Skip to content
  • Categories
Collapse

The Silver Fern

  • Tipping
  • Team Sheets
  • Highlights
  • Results
    • All Blacks

      Search every All Blacks Test. Filter results by year, opposition, location, venue, city and RWC stage

    • Super Rugby

      Search every Super Rugby since match 1996

    • NPC

      Search NPC results. Only first division matches from 1976-2005. All results from the 14 team competition (2006-present) are included

Reason and Tuipulotu

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Sports Talk
73 Posts 27 Posters 2.6k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • taniwharugbyT taniwharugby

    Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

    Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

    MajorPomM Offline
    MajorPomM Offline
    MajorPom
    wrote on last edited by
    #11

    @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

    Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

    Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

    I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

    KirwanK boobooB 2 Replies Last reply
    2
    • MajorPomM MajorPom

      @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

      Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

      Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

      I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

      KirwanK Offline
      KirwanK Offline
      Kirwan
      wrote on last edited by
      #12

      @MajorRage said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

      @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

      Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

      Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

      I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

      I think the NZRU have an obligation to protect their players from these sort of smears. Absolutely should be legal action.

      jeggaJ 1 Reply Last reply
      9
      • KirwanK Kirwan

        @MajorRage said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

        @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

        Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

        Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

        I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

        I think the NZRU have an obligation to protect their players from these sort of smears. Absolutely should be legal action.

        jeggaJ Offline
        jeggaJ Offline
        jegga
        wrote on last edited by
        #13

        @Kirwan said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

        @MajorRage said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

        @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

        Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

        Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

        I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

        I think the NZRU have an obligation to protect their players from these sort of smears. Absolutely should be legal action.

        They never did anything any of the times muckrakers said players were poached or when likes of Phil Kearns said we cheated our way to the 2011 title . There’ll be no consequences for Reason I bet .

        MajorPomM 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • MajorPomM MajorPom

          @Kirwan said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

          @Nepia said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

          @Toddy said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

          I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

          I think the news reports at the time suggested that the A sample was botched by the lab.

          Reason being Reason I guess.

          Close to slander if he got it around the wrong way.

          I'm sure Reason has own sources who have confirmed to him that this whole thing was a cover up.

          In other news, I understand Reason is a protege of a Walrus ...

          RapidoR Offline
          RapidoR Offline
          Rapido
          wrote on last edited by
          #14

          @MajorRage said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

          @Kirwan said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

          @Nepia said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

          @Toddy said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

          I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

          I think the news reports at the time suggested that the A sample was botched by the lab.

          Reason being Reason I guess.

          Close to slander if he got it around the wrong way.

          I'm sure Reason has own sources who have confirmed to him that this whole thing was a cover up.

          In other news, I understand Reason is a protege of a Walrus ...

          Reason just works from home in Wairarapa watching TV and writing stuff. Is he close to anything much to have actual sources? Doesn't strike me as an investigative type.

          1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • jeggaJ jegga

            @Kirwan said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

            @MajorRage said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

            @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

            Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

            Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

            I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

            I think the NZRU have an obligation to protect their players from these sort of smears. Absolutely should be legal action.

            They never did anything any of the times muckrakers said players were poached or when likes of Phil Kearns said we cheated our way to the 2011 title . There’ll be no consequences for Reason I bet .

            MajorPomM Offline
            MajorPomM Offline
            MajorPom
            wrote on last edited by MajorPom
            #15

            @jegga said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

            @Kirwan said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

            @MajorRage said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

            @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

            Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

            Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

            I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

            I think the NZRU have an obligation to protect their players from these sort of smears. Absolutely should be legal action.

            They never did anything any of the times muckrakers said players were poached or when likes of Phil Kearns said we cheated our way to the 2011 title . There’ll be no consequences for Reason I bet .

            I don't think thats the same. Poaching is more or less opinion and Kearns was just being Kearns.

            The offical report we heard is that Patty's A sample was bull shit which was proved by the B sample. Reason is stating that "He failed a drugs test in France but was excused when the North American lab botched the 'B' sample." Which is the opposite.

            So either the NZRFU is lying to cover him, or Reason is inaccurate in a libelous manner.

            Both are scandal and both are worthy of follow up.

            jeggaJ 1 Reply Last reply
            2
            • ToddyT Toddy

              [edit - split from another thread]

              Anyone read the latest from Mark Reason? https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/110690533/mark-reason-akira-ioane-starts-world-cup-push-with-bruising-performance

              I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

              "The Blues have struggled with their leadership in recent seasons and the appointment of Tuipulotu is not the way forward. He failed a drugs test in France but was excused when the North American lab botched the 'B' sample. It's not a good look for a Super Rugby captain"

              boobooB Offline
              boobooB Offline
              booboo
              wrote on last edited by
              #16

              @Toddy said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

              [edit - split from another thread]

              Anyone read the latest from Mark Reason? https://i.stuff.co.nz/sport/opinion/110690533/mark-reason-akira-ioane-starts-world-cup-push-with-bruising-performance

              I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

              "The Blues have struggled with their leadership in recent seasons and the appointment of Tuipulotu is not the way forward. He failed a drugs test in France but was excused when the North American lab botched the 'B' sample. It's not a good look for a Super Rugby captain"

              Reason is a cock regardless.

