And there we have It, the sign of a lost argument. Still slipping down that hole you dug.




Really?



So you hadn't decided what he said?



The RFL agrees with you, yet you haven't decided what he said?



So they had already decided, and agreed with you? yet you now say you haven't decided. That makes perfect sense Smokey.

Why not just admit it really. You dug yourself a hole and you had to keep to it, not realising you would lose face so much.

Do people often point out your ad hominem insults are filled with spelling mistakes and poor grammar?

yes sweetheart,



HTH

No, what i actually said was

The RFL agree with me that a homophobic slur is not foul and abusive language, it is an offence in and of itself. It isnt the same as calling someone a moron, wit or a c'nt or a jackass or any of the multitude of words which must be directed at you on a daily basis. I make no comment on his guilt or otherwise.

Bloody hell, and somebody accused me of fog knitting. That post from Smokey above, is the most pathetic post every on this board.

And full of lies, to say he now said "Allegedly" after I had posted to him three times with the word, and he still insisted the RFL agreed with him. Unbelievable.

Like I said Smokey, you have lost a lot face with this.

You do realise that because its written you can go back in the thread and check yeah? its all there.

Im actually astounded that even after having having it explained to you, you still dont understand the difference between what i said, and what you thought i said.

You really dont know your ar5e from your Phil Daly do you?

Smokey, anybody only has to look at this very page of the thread, to see you are talking nonsense.

I can only ask again, are you aware of the term 'transference'

I am aware of the term d1ckh3ad mentioned a lot to your posts. Just saying like.

Wigan v Leeds in the Challenge Cup Final 2011.

People mention things to my posts. W13rd.

Yes I imagine some individuals will be involved in both. But how many incidents have you heard of referred to the Compliance Department???

Papers aren't always correct you know. Say for arguments sake Child hasn't reported it, but several dozen people complain to the RFL about it with the incident on video being banded about......do you think they'd ignore it and say sorry can't do anything as the ref didn't hear it?

To be fair that was as plain as day, how many people actually saw this Hardaker thing at the actual time?

This thread:

[url=http://s490.photobucket.com/user/thebloodbath/media/handbags.jpg.html[/url

And fully justified too. There was absolutely no doubt over what happened on that occasion.

You can't really argue with this, can you?

According to [url=http://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/On%20Field%20Compliance%20Sentencing%20Guidelines%202014-Final.pdfthis document[/url it is standard practice, when incidents have not been acted upon during the match or picked up on by officials during the match or via TV footage by the match review panel. The Compliance team will refer the incident on to the tribunal if appropriate. So far as I can gather from reading the operational rules and the guidance on homophobic language, the Compliance team simply oversees the whole disciplinary process, which makes sense given its name. Anyone can report homophobic (or racist/sexist/etc) language to the Compliance team although there are procedures open to follow as an alternative for fans (reporting to the stewards, direct to the club, etc). Upon receiving a report an investigation will be undertaken and an appropriate course of action taken, which may or may not include sanctions. If the guilty party is a player and that course of action is to take the case to the disciplinary panel then if they are found guilty they can receive a Grade E to F ban (5 to 8 matches). There is a specific sanction band for homophobic/racist/sexist/etc language and behaviour.

Seems clear it didn't have to be Child who reported it

You asked when it was and I told you.

Wasn't this your question
"When was the last time we had something like this though, with videos all over the web and lynch mobs out for blood?"

He rightly got fined by the club and the RFL.

Smokey is your full time occupation engaging in quote off's on here? because every single f*cking thread I see you in you're dissecting people posts practically word by word.

I wouldn't be suprised if you had a lawyer go over the wording of your posts before hitting submit, just to make sure there's no post or argument you can't twist and wriggle your way out of, with enough quotes and posts of course.

Not quite the same though is it, the above was a cut & dried case of a player acting like a total ****with the photo leaving no one in doubt whatsoever. Unlike that 10 second video that's currently doing the rounds.

Let the powers that be sort it out. That's their job isn't it?

It didn't, no. It could have been another player.

Interestingly, not according to the Urban Dictionary. [urlhttp://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=faggot[/url



Not to mention the earlier reference I provided stating the term was acceptable if used by homosexual men. Of course, many traditional dictionaries say it is an offensive term though, interestingly, not a homophobic term.

So I've provided a plethora of authorities which say the word may or may not be offensive but you've provided none that say it's homophobic apart from it is because you say it is.

That's another thing about language, it can and often does change and words that were not originally offensive can become so and words that were offensive can become less so. The younger generation do use the term faggot in a non offensive way as described in the Urban Dictionary. Think about the word Bitch. Many people now refer to their bitches including women talking about their girlfriends. People have taken ownership of a previously offensive word and taken the offence out of it, like that gay community has done by their own use of the word "fag" (fag hag etc).

Think about calling someone or something crazy. Fairly inoffensive but what about the connotations and stigma with the mentally ill? What about calling someone or a situation lame? Would that cause outrage? What about the negative connotations with disability from which that word originates?

G1 - I assume Zak has contacted you to conduct his defence if this goes to a Tribunal? Judging stereotypically from his tats etc I'd suggest you do all the talking.

Frankly I'd rather let the relevant authority's deal with the "alleged" abuse, rather than a bunch of amateur lip readers.

South Park has an episode called ""The F word" that deals with this furore quite aptly.

I'm also sure most folk can find an internet site called YouTube and put in BAD NFL LIP READING. Try it.

Before anyone starts either, I don't condone any abuse of any kind either, I just prefer to make up my own mind after seeing/hearing ALL the evidence.

No, it's not quite the same. One was a kid sticking 2 fingers up at the people who had been verbally abusing him and also booooood him whilst playing for his country. Silly thing to do and he rightly got fined.

The other is about an investigation that is taking place. IF found to be guilty is on a different level and will be very harshly dealt with. There is no doubt he said something which on the face of it appeared to be a homophobic term. That is for the people conducting the investigation to decide. IMO from the little evidence I have seen it is impossible to judge exactly what was said and who it was aimed at. The investigation will have access to several camera angles and expert lip readers to help them come to a conclusion.

For those who are blaze about the seriousness of the alleged incident and want to talk technicