The chanting may have stopped and started but it was heard at the start of the match (6 minutes or so in iirc) and was heard a number of other times during the game (last time i could recall hearing it at about 65 mins i think). The chanting was on a larger scale and for longer duration than cas got fined for.

You may not have heard it at the game but the chanting cas got fined for wasnt heard by most cas fans, anyone in the press box, the refereeing staff or the match commisionaire.

I would agree that first leeds deserve a warning but the fact they deserve one according to the rfls respect policy can be in no doubt.

And yes complaints should be made about the warrington game and all other games featuring abuse of players and officials now that the rfl have set a precedent. We cant have some forms of discrimination ignored or some clubs let of, all should be punished eqaully if the rfl is to prove it has no agenda.

I'm glad you said that. So now I take it you also think that Cas should be penalised further after yesterday's match? I was at your game yesterday, as I am at the majority of your home matches, and you can not get away from the fact that the crowd were singing "the referees a w@n*er", can you now? Nor can you get away with the constant singing of "we all hate Leeds scum, we all hate Leeds scum", along to the music after every score, can you now? where will it stop? I noticed quite clearly a piece of scum walking out of the ground in tears after that 4th try.

So we're going to complain about every game then?

The only ones singing anything about the referee were the hudds fans

And no one sang anything about leeds. I dont think you were there, i think you are lying.

The rfl have now set a precedent, unless there is a bias all club should be treated eqaully.

Where were you stood when you heard this then?

I was there and heard none of this which you say you heard.

If you couldnt care less why are you arguing about it on an internet message board?

This thread is about whether or not the rfl will apply the rules to all clubs in the same manner, which is quite a relevent topic at the moment. The fact is a number of leeds fans seem to think some sorts of abuse are ok but others arent, which is against the whole idea of the respect policy which is supposed to be abpout treating all groups the same.

Heres a question for you do you think some forms abuse are ok and some arent?

And another, should clubs be fined for breaching the respect policy?

I was in the seats, usually I am in the boxes. And it was clearly evident, you are just choosing to ignore it for the sake of it.




I am pointing out how silly you all sound in trying to say chanting at Leeds on Saturday was the same as you had got in trouble for. I prefer to leave it to the authorities and the clubs to deal with.



Homophobic chanting is exactly the same as racist chanting, and has been dealt with the same way for years. It is dealt with the same way in society also. So yes Homophobic/Racist chanting is entirely different to some other abuse. Or at least society deals with it that way.

Just because you are the first club to reduce it's self to the level of personal homophobia does not mean you should be allowed to get away with it. Chants hear previously of this nature were banter against players who it was clearly known where not gay. You were chanting on somethign where it was known to all that the player concerned was gay, and therefore it was personal abuse.



How do you define the respect policy? The respect policy to me means no racist/homophobic chanting at players of a ethnic or sexual preference. The referees element is clearly defined in relation to the players. But in relation to the fans it is that the referee is to feel safe at all times.

Only one club I recall has made a referee fear for his safety, and again only one club I recall has been investigated for homophobic chanting.

Banter at referees has been going on since the game began, and it is clear at all sporting events. So it's hardly likely the ruling bodies will take action against a banter at a referree. Making that ref fear for his safety however, should and will be actioned on.

I don't think you were there either.
The crowd did not 'BOO' the ref until he had sigalled our feed at the scrum re Shenny.
And there was no 'we all hate leeds' chant at anytime.

We too are not bothered about which teams are dealt with, just saying all must be done equally in line with RFL respect policy, you must agree...

Unfortunately when something like this happens as in business Banter=Abuse, all must stop.

And would you like to answer my question, in your eyes are some forms of abuse to players ok and others not? yes or no answer please.

Did you choose to ignore that?



To be fair to you and question you are asking. Yes I do think abuse of a personal nature should be treated the same. And by that I mean Racist, homophobic, Fat, or Ginger, or others of a personal nature.

But you know just as clearly as I do that those are not dealt with the same in society, and by the same token the RFL policy does also not deal with Fat and Ginger comments the same as Racist and homophobic comments. It follows the same as society in general does.

As long as society in general deals that way then why should the RFL act differently upon it?

Perhaps because the respect policy of the rfl isnt that we will punsih whichever forms of disrimination are worse its that we will punish all forms of discrimination.

Since you agree that personal abuse of players is wrong, surely you would agree that the leeds club deserves some sort of reprimand for giving players personal abuse?

How do you work that one out?

How can you be punished for something in the game that is not against the rules of the game?

The rules didn't change you know just because Cas fans kicked up a stink about their own punishment. You were punished within the rules of the game. I have seen enough of your posts to know you are not foolish, so surely you are not daft enough to think clubs should be punished outside of the rules?

But Leeds were guilty of abusing a player...but because of an implied sliding abuse/moral scale should be overlooked against what the RFL are trying to implement with their Respect policy?