Aussie Pro Rugby
-
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field. Calling him a 'plodder' is laughable. Ha! Ha! I don't let it worry me. You're the only one who looks foolish when you disrespect an immortal of the game in that way.
If there was any justice in the world, Phil Waugh would still be leading the Wallabies to Tokyo, no doubt trying to win our third consecutive World Cup.
-
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field. Calling him a 'plodder' is laughable. Ha! Ha! I don't let it worry me. You're the only one who looks foolish when you disrespect an immortal of the game in that way.
If there was any justice in the world, Phil Waugh would still be leading the Wallabies to Tokyo, no doubt trying to win our third consecutive World Cup.
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field. Calling him a 'plodder' is laughable. Ha! Ha! I don't let it worry me. You're the only one who looks foolish when you disrespect an immortal of the game in that way.
If there was any justice in the world, Phil Waugh would still be leading the Wallabies to Tokyo, no doubt trying to win our third consecutive World Cup.
we all have our pet blind spots
-
George Smith was a gun right from the start, what a phenomenal player. One of the best all-round rugby players i have ever had the pleasure of watching. The fact he was forced to share game time with a plodder like Phil Waugh is one of the great tragedies of Wallaby rugby.
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
George Smith was a gun right from the start, what a phenomenal player. One of the best all-round rugby players i have ever had the pleasure of watching.
Agreed. Phenomenally talented player.
-
George Smith was a gun right from the start, what a phenomenal player. One of the best all-round rugby players i have ever had the pleasure of watching. The fact he was forced to share game time with a plodder like Phil Waugh is one of the great tragedies of Wallaby rugby.
@mariner4life said in Aussie Rugby in general:
George Smith was a gun right from the start, what a phenomenal player. One of the best all-round rugby players i have ever had the pleasure of watching. The fact he was forced to share game time with a plodder like Phil Waugh is one of the great tragedies of Wallaby rugby.
The worst bit? When the Tahs saw both Waugh and Smith going around as youngsters, they decided to wait on Waugh and Eddie Fucking Jones took Smith to the Ponies. :man_facepalming:
-
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field. Calling him a 'plodder' is laughable. Ha! Ha! I don't let it worry me. You're the only one who looks foolish when you disrespect an immortal of the game in that way.
If there was any justice in the world, Phil Waugh would still be leading the Wallabies to Tokyo, no doubt trying to win our third consecutive World Cup.
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field.
Phil Waugh was the angriest dwarf I've ever seen play rugby.
-
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field.
Phil Waugh was the angriest dwarf I've ever seen play rugby.
@nzzp said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field.
Phil Waugh was the angriest dwarf I've ever seen play rugby.
Probably because he went bald early.
-
@nzzp said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@barbarian said in Aussie Rugby in general:
Phil Waugh was one of the greatest Australians to set foot on a rugby field.
Phil Waugh was the angriest dwarf I've ever seen play rugby.
Probably because he went bald early.
Years back someone described Waugh pretty well. I'm not sure who but have a feeling it may have been @NTA
"Waugh has a face like a smashed crab."
-
@chimoaus said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@Siam said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@NTA never been comfortable with the asleep in a parked and turned off car equals drunk driving laws.
Seems to me most cases of car sleeping are legitimately undertaken in order to not breach dui laws, which is the end goal innit?. It's got a stench of entrapment about it ( the legislation, that is).
Police still require evidence and need to prove he was the driver. A magistrate still needs to find him guilty of DUI on the evidence offered by Police. Police would not charge someone for DUI if they didn't have a prima facie case.
An example would be Police observe a car stopped in an unusual location stopped at a funny angle, the engine is still running. They approach the vehicle and observe a male slumped over the steering wheel with keys in the ignition. They manage to wake the driver and the smell of intoxicating liquor is very strong. His eyes are glazed and he has vomit on his shirt. They look around the car and cannot see any empty bottles or cans. Suspecting the male is intoxicated they caution the driver before asking him questions. He would either say nothing, admit to driving or lie. Police would IMO have grounds to suspect he was the driver and submit him to a breath analysis.
