HRH Prince Harry of Wales

[kiyan]

So Harry. In his new role as patron, is attending a RL event in Leeds. The RFL are trying to raise awareness of his visit. 

In my opinion, regardless of your opinion on the Royal family, RL fans should embrace the PR opportunity his visit to RL in Leeds provides.

I have started this thread  because I have suggested some comments on the rugby board, are nothing to do with rugby and while I would like to discuss their comments it should be done here!

Harry has served his time in the Army, 2 tours in Afghanistan and for some to suggest he has never had a real job - is simply offensive!

He has used his "position" to make the Invictus Games a world wide success and constantly put the plight of ex service people into the national press.

Now he is engaging in his role as RL patron and people still want to have a go?

Finally, he receives no money from the civil list, Prince of Wales pays their bills from the Duchy of Cornwall and he inherited several millions from his mother so is independently secure.

Why he chooses to support charities, servicemen, sport (like RL), serve in the army, etc when he has enough money to just forget it all and live in an island somewhere? 

I haven't a clue, but I think if if I was him I would have left years ago!

[Robin Evans]

I applaud almost anything that will bring positive PR to rugby and each to their own.

But as a republican I'll give it a miss Kiyan

[JohnM]

Miseryguts 

You are just like Donald Trump. He's a republican too.  #republicanandproud  

The left is very fond of the concept of "solidarity" but where is it when we are called to display it for the good of the game?

Do republicans  not sing the National Anthem at games?  Do atheists not sing Abide With Me at the Cup Final, nor Land of Hope and Glory? 

[Griff9of13]

As Harry is on record as saying that none of his generation of royals wants the gig of monarch anymore is he also now a republican?

 

[Robin Evans]

11 minutes ago, JohnM said:

 

Do republicans  not sing the National Anthem at games?  

I can't speak for all those who want an end to the monarchy, but I certainly do not.... not since I was 15 years old.... and then I was made to.

[Just Browny]

Why does it have to be another tedious right/left thing?

I don't think we should have a royal family. It is a beacon of the unearned privilege which is present throughout our society. That said, other people do like them and the whole thing doesn't upset or damage me much at all.

After thinking he was a bit of a tool in his younger days (who isn't), I have come to quite like Harry and admire the work he has done both in the army and for charities. I welcome the profile he will bring to RL and I suspect he will be a sincere and modest patron for our game. I am delighted he is doing this first engagement and hope he can be coaxed into doing the Cup Final and, later in the year, hosting a little shindig to see off our teams when they leave for the Rugby World Cup.

[nec]

I don't sing the national anthem or land of hope..., in the former case because it is a dirge about respecting a monarchy that I feel should be removed in the latter because it is colonial jingoistic nonsense. I love the tradition of abide with me and sing it at the cup final etc

[Robin Evans]

10 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Why does it have to be another tedious right/left thing?

Eggsbloodyzactly....

The concept of monarchy has little to do with my politics. 

I could have written a long reply to several points in Kyan's post.... but this would detract from the point of his thread.

A royal involved in some PR for rugby and I'm supposed to embrace this? 

Nope. 

But I do embrace the positive PR....

[Wiltshire Rhino]

8 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

 

After thinking he was a bit of a tool in his younger days (who isn't), I have come to quite like Harry and admire the work he has done both in the army and for charities. I welcome the profile he will bring to RL and I suspect he will be a sincere and modest patron for our game. I am delighted he is doing this first engagement and hope he can be coaxed into doing the Cup Final and, later in the year, hosting a little shindig to see off our teams when they leave for the Rugby World Cup.

No need to write what I think as JB has written my thoughts perfectly 

[The Future is League]

4 hours ago, kiyan said:

So Harry. In his new role as patron, is attending a RL event in Leeds. The RFL are trying to raise awareness of his visit. 

In my opinion, regardless of your opinion on the Royal family, RL fans should embrace the PR opportunity his visit to RL in Leeds provides.

I have started this thread  because I have suggested some comments on the rugby board, are nothing to do with rugby and while I would like to discuss their comments it should be done here!

Harry has served his time in the Army, 2 tours in Afghanistan and for some to suggest he has never had a real job - is simply offensive!

He has used his "position" to make the Invictus Games a world wide success and constantly put the plight of ex service people into the national press.

Now he is engaging in his role as RL patron and people still want to have a go?

Finally, he receives no money from the civil list, Prince of Wales pays their bills from the Duchy of Cornwall and he inherited several millions from his mother so is independently secure.

Why he chooses to support charities, servicemen, sport (like RL), serve in the army, etc when he has enough money to just forget it all and live in an island somewhere? 

I haven't a clue, but I think if if I was him I would have left years ago!

Like you say we should embrace the positivity of Harry's visit to Leeds and Rugby League.

[gingerjon]

29 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Miseryguts 

You are just like Donald Trump. He's a republican too.  #republicanandproud  

The left is very fond of the concept of "solidarity" but where is it when we are called to display it for the good of the game?

Do republicans  not sing the National Anthem at games?  Do atheists not sing Abide With Me at the Cup Final, nor Land of Hope and Glory? 

This atheist sings Abide With Me for the memories, Land of Hope and Glory for the fun of it all, but does hasn't sung the National Anthem for years.  I won't stop others and I don't wish any member of the royal family harm but it's not for me.

[gingerjon]

19 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Why does it have to be another tedious right/left thing?

I don't think we should have a royal family. It is a beacon of the unearned privilege which is present throughout our society. That said, other people do like them and the whole thing doesn't upset or damage me much at all.

