from the tour.
In 2007, Tuqiri turned up late to a Wallabies training session and was
over the limit when tested on a breathalyser. He received a substantial
fine and a two-game suspension as a carry over from the incident in
South Africa.
In another incident in Brisbane, he was put on a final warning after a
late night during which he invited guests to his hotel room - who were
later questioned over the bashing of a taxi driver.
That led to an ARU a curfew before the World Cup in France. At the
time, O'Neill said: "It was unacceptable behaviour ... our conversation
with them has left them in no doubt as to what the ramifications are if
there is another offence.''
Tuqiri's solicitor Mark O'Brien and his manager Les Ross refused to
return numerous phone calls or text messages from The Sunday Telegraph.
And after last game, it shows how much they will miss him,
davy
JohnO
>
> And after last game, it shows how much they will miss him,
> davy
That was one expensive shag. Hope she was worth it.
Klitty
John O'Neill should be fired.
Lote shagging some young bird isn't going to upset his game : if anything
it'll help him sleep. Maybe not so for Richard brown though ...
It's probably 'cos she was a young white chick from a prominent family
out looking for a bit of rough.
Mike Thompson
Problem is he'd been warned about it before and was on a last warning.
The time before it was some 16 year old apparently.
--
Mike
Klitty
Good on him. I think its great because it gives the PC brigade sleepness
nights. Heh, if half the do gooders and bible bashing "who will think of
the children" types knew a quarter of what feisty 16-18 year old
chicks get up to on a night out they'd never sleep again at night :-;
Chris Parslow
This story seems painfully familiar to we league yobbos.
Earlier this year, Brisbane Broncos forward Joel Clinton was within a
gnat's todger of being punted and was 'fined' AUD50,000 (3.872 euros)
for the horrid sin of taking a person of female persuasion to his
hotel room.
Clinton at the time was not on any first second or whatever warnings.
Fact is, a recent spate of high-profile nasties has left Oz footy
bosses gun-shy. And in Lote's case, I reckon O'Neill et al were
blinded by the dollars they imagined saving...
CP
will_s
"davy" <no...@home.net> wrote in message
news:4aa2e587$0$5422$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Revealed: the real reason Lote Tuqiri was sacked
> * By Phil Rothfield
> * From: The Sunday Telegraph
> * September 06, 2009 12:00AM
>
> FOOTBALL superstar Lote Tuqiri was sacked by the Australian Rugby Union
> for breaking strict team rules for taking a woman to his Wallabies hotel
> room.
translation : O'Neil talked to Robbie and asked him if he really wanted him
you figure the rest
Mike Thompson
It's got nothing to do anyone being PC.
Tuqiri broke team rules designed to not have one room mate causing a
problem for another. So he turned "shagging around", which no one
would have given a toss about, into a team discipline issue.
If he wanted to shag her, he should have gone to her room, or hired
another one, or something. Instead he he was stupid and broke the
rules. Again. After being warned twice before.
He made it impossible for the team who collectively have the job of
maintaining discipline. He made it impossible for the ARU. He's a
dickhead.
--
Mike
Mike Thompson
So blinded that they had previously given him one unofficial warning
and then one in writing? Over multiple years?
--
Mike
viper
"Klitty" <mitt...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:h7v2n4$irb$2...@klitty.eternal-september.org...
Top contender for Meathead of the Year....
'Klitty?'.....Doubt you've seen one
Viper
>
will_s
"Mike Thompson" <mike.tho...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ef3260b9-4cbb-4252...@v37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
oh fucking bullshit
you are full of it
IF HE WAS IMPORTANT IN THE PLANS OF DEANS/O'NEIL HE WOULD STILL BE THERE
Klitty
Well "Viper", there's always one that makes references like
that. Typically "he" men with fighter pilot names. Oh! You!
Lets just say, living where I live (a tourist destination) I see a lot
more than most people. And believe me when I say, I suspect you would
cry yourself to sleep ....
But thanks for proving the validity of my previous post.
Leonard
>
> And after last game, it shows how much they will miss him,
> davy
Obviously frigging wimps are running the game when a player can't even
enjoy some pussy in his free time.
What are they going to ban next - poker between the boys in their
hotel rooms and cigars?