Police would then likely look for witnesses, CCTV, where were they drinking prior to driving etc etc. The magistrate can then decide if the male was driving.
None of that applies to NSW. The relevant legislation provides that you are in control of the vehicle if you're in the driver's seat (even being in the front) which then satisfies the relevant section under Schedule 3:
Power to conduct random breath testing(cf STM Act, s 13 (1) and (3A)–(5))
(1) A police officer may require a person to submit to a breath test in accordance with the officer’s directions if the officer has reasonable cause to believe that:
(a) the person is or was driving a motor vehicle on a road, or
(b) the person is or was occupying the driving seat of a motor vehicle on a road and attempting to put the motor vehicle in motion, or
(c) the person (being the holder of an applicable driver licence) is or was occupying the seat in a motor vehicle next to a learner driver while the driver is or was driving the vehicle on a road.Further if a police officer is of the opinion that a person who is driving (or about to drive) a motor vehicle is under the influence of alcohol or any other drug, or a combination of drugs, the police officer may:
(a) prohibit the person from driving the vehicle while the person is under the influence of alcohol or that other drug or a combination of drugs,The legislation defines drive:
drive includes:
(a) be in control of the steering, movement or propulsion of a vehicle, and
(b) in relation to a trailer, draw or tow the trailer, and
(c) ride a vehicle.@antipodean Thanks for the legislation however I think you may misunderstand me. Simply sitting in the drivers seat in a parked vehicle does not give Police the power to breath test.
The key wording in B is attempting to put vehicle in motion. Being slumped over the wheel of a parked car does not satisfy B. You can’t be trying to put a vehicle in motion if you are asleep or passed out.
My example given is what Police use to get reasonable grounds to satisfy A.
For them to breath test they must have had reasonble grounds to suspect he had been driving the car. -
@antipodean Thanks for the legislation however I think you may misunderstand me. Simply sitting in the drivers seat in a parked vehicle does not give Police the power to breath test.
The key wording in B is attempting to put vehicle in motion. Being slumped over the wheel of a parked car does not satisfy B. You can’t be trying to put a vehicle in motion if you are asleep or passed out.
My example given is what Police use to get reasonable grounds to satisfy A.
For them to breath test they must have had reasonble grounds to suspect he had been driving the car.@chimoaus https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-union/tolu-latu-stood-down-by-waratahs-after-drink-driving-charge-20190521-p51prj.html
It is understood allegedly police found the 12-Test Wallaby motionless behind the wheel of his car while stopped at a set of traffic lights on Cleveland Street in Sydney in the early hours of the morning.
-
@chimoaus https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-union/tolu-latu-stood-down-by-waratahs-after-drink-driving-charge-20190521-p51prj.html
It is understood allegedly police found the 12-Test Wallaby motionless behind the wheel of his car while stopped at a set of traffic lights on Cleveland Street in Sydney in the early hours of the morning.
@NTA said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@chimoaus https://www.smh.com.au/sport/rugby-union/tolu-latu-stood-down-by-waratahs-after-drink-driving-charge-20190521-p51prj.html
It is understood allegedly police found the 12-Test Wallaby motionless behind the wheel of his car while stopped at a set of traffic lights on Cleveland Street in Sydney in the early hours of the morning.
Yep I reckon that would give them start on satisfying A for sure.
-
@antipodean Thanks for the legislation however I think you may misunderstand me. Simply sitting in the drivers seat in a parked vehicle does not give Police the power to breath test.
The key wording in B is attempting to put vehicle in motion. Being slumped over the wheel of a parked car does not satisfy B. You can’t be trying to put a vehicle in motion if you are asleep or passed out.
My example given is what Police use to get reasonable grounds to satisfy A.
For them to breath test they must have had reasonble grounds to suspect he had been driving the car. -
@chimoaus don't know about NSW, but I wouldn't bet on getting away with being drunkenly slumped over the steering wheel in Qld. Surely NSW is similar?
@Crazy-Horse said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@chimoaus don't know about NSW, but I wouldn't bet on getting away with being drunkenly slumped over the steering wheel in Qld. Surely NSW is similar?