After thinking he was a bit of a tool in his younger days (who isn't), I have come to quite like Harry and admire the work he has done both in the army and for charities. I welcome the profile he will bring to RL and I suspect he will be a sincere and modest patron for our game. I am delighted he is doing this first engagement and hope he can be coaxed into doing the Cup Final and, later in the year, hosting a little shindig to see off our teams when they leave for the Rugby World Cup.

If he becomes more involved I'd like to see him bring the same awareness of mental health issues that he is raising elsewhere.  State of Mind would be a good fit and could definitely use his voice.

[Trojan]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

Miseryguts 

You are just like Donald Trump. He's a republican too.  #republicanandproud  

The left is very fond of the concept of "solidarity" but where is it when we are called to display it for the good of the game?

Do republicans  not sing the National Anthem at games?  Do atheists not sing Abide With Me at the Cup Final, nor Land of Hope and Glory? 

I don't sing Abide With Me, it's a dreadful dirge about death, and I wouldn't be caught dead singing "Land of Soap and Tory"

[Oxford]

Just what the world needs ... another Harry thread!

[Robin Evans]

I don't know what he was like in the army. He appears to be a good community worker and for that he gets some credit as do all community workers who put time for the betterment of their communities... 

He is No different to other community workers in my judgement.

[ckn]

2 hours ago, gingerjon said:

This atheist sings Abide With Me for the memories, Land of Hope and Glory for the fun of it all, but does hasn't sung the National Anthem for years.  I won't stop others and I don't wish any member of the royal family harm but it's not for me.

If they went fully ceremonial and had absolutely nothing to do with politics, even the Queen's Speech which is written by the government but approved by the Queen, then I'd be fairly content for them to remain but at a real pittance of their current grant to reflect the 9 figure savings the Queen has.

It's people like Prince Andrew who really get me into stronger Republican cravings for total abolishment.  He, and his offspring, are everything that is wrong with the royal family.  Harry's a decent bloke though and by far the best of a bad bunch.

[Tongs ya bas]

3 hours ago, Griff9of13 said:

As Harry is on record as saying that none of his generation of royals wants the gig of monarch anymore is he also now a republican?

 

Well they can always pack it in and get a zero hours job

[Tongs ya bas]

19 minutes ago, Robin Evans said:

I don't know what he was like in the army. He appears to be a good community worker and for that he gets some credit as do all community workers who put time for the betterment of their communities... 

He is No different to other community workers in my judgement.

Community workers who get little or no recognition, how he was like in the army is irrelevant. He was in the army just like thousands of others were and are in the army.

[iffleyox]

1 hour ago, Robin Evans said:

I don't know what he was like in the army.

I do, pretty generally accepted to be a top guy.

I was in the navy, and served with many people who'd served with both Charles and Andrew. That was much more nuanced.

Thinking on Charles was that he was a top chap and first class officer who would have got to CO on merit eventually anyway if he hadn't been fast tracked because of who he was. Difficult, if not impossible, to find anyone who'd served with him who had a bad word to say - and we're talking late night conversations inside the wire in the wardroom bar between naval officers so why would they lie?

I paint that picture in detail to set up the fact that I never found *anyone* with a good word for Andrew.

[Martyn Sadler]

1 hour ago, Tongs ya bas said:

Well they can always pack it in and get a zero hours job

I would have thought that he is already on a zero-hours contract.

[Tongs ya bas]

Just now, Martyn Sadler said:

I would have thought that he is already on a zero-hours contract.

I wouldn't. And you insult the poor gets who derive a paltry and insecure living from this iniquity

[iffleyox]

1 hour ago, Tongs ya bas said:

how he was like in the army is irrelevant. He was in the army just like thousands of others were and are in the army.

it's not irrelevant though is it? Because, just as with any other walk of life, there are some utter tools in the army. Isn't it slightly relevant, given whether he or we like it or not he's currently in a high profile position, whether or not he's one of them?

By the way, why not the Glens? That Charlie Sloan was slightly less unhinged....

[Tongs ya bas]

9 minutes ago, iffleyox said:

it's not irrelevant though is it? Because, just as with any other walk of life, there are some utter tools in the army. Isn't it slightly relevant, given whether he or we like it or not he's currently in a high profile position, whether or not he's one of them?

By the way, why not the Glens? That Charlie Sloan was slightly less unhinged....

He was in the army. So were and are lots of other people. His status should be no different to anyone else who was in the army. Tools are in every walk of life. Toolishness is irrelevant in this context. Well done Harry mountbatten for being in the army, well done to everyone for being in the army.

[iffleyox]

24 minutes ago, Tongs ya bas said:

He was in the army. So were and are lots of other people. His status should be no different to anyone else who was in the army. Tools are in every walk of life. Toolishness is irrelevant in this context. Well done Harry mountbatten for being in the army, well done to everyone for being in the army.

completely agree, which brings me back to my question about, regardless of whether he was in the army or not, given he's in a high profile position, isn't it better that he isn't a tool? That's not a point about whether we should have a royal family or not, just that, as we *have* got one, isn't it better if they're ok people as well. 

If/when we haven't got a RF, it won't matter. At the moment, it does whether we like it or not.

[Robin Evans]

I'm much happier amongst "reight" folk, regardless of who or what they are.

Royal status means nowt to me. He's lived a very privileged lifestyle and as a result, direct comparisons with  others is rather meaningless.

That rugby league is getting some 'acceptance' by the establishment is a little ironic but welcome.