Looks like it will be 8pm bedtime with Warm Milo the way its going.
FFS Why can't men be men anymore?
viper
Old, old news. West Harbour players signed off on an agreement not to talk
to the media in the aftermath, but word had flashed around club rugby and
beyond in any case......no loss, had more than three strikes in any case and
should have been pissed off after the Norton Knight incident
Viper
> davy
timbochov
Its a bit fucking poofterish to stop the lads from having some totty
when on tour. Rugby, beer and racing and if you get a shag then
thats a bonus.
Jaque Niffe
>
> And after last game, it shows how much they will miss him,
> davy
Team management was made aware of Tuqiri's breach of rules the next
day.
By who ??
Mike Thompson
> "Mike Thompson" <mike.thompsona...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Believe in conspiracies if you want, but as far as I can see, there's
a series of events moving to an entirely obvious, not surprising
conclusion.
When you are issued with a letter saying "Do it again and you will be
sacked" and then you do it again, what the hell do you expect to
happen?
--
Mike
Mike
I suspect Lote is just stupid enough to have gone down for breakfast
with her.
Mike
BrritSki
> Jaque Niffe wrote:
>>
>> Team management was made aware of Tuqiri's breach of rules the next
>> day.
>>
>> By who ??
>
> I suspect Lote is just stupid enough to have gone down for breakfast
> with her.
>
will_s
"Mike Thompson" <mike.tho...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:da8e0ae4-82d2-48ce...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
Put it this way, if it was Giteau we wouldnt be having this discussion
Mike Thompson
Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about.
--
Mike
Mike Thompson
Drew Mitchell probably.
--
Mike
viper
I think you are confusing me with mg. He is the FA18 pilot in this ng
>
> Lets just say, living where I live (a tourist destination) I see a lot
> more than most people. And believe me when I say, I suspect you would
> cry yourself to sleep ....
>
> But thanks for proving the validity of my previous post.
Hang on, you are mg !
Viper
Mike
Weight watchers food points guides must be more comprehensive than I
thought ......
But if that's true then why is Matua such a fat bastard?
Mike
Klitty
You crossed a line there buddy ..... (spits out cigar and climbs into
Eurofighter ...)
Klitty
Klitty
Man gravy is fattening. Did you never see pictures of your Mom before
the stork delivered you?
--
Pamcakes : "Can't you sleep?"
Gaylord Focker: "Err no, I was running over the answers I gave to your father when he put me through a polygraph test".
Jaque Niffe
that's cos Giteau is allowed to fuck "respectable white chicks" ;-)
didgerman
> Revealed: the real reason Lote Tuqiri was sacked
> * By Phil Rothfield
> * From: The Sunday Telegraph
> * September 06, 2009 12:00AM
>
> FOOTBALL superstar Lote Tuqiri was sacked by the Australian Rugby Union
> for breaking strict team rules for taking a woman to his Wallabies hotel
> room.
>
> At the time, Tuqiri was on his "last warning'' for previous behavioural
> issues.
>
> Tuqiri's $5 million contract was torn up by ARU boss John O'Neill for
> taking the guest, a 20-year-old, into his room after a night out in
> Canberra in the week leading up to a Test.
>
> He met the girl, a university student and the daughter of a respected
> Canberra family, at a nightclub in Canberra before the pair returned to
> the Crowne Plaza Hotel.
Fuck it: if you have to go, that's the way to do it.
Why wait not to get picked?
He'll be back anyway. One decent lawyer, one minute of their time, and
it's all over. Adults in hotel rooms, my arse.
didgerman
Or the 'respected' father of the girl in question....
didgerman
Ejaculation?
>
> --
> Mike
>
>
dechucka
"will_s" <wil...@notonehere.com.au> wrote in message
news:7ghe0hF...@mid.individual.net...
You're right because Giteau isn't a serial offender against team discipline
Klitty
What part of "if it was Giteau" seems to have flown right over your
head Chucky?
dechucka
Hey Clitty. If Giteau had been caught shagging a bird in the team hotel we
would not be talking about this because Giteau isn't a serial offender
against team discipline thus wouldn't have been on a final warning
Simple concept
Klitty
This "if it was Giteau" concept seems to have totally flown you by.
JohnO
> ...Adults in hotel rooms, my arse.
