Wolves sign Josh McGuire

[Old Frightful]

7 hours ago, Gavin Harrison said:

Josh Charnely has suffered no harm whatsoever from whatever McGuire said. No other person has suffered any harm.

Psychological harm is far worse than a broken nose or fat lip, those sort of injuries will heal rapidly.

What McGuire said to Charnley will stay with him for an awful long time, probably even the rest of his life. He may well think of it every time he looks at the person McGuire made the comment about.

The more I think about it the more I think McGuire got off lightly.

 

[RP London]

1 minute ago, Dunbar said:

Without broadening the conversation too much, I have some reservations about how freedom of speech is being a little suppressed - if not legislatively, then through the weight of some very vocal voices.

But, and here is the key thing, surely the fight for free expression is not the fight to abuse people and throw insults and hateful language around without consequences.  If that is the fight you want to win then very few will be on your side and certainly not me.

I am pleased that the disciplinary panel has taken such a hard stand on this.  One, because of what happened just a few months ago (for which McGuire showed no remorse whatsoever) and second, because of what appears to be the extremely personal and directed nature of the language used.

If this is the end of McGuire in the UK game then I won’t be losing any sleep over it.  Good riddance to him.

As you say the thing with free speech is that we all have the right to it, do we have the right to abuse others just for the colour of their skin, their sexual preference or their opinion? Does Free Speech include talking provable nonsense? To say that someone is inferior just because of their sexual orientation or skin colour or hair colour.. is that free speech?

Free Speech is a funny old thing and has never and will never truly exist. People should not be allowed to just stand up and spout absolute nonsense  without being challenged, and sometimes you just have to say "look just stop" if you are an organisation and not have "free speech" thrown as a defence. If someone is shouting that gravity doesnt exist and that all elephants were purple people tend to just walk away. However, if someone does that in a pub or a theatre or a lecture hall and the reaction is that people arent going to turn up, spend their money and keep the business afloat, then surely it is the right of that venue to say "no your not going on" and not be accused of "cancel culture" etc.. it is just the consequences of free speech in action, because the venue surely has free speech and that includes actions in this case.

Rugby is the same, you have the freedom to say what you want but not that and not here, and surely that is ok.

Free Speech is not under threat, what some people want is a Freedom of Speech without Challenge and to be told they are right no matter what rubbish comes out of their mouth.. and that should never be allowed.  (this forum is excellent before anyone says anything)

[ELBOWSEYE]

8 minutes ago, Old Frightful said:

Psychological harm is far worse than a broken nose or fat lip, those sort of injuries will heal rapidly

 

Then next time a wife goes to the hospital with her face stoved in the doctor will say don't worry these injuries will soon heal,it could be worse he could have called you names.

[Old Frightful]

12 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

Then next time a wife goes to the hospital with her face stoved in the doctor will say don't worry these injuries will soon heal,it could be worse he could have called you names.

Sorry but I think you're being facetious in the extreme there.

I can't think why but I'm not going to try and understand. I'm assuming you knew exactly what I meant and to twist it round to score points means it's not worth discussing it.

[ELBOWSEYE]

1 minute ago, Old Frightful said:

Sorry but I think you're being facetious in the extreme there.

I can't think why but I'm not going to try and understand. I'm assuming you knew exactly what I meant and to twist it round to score points means it's not worth discussing it.

At least you replied rather than post a stupid emoji, sorry you feel that but it's what I thought when I read it.

[Adelaide Tiger]

56 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Anybody who's lived ' down under ' will be aware of different cultural things that are acceptable in different places

Bl00dy oath mate!  First day at work in Oz one of my new work colleagues, a women’s in her forties, was telling me about the various teams in the large open place Council office.  She gave her views on each team then said in a loudish voice whilst pointing ‘Be careful with that team they are full of - the word rhymes with togs but starts with a W ’’.

I looked around and no one batted an eyelid.  I didn’t realise that that particular word meant someone from, or a descendant of someone from, a country around the Mediterranean area

Edited June 7 by Adelaide Tiger

[Old Frightful]

13 minutes ago, ELBOWSEYE said:

At least you replied rather than post a stupid emoji, sorry you feel that but it's what I thought when I read it.