I’m not saying you get away with it, I am saying Police need evidence to prove driver. It is possible I had a fight with the missus, drove my car to the nearest car park, stopped the car. Drunk a bottle of whiskey, threw the bottle away and fell asleep behind the wheel. At no point did I drive intoxicated or try and put the vehicle in motion.
Police always need evidence to put before a magistrate, simply being slumped over the wheel drunk is not enough. There always other factors that help Police form reasonable grounds and that is what they are trained to look for.
-
@Crazy-Horse said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@chimoaus don't know about NSW, but I wouldn't bet on getting away with being drunkenly slumped over the steering wheel in Qld. Surely NSW is similar?
I’m not saying you get away with it, I am saying Police need evidence to prove driver. It is possible I had a fight with the missus, drove my car to the nearest car park, stopped the car. Drunk a bottle of whiskey, threw the bottle away and fell asleep behind the wheel. At no point did I drive intoxicated or try and put the vehicle in motion.
Police always need evidence to put before a magistrate, simply being slumped over the wheel drunk is not enough. There always other factors that help Police form reasonable grounds and that is what they are trained to look for.
@chimoaus in Qld at least, don't know about NSW, there is an offence of being in charge of a motor vehicle will over the limit. Don't have to prove someone has been driving, merely have to prove they are in charge. Even having car keys on you and not actually being in the car while pissed could be interpreted as being in charge under some circumstances. Being pissed, slumped over the steering wheel is enough. The car keys don't necessarily have to be in the ignition either.
-
@chimoaus in Qld at least, don't know about NSW, there is an offence of being in charge of a motor vehicle will over the limit. Don't have to prove someone has been driving, merely have to prove they are in charge. Even having car keys on you and not actually being in the car while pissed could be interpreted as being in charge under some circumstances. Being pissed, slumped over the steering wheel is enough. The car keys don't necessarily have to be in the ignition either.
@Crazy-Horse So don’t sleep drunk in your car in QLD by the sounds. There is no “In Charge” wording in NSW Legislation as far as I know.
-
George Smith was a cheat. Referees turned a blind eye to his breakdown cheating. It was a blight on the game.
-
George Smith was a cheat. Referees turned a blind eye to his breakdown cheating. It was a blight on the game.
@ACT-Crusader Sub McCaw for Smith and the rest of the world outside NZ for you - lol.
-
George Smith was a cheat. Referees turned a blind eye to his breakdown cheating. It was a blight on the game.
@ACT-Crusader said in Aussie Rugby in general:
George Smith was a cheat. Referees turned a blind eye to his breakdown cheating. It was a plight on the game.
Marshall '03.
-
George Smith was a cheat. Referees turned a blind eye to his breakdown cheating. It was a blight on the game.
@ACT-Crusader said in Aussie Rugby in general:
George Smith was a cheat. Referees turned a blind eye to his breakdown cheating. It was a plight on the game.
And a blight.
Had a cloak of invisibility ...
But seriously: George Smith was a legend as he was the only player ever throughout McCaw's career that in any one given year (can't remember which one, fairly early) who I would have picked in a World XV in front of him.
-
@antipodean Thanks for the legislation however I think you may misunderstand me. Simply sitting in the drivers seat in a parked vehicle does not give Police the power to breath test.
The key wording in B is attempting to put vehicle in motion. Being slumped over the wheel of a parked car does not satisfy B. You can’t be trying to put a vehicle in motion if you are asleep or passed out.
My example given is what Police use to get reasonable grounds to satisfy A.
For them to breath test they must have had reasonble grounds to suspect he had been driving the car.@chimoaus said in Aussie Rugby in general:
@antipodean Thanks for the legislation however I think you may misunderstand me. Simply sitting in the drivers seat in a parked vehicle does not give Police the power to breath test.
The key wording in B is attempting to put vehicle in motion. Being slumped over the wheel of a parked car does not satisfy B. You can’t be trying to put a vehicle in motion if you are asleep or passed out.
My example given is what Police use to get reasonable grounds to satisfy A.
For them to breath test they must have had reasonble grounds to suspect he had been driving the car.You can be if you're found to have the keys in the ignition. particularly if you're stationary at a set of lights. That satisfies the law.