... and Matua, and a tub of baby oil.
dechucka
Not at all mainly because it is a bullshit concept
dechucka
"JohnO" <john...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5338d539-39b4-4c66...@w37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On Sep 7, 3:20 am, didgerman <didger...@rfu.com> wrote:
> ...Adults in hotel rooms, my arse.
... and Matua, and a tub of baby oil.
=============================
best post of the thread
Klitty
We are getting there. Yes, the "if" does indeed suggest a concept.
Nice one Chuckles.
Klitty
It would be IF baby oil came in tubs. It doesn't it comes in
bottles. Baby Cream or "Salv" comes in tubs. So does Crockett of
course.
We won't mention what Manure comes in. Especially in the same thread as
Didge's arse.
dechucka
> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> "JohnO" <john...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:5338d539-39b4-4c66...@w37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>> On Sep 7, 3:20 am, didgerman <didger...@rfu.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ...Adults in hotel rooms, my arse.
>>
>> ... and Matua, and a tub of baby oil.
>>
>>
>> =============================
>>
>> best post of the thread
>>
>>
>
> It would be IF baby oil came in tubs. It doesn't it comes in
> bottles.
I didn't know baby oil could come
snip
dechucka
Well done Clitty you are getting the idea. This is as stupid and full of
conspiracy theories as the thread on RSC and ASC when Symonds got sacked for
repeated breaches of team discipline. He was also on a final warning and
wasn't bright enough to understand that concept.
The Giteau concepts are irrelevant because he wasn't in that position and
Will is just being paranoid
Klitty
Amazing. So the concept of "if" really has flown over your head. Are you
being serious and can really not see the parallel being drawn about how
they would have treated another played IF that other played had done the
same things?
Sorry for not snipping, but I dont want you to have any excuses for not
understanding what "if" means in the context of this discussion with
regard to the victimisation of Lote.
dechucka
If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle. The concept of "if" is ridiculous as
Gitaeu isn't in that position and Will is being a paranoid conspiracy nut
>
> Sorry for not snipping, but I dont want you to have any excuses for not
> understanding what "if" means in the context of this discussion with
> regard to the victimisation of Lote.
Ah now we are getting your pov clear with the "victimisation of Lote"
comment. Lote was a very naughty boy, on his final warning, transgressed
team discipline and got sacked. Would happen in any workplace
Klitty
You still miss the point completely.
>
>>
>> Sorry for not snipping, but I dont want you to have any excuses for not
>> understanding what "if" means in the context of this discussion with
>> regard to the victimisation of Lote.
>
> Ah now we are getting your pov clear with the "victimisation of Lote"
Which is tied in with the "if giteau had done the same" concept that you
find so hard to understand.
> comment. Lote was a very naughty boy, on his final warning, transgressed
> team discipline and got sacked. Would happen in any workplace
Yes. but HAD it been Giteau, would he have been? Answer: probably
not. The point which seems to elude you is that The Convicts tried to
get him out and save a shit load of cash.
dechucka
>> If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle. The concept of "if" is ridiculous
>> as
>> Gitaeu isn't in that position and Will is being a paranoid conspiracy
>> nut
>
> You still miss the point completely.
Sorry I missed the "IF". There was no "if" it was Lote a serial offender
>
>>
>>>
>>> Sorry for not snipping, but I dont want you to have any excuses for not
>>> understanding what "if" means in the context of this discussion with
>>> regard to the victimisation of Lote.
>>
>> Ah now we are getting your pov clear with the "victimisation of Lote"
>
> Which is tied in with the "if giteau had done the same" concept that you
> find so hard to understand.
If Giteau had done the same he wouldn't of got sacked he isn't a serial
offender
>
>> comment. Lote was a very naughty boy, on his final warning, transgressed
>> team discipline and got sacked. Would happen in any workplace
>
> Yes. but HAD it been Giteau, would he have been? Answer: probably
> not. The point which seems to elude you is that The Convicts tried to
> get him out and save a shit load of cash.
OK so we are going for the paranoid conspiracy theory. Cool, now I know
where you are coming from
JD
> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
> > "Klitty" <mitti...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>> The Giteau concepts are irrelevant because he wasn't in that position and
> >>> Will is just being paranoid
>
> >> Amazing. So the concept of "if" really has flown over your head. Are you
> >> being serious and can really not see the parallel being drawn about how
> >> they would have treated another played IF that other played had done the
> >> same things?