No bother, it's all about opinions and you're perfectly entitled to yours.

[Tim Streets tache]

McGuire crossed a line and he's reaping what he sowed.

McGuire should think himself lucky just missing some Rugby matches.

In plenty of other circumstances he could of(plently would say should of) ended up in a pool of his own blood for making such comments.

 

[Snowys Backside]

As an Employer, Warrington Wolves need to do more digging around this. McGuire denies things also, so Dishonesty is also a dismissal charge in many peoples eyes, but he and Charnley were never team mates. 
 

Someone has prepped the idiot up for this, and off he spouts. That third party in that Warrington camp is probably more culpable than McGuire himself. 
 

There is sledging and there is ‘sledging’. This is neither. It’s protected by an ‘Act’ like most things are now and he plays a sport for which kids with vulnerabilities could only dream of being. He is supposed to be a Role Model !

Instead (after getting away with it first time) it’s proven he will never learn. He’s just a grub who doesn’t deserve to promote our beautiful sport. 
 

If this was a Leigh player, I would say exactly the same thing !

[Phil]

I think most of us now have seen reports of what was said, they were not “hurty words” (ffs!)

I wonder what have happened back in the day if he’d said similar to Jim Mills or Les Boyd?

 I reckon 12 is very lenient 

[OriginalMrC]

1 hour ago, Gavin Harrison said:

Yes. It is 2023. 

You really should be fearful of what you are actually supporting here. Not just in terms of rugby league.

McGuire's history is what exactly, prior to arriving at Warrington?

A 12 match ban for words. Think about that.

 

What are you talking about?! 

This is nothing to do with the modern game. Stuff like this has always been frowned upon even back in the 'good old days'. 

[Saint Toppy]

1 hour ago, Gavin Harrison said:

 

McGuire's history is what exactly, prior to arriving at Warrington?

A 12 match ban for words. Think about that.

 

McGuire has a long history of charges & bans in the NRL, some of which show the guys has s&*t for brains and never learns. He got banned 3 times in 1 season for attacking the face of opponents (1 of which was gouging, which is amazing from a guy who knows 1st hand the severity of eye injuries), he's been cautioned for online abuse of other players (after QLD had just beaten NSW in Origin), he's been banned for verbal abuse of officials, and in the year before joining Wire he missed a dozen games through multiple suspensions.

Add all this to the fact he's already had a 7 match ban for unacceptable language this year, so when he goes and commits the same offence again just a few months later you'd be hard pressed to find many people with little sympathy for him. Wire knew exactly what kind of a person they were getting when they signed him so they can't really complain when goes and screws up again.

Edited June 7 by Saint Toppy

[Dave T]

6 minutes ago, Snowys Backside said:

As an Employer, Warrington Wolves need to do more digging around this. McGuire denies things also, so Dishonesty is also a dismissal charge in many peoples eyes, but he and Charnley were never team mates. 
 

Someone has prepped the idiot up for this, and off he spouts. That third party in that Warrington camp is probably more culpable than McGuire himself. 
 

 

It's a small world, many of these players know each other off the field. No need for the over-reaction in your post.

[Dave T]

Just now, Saint Toppy said:

Wire knew exactly what kind of a person they were getting when they signed him so they can't really complain when goes and screws up again.

I don't really buy this argument tbh. Had he been picking up bans for thuggery, I'd agree, and I think that is a feature of his game that we decided to accept. Just like we did with Dudson. There is a fair argument that our pack needed toughening up.

Abuse like this sits outside of all of his previous offences in his very long career at the top of the game.

[Saint Toppy]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Abuse like this sits outside of all of his previous offences in his very long career at the top of the game.

Aside from his ban for verbal abuse of a referee, his caution for online abuse of other players, and the 7 game ban already served this year for verbal abuse you mean. So no history at all of verbally abusing players & officials  

Edited June 7 by Saint Toppy

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

It's a small world, many of these players know each other off the field. No need for the over-reaction in your post.