              Yes, I'm pretty sure you're right that it was reported that his B sample was negative.

              And wasn't it post Chicago?

              Always made me wonder what Irish roid rager he got mixed up with escaped due to incompetence of the lab.

              Click bait piston wristed gibbon.

              1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • MajorPomM MajorPom

                @Kirwan said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                @Nepia said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                @Toddy said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

                I think the news reports at the time suggested that the A sample was botched by the lab.

                Reason being Reason I guess.

                Close to slander if he got it around the wrong way.

                I'm sure Reason has own sources who have confirmed to him that this whole thing was a cover up.

                In other news, I understand Reason is a protege of a Walrus ...

                boobooB Offline
                boobooB Offline
                booboo
                wrote on last edited by
                #17

                @MajorRage said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                @Kirwan said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                @Nepia said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                @Toddy said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

                I think the news reports at the time suggested that the A sample was botched by the lab.

                Reason being Reason I guess.

                Close to slander if he got it around the wrong way.

                I'm sure Reason has own sources who have confirmed to him that this whole thing was a cover up.

                In other news, I understand Reason is a protege of a Walrus ...

                I understand that para 1 is taking the piss ...

                MajorPomM 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • MajorPomM MajorPom

                  @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                  Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

                  Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

                  I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

                  boobooB Offline
                  boobooB Offline
                  booboo
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #18

                  @MajorRage said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                  @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                  Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

                  Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

                  I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

                  Farking A

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • TimT Offline
                    TimT Offline
                    Tim
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #19

                    Additionally, the testing was done in the USA, not in France. Supremely lazy hack work.

                    https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/sport/324206/wada-and-six-nations-demand-answers-on-tuipulotu

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    1
                    • Billy TellB Offline
                      Billy TellB Offline
                      Billy Tell
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #20

                      My suggestion: Put Mark Reason and Tuipolotu in a ring and let's see who da man.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • boobooB booboo

                        @MajorRage said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                        @Kirwan said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                        @Nepia said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                        @Toddy said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                        I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

                        I think the news reports at the time suggested that the A sample was botched by the lab.

                        Reason being Reason I guess.

                        Close to slander if he got it around the wrong way.

                        I'm sure Reason has own sources who have confirmed to him that this whole thing was a cover up.

                        In other news, I understand Reason is a protege of a Walrus ...

                        I understand that para 1 is taking the piss ...

                        MajorPomM Offline
                        MajorPomM Offline
                        MajorPom
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #21

                        @booboo said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                        @MajorRage said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                        @Kirwan said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                        @Nepia said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                        @Toddy said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                        I always thought Patty was cleared because his b sample was clean, rather than the b test being 'botched'. It's a pretty shocking fact to get wrong if he has.

                        I think the news reports at the time suggested that the A sample was botched by the lab.

                        Reason being Reason I guess.

                        Close to slander if he got it around the wrong way.

                        I'm sure Reason has own sources who have confirmed to him that this whole thing was a cover up.

                        In other news, I understand Reason is a protege of a Walrus ...

                        I understand that para 1 is taking the piss ...

                        Not really. It wouldn't surprise me if in conversation Jones and told Reason he thought the whole thing was a cover-up, typical NZ rugby etc etc ... and Reason has taken that as fact.

                        It's either that or Reason does have facts behind is view, in which case I think they should be exposed.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • MajorPomM MajorPom

                          @jegga said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                          @Kirwan said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                          @MajorRage said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                          @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                          Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

                          Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

                          I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

                          I think the NZRU have an obligation to protect their players from these sort of smears. Absolutely should be legal action.

                          They never did anything any of the times muckrakers said players were poached or when likes of Phil Kearns said we cheated our way to the 2011 title . There’ll be no consequences for Reason I bet .

                          I don't think thats the same. Poaching is more or less opinion and Kearns was just being Kearns.

                          The offical report we heard is that Patty's A sample was bull shit which was proved by the B sample. Reason is stating that "He failed a drugs test in France but was excused when the North American lab botched the 'B' sample." Which is the opposite.

                          So either the NZRFU is lying to cover him, or Reason is inaccurate in a libelous manner.

                          Both are scandal and both are worthy of follow up.

                          jeggaJ Offline
                          jeggaJ Offline
                          jegga
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #22

                          @MajorRage said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                          @jegga said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                          @Kirwan said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                          @MajorRage said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                          @taniwharugby said in Alternative needed from the absolute crap of stuff.co.nz:

                          Treason is a cnut of the highest order, most knew that @MN5 I just mentioned your old mate again.

                          Hope someone takes him to task over his comments, but I bet they wont in this farked up (social) media world we live in now.

                          I'm sure the NZRFU will be informed, and if he's wrong, then legal action should occur.