>
> > If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle. The concept of "if" is ridiculous as
> > Gitaeu isn't in that position and Will is being a paranoid conspiracy
> > nut
>
> You still miss the point completely.
There is no point you fucking imbecile. Engaging in hypothetical
questions results in hypothetical answers and it's patently obvious
you and Will posed the hypothetical as rhetorical to satisfy a
nonsensical position of implied racism. Here's all we do know for
sure; habitual, non performing, offenders will get sacked.
Klitty
Nice one : you miss the point as well.
The point was that the Aussie board saw this as a good way to dump Lote
and save some money. They fucked up with his big contract and they
wanted it back. This was abundantly clear to anyone who read the thread
and paid attention to when the question was posed.
The POINT, for those slow of thinking, about the "IF IT WAS GITEAU" is
that Giteau is seen as the golden saviour of convict rugby and possibly
would NOT have been dumped regardless of repeat minor misdemeanours.
Glad to have helped.
There was no racism implied whatsoever.
Quite where you get the racism from is something for you to find deep in
your heart. If you have one.
dechucka
Thank you paranoid conspiracy theorist
snip
Klitty
I'm sorry Chucky. I thought this was a discussion group. Sorry about
that.
And we'll just take your word that Ben Tune, Warne et al were not drugs
cheats will we?
Oh and snipping of pertinent explanations is the sign of a loser ......
dechucka
Apology accepted
>
> And we'll just take your word that Ben Tune, Warne et al were not drugs
> cheats will we?
Tune ,no. Warne, yes. Hey that destroyed your paranoid conspiracy theory'
>
> Oh and snipping of pertinent explanations is the sign of a loser ......
Your posting style seems very familiar.
Jaque Niffe
> "Klitty" <mitti...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:h81fqe$l3h$3...@klitty.eternal-september.org...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> >>news:h81e83$l3h$1...@klitty.eternal-september.org...
> >>> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> >>>>news:h819fa$hcf$1...@klitty.eternal-september.org...
> >>>>> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> >>>>>>news:h817va$t00$1...@klitty.eternal-september.org...
> >>>>>>> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> >>>>>>>> "will_s" <wil...@notonehere.com.au> wrote in message
> >>>>>>>>news:7ghe0hF...@mid.individual.net...
>
> > being serious and can really not see the parallel being drawn about how
> > they would have treated another played IF that other played had done the
> > same things?
>
> If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle. The concept of "if" is ridiculous as
> Gitaeu isn't in that position and Will is being a paranoid conspiracy nut
>
>
>
> > understanding what "if" means in the context of this discussion with
> > regard to the victimisation of Lote.
>
> Ah now we are getting your pov clear with the "victimisation of Lote"
> team discipline and got sacked. Would happen in any workplace
except the Whitehouse....
Why so serious?
> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
> > "Klitty" <mitti...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I don't think you can extrapolate from past experiences with sportsmen
doing wrong, because the evidence is so contradictory. Warne was
welcomed back with open arms (well... he came back), Symonds was
eventually ditched. Both were important parts of the Australian team,
although Warne obviously a lot more.
Moving away from cricket, the Tune comparison is a poor one because
his was never a matter of discipline, and he had no previous
disciplinary issues. Wendell Sailor is similarly non-analogous: while
he had prior disciplinary problems his final breach of discipline was
probably enough to get him the sack regardless of previous issues.
As for the "if-it-were-Giteau" argument, I don't think it's a
meaningful line of reasoning. Giteau is a world-class, 26 year old
flyhalf with an impeccable professional and character record. Tuqiri
is a fairly good winger, going-on-thirty and with a history of getting
drunk, embarrassing team-mates and generally being a douche.
If your argument is that the current Giteau would have a better chance
of avoiding the sack if he brought a girl into the hotel, then I would
answer yes. But the question makes no sense, because the current
Giteau would not do that. I think that is what dechucka is saying.
However, my guess is that your argument is more like this: if Tuqiri
had been an essential component of Dean's plans (a la Giteau), he
would have escaped the sack, regardless of his history. This is
equally nonsensical, because you are trying to reduce everything down
to one principle, when there are obviously other variables to
consider.