While i agree with you there may be nothing in it.. i'd also agree that i'd investigate it as a club. He may just have heard people talking who are still friends with Josh and discussing things and thought "i'll bank that for later" equally he may have been primed with "this will get into him and rile him up, put him off his game" etc at which point that person needs sorting out as well (obvioulsy they've picked their villain well). Same way it wasnt just Cameron Bankroft banned for ball tampering but also Warner and Smith who suggested it as a tactic, and were those in leadership that could have/should have stopped it. 

[Dunbar]

3 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Aside from his ban for verbal abuse of a referee, his caution for online abuse of other players, and the 7 game ban already served this year for verbal abuse you mean. So no history at all of verbally abusing players & officials  

I'm not sure you can use the 7 game ban after they signed him as a reason not to sign him.

[Wellsy4HullFC]

There's a difference between freedom of speech and freedom to abuse.

Saying you don't agree with something that others do might upset people, but we're settled to our thoughts and ideas. But referring to someone or a group of people in an intentional derogatory and upsetting way to cause upset is not the same as simply disagreeing. It's targeted malice, a form of abuse, and definitely deserves consequences.

[Dave T]

11 minutes ago, Saint Toppy said:

Aside from his ban for verbal abuse of a referee, his caution for online abuse of other players, and the 7 game ban already served this year for verbal abuse you mean. So no history at all of verbally abusing players & officials  

Let's be honest, nobody thought this was how this was going to end. A gouge, maybe, even dissent to an extent, but nobody predicted this. 

THis article was interesting, I assume he took the one match ban for dissent, but interesting how the NRL treated another player who called the ref an "effing r**ard" - 2 match ban. 

NRL: Josh McGuire's vile rant towards referee revealed (yahoo.com)

[Tim Streets tache]

16 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I don't really buy this argument tbh. Had he been picking up bans for thuggery, I'd agree, and I think that is a feature of his game that we decided to accept. Just like we did with Dudson. There is a fair argument that our pack needed toughening up.

Abuse like this sits outside of all of his previous offences in his very long career at the top of the game.

You talking about the same bloke as everyone else?

It absolutely sits inside with his previous offences!

One VERY previous. Hence the fckin ban! 

[Dave T]

4 minutes ago, Tim Streets tache said:

You talking about the same bloke as everyone else?

It absolutely sits inside with his previous offences!

One VERY previous. Hence the fckin ban! 

We are talking about when Wire signed him. These two offences have been at Wire.

[Gavin Harrison]

2 hours ago, RP London said:

as has been said before you cannot compare offences like that.. This is about the game as a whole and allowing prejudice of players come through to alienate possible sections of the community from becoming involved in the game. Agree with that, and the harshness or not but thats why it is judged on a different level. Lets also remember its not his first offence and he has also been in mandatory education and hes still coming out with this nonsense.. 

You're absolutely right, they are incomparable.

Punching someone unconscious then punching them again as they lay unconscious, leading ro concussions, psychological problems & ending a career pales in to insignificanace compared to an insult.

My bad.

[Gavin Harrison]

1 hour ago, Old Frightful said:

Psychological harm is far worse than a broken nose or fat lip, those sort of injuries will heal rapidly.

What McGuire said to Charnley will stay with him for an awful long time, probably even the rest of his life. He may well think of it every time he looks at the person McGuire made the comment about.

The more I think about it the more I think McGuire got off lightly.

 

 

Charnley told you that himself did he?

[Phil]

5 minutes ago, Gavin Harrison said:

 

Charnley told you that himself did he?

Try using some empathy, put yourself in Charnley’s position 

[Saint Toppy]

31 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

I'm not sure you can use the 7 game ban after they signed him as a reason not to sign him.

Thats not the specific post I responded to. Dave T stated that this verbal abuse offence sits outside all of his previous offences - it clearly doesn't ! Prior to this latest 12 match ban there have been 3 previous instances of him abusing players or officials.

He also has quite a lengthy list of bans & fines for on-field and off-field offences throughout his career.