                          I think the NZRU have an obligation to protect their players from these sort of smears. Absolutely should be legal action.

                          They never did anything any of the times muckrakers said players were poached or when likes of Phil Kearns said we cheated our way to the 2011 title . There’ll be no consequences for Reason I bet .

                          I don't think thats the same. Poaching is more or less opinion and Kearns was just being Kearns.

                          The offical report we heard is that Patty's A sample was bull shit which was proved by the B sample. Reason is stating that "He failed a drugs test in France but was excused when the North American lab botched the 'B' sample." Which is the opposite.

                          So either the NZRFU is lying to cover him, or Reason is inaccurate in a libelous manner.

                          Both are scandal and both are worthy of follow up.

                          It’s not the same but the NZRU did nothing , poaching isn’t a matter of opinion either . Multiple nh column writers accused of trying to poach Rupeni and even if trying to change the rules when we were doing the opposite. There were certainly grounds for libel there , nothing happened. At worst there’ll be an apology from his news outlet and he’ll return to his previous behaviour soon enough .

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • TimT Offline
                            TimT Offline
                            Tim
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #23

                            My friend is not a libel lawyer, but he viewed Reason's column as a clear case of libel.

                            DamoD 1 Reply Last reply
                            4
                            • taniwharugbyT Offline
                              taniwharugbyT Offline
                              taniwharugby
                              wrote on last edited by taniwharugby
                              #24

                              TV broadcasts are subject to Broadcasting standards, which include being factually correct, surely there is something that governs clickbaiiters for a major 'news' outlet?

                              And broadcasting standards can be questioned by the general public, surely similar standards must apply here?

                              StargazerS 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • PaekakboyzP Offline
                                PaekakboyzP Offline
                                Paekakboyz
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #25

                                Fuck that makes my blood boil. There is zero doubt that the A sample was messed up and caused the false positive. Totally cleared by the B sample and he still spent time in purgatory while that was sorted out. For Reason (lol the irony) to essentially say it was a testing error of a positive result is bullshit.

                                Really hope we see some action on this from NZRU and/or Pat.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • taniwharugbyT taniwharugby

                                  TV broadcasts are subject to Broadcasting standards, which include being factually correct, surely there is something that governs clickbaiiters for a major 'news' outlet?

                                  And broadcasting standards can be questioned by the general public, surely similar standards must apply here?

                                  StargazerS Offline
                                  StargazerS Offline
                                  Stargazer
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #26

                                  @taniwharugby said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                                  TV broadcasts are subject to Broadcasting standards, which include being factually correct, surely there is something that governs clickbaiiters for a major 'news' outlet?

                                  And broadcasting standards can be questioned by the general public, surely similar standards must apply here?

                                  The NZ Media Council is the organisation dealing with complaints against websites like stuff. The question remains, how does a member of the public prove that Reason is lying? A full decision of Drugfree NZ will count as facts; I haven't seen the decision on PT, so don't know whether it contains enough info to base a complaint on.

                                  http://www.mediacouncil.org.nz/

                                  taniwharugbyT 1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • StargazerS Stargazer

                                    @taniwharugby said in Reason and Tuipulotu:

                                    TV broadcasts are subject to Broadcasting standards, which include being factually correct, surely there is something that governs clickbaiiters for a major 'news' outlet?

                                    And broadcasting standards can be questioned by the general public, surely similar standards must apply here?

                                    The NZ Media Council is the organisation dealing with complaints against websites like stuff. The question remains, how does a member of the public prove that Reason is lying? A full decision of Drugfree NZ will count as facts; I haven't seen the decision on PT, so don't know whether it contains enough info to base a complaint on.

                                    http://www.mediacouncil.org.nz/

                                    taniwharugbyT Offline
                                    taniwharugbyT Offline
                                    taniwharugby
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #27

                                    @Stargazer they shouldnt have to, he should have to prove what he is saying is true.

                                    StargazerS 1 Reply Last reply
                                    1
                                    • MN5M Online
                                      MN5M Online
                                      MN5
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #28

                                      can they sting Reason for what is essentially an opinion piece though ?

                                      taniwharugbyT 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • MN5M MN5

                                        can they sting Reason for what is essentially an opinion piece though ?

                                        taniwharugbyT Offline
                                        taniwharugbyT Offline
                                        taniwharugby
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #29

                                        @MN5 he still cant state things that are untrue, unless he knows them to be fact, Otherwise he should say it is fiction

                                        MN5M 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • taniwharugbyT taniwharugby

                                          @Stargazer they shouldnt have to, he should have to prove what he is saying is true.

                                          StargazerS Offline
                                          StargazerS Offline
                                          Stargazer
                                          wrote on last edited by Stargazer
                                          #30

                                          @taniwharugby Yes, it all depends on the standard of proof required, but a member of the public making a complaint about an article that they claim is defamatory and not based on facts, should at least make it plausible that the article is factually incorrect. You can't just say he's lying and leave it at that. You'll have to indicate why.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Search
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Search