The fact of the matter is that disciplinary dismissal cases in any
workplace are informed by precedent and norms, but are ultimately
treated as individual cases. You will really struggle to define a set-
in-steel definition of what it would take to get the sack. The guiding
principle would seem to be something like "when an employee's
indiscipline has made it less beneficial for their employer to keep
them, than to terminate their contract".
Obviously that point will differ from individual to individual, but I
would hazard to guess that Lote's history of indiscretions and
generally being a dick to his team-mates would have been enough to get
him the sack regardless of his big pay-check. He won't be missed.
didgerman
Unlikely. But you carry on.
JohnO
I see you won't rule it out then. Matua will be encouraged and
emboldened by your coy hard-to-get play.
JD
> JD <_antipode...@bigpond.com> writes:
> > On Sep 7, 9:54 am, Klitty <mitti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >> > "Klitty" <mitti...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:h81fqe$l3h$3...@klitty.eternal-september.org...
> >> >> "dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> writes:
>
> >> >>> The Giteau concepts are irrelevant because he wasn't in that position and
> >> >>> Will is just being paranoid
>
> >> >> Amazing. So the concept of "if" really has flown over your head. Are you
> >> >> being serious and can really not see the parallel being drawn about how
> >> >> they would have treated another played IF that other played had done the
> >> >> same things?
>
> >> > If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle. The concept of "if" is ridiculous as
> >> > Gitaeu isn't in that position and Will is being a paranoid conspiracy
> >> > nut
>
> >> You still miss the point completely.
>
> > There is no point you fucking imbecile. Engaging in hypothetical
> > questions results in hypothetical answers and it's patently obvious
> > you and Will posed the hypothetical as rhetorical to satisfy a
> > nonsensical position of implied racism. Here's all we do know for
> > sure; habitual, non performing, offenders will get sacked.
>
> Nice one : you miss the point as well.
I realise you're an argumentative twat who offers nothing of substance
for what this ng is actually for, but I've already explained why there
is no point and I see no benefit in repeating myself beyond this:
didgerman
I can't rule it out: it's possible that matua is in fact Paris Hilton,
and only posts here for the rough and tumble.
Still, even if it was Paris Hilton, I'd have to mull it over..... dopey cow.
JohnO
Yeah right, pull the other one. Whoops, down, Matua!
Matua
"dechucka" <vo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4aa42565$0$27617$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
What about the time you were in Giteau's room.
You were lucky that they didn't catch you two body sliding under the sheets,
you sick fuck bumfucka.
Matua
"JohnO" <john...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5338d539-39b4-4c66...@w37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> ...Adults in hotel rooms, my arse.
... and Matua, and a tub of baby oil.
Much better than sliding around in a bath of baby batter eh "Cocko"
You do know what your name is known as, don't you dunny boy ??
Matua
"didgerman" <didg...@rfu.com> wrote in message
news:h80jve$1eo$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
> davy wrote:
>> Revealed: the real reason Lote Tuqiri was sacked
>> * By Phil Rothfield
>> * From: The Sunday Telegraph
>> * September 06, 2009 12:00AM
>>
>> FOOTBALL superstar Lote Tuqiri was sacked by the Australian Rugby Union
>> for breaking strict team rules for taking a woman to his Wallabies hotel
>> room.
>>
>> At the time, Tuqiri was on his "last warning'' for previous behavioural
>> issues.
>>
>> Tuqiri's $5 million contract was torn up by ARU boss John O'Neill for
>> taking the guest, a 20-year-old, into his room after a night out in
>> Canberra in the week leading up to a Test.
>>
>> He met the girl, a university student and the daughter of a respected
>> Canberra family, at a nightclub in Canberra before the pair returned to
>> the Crowne Plaza Hotel.
>
> Fuck it: if you have to go, that's the way to do it.
Hey didge, stop swearing for fucks sake.
> Why wait not to get picked?
> He'll be back anyway. One decent lawyer, one minute of their time, and
> it's all over. Adults in hotel rooms, my arse.
>
>>
>> http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sunday-telegraph/revealed-the-real-reason-lote-tuqiri-was-sacked/story-e6frewt0-1225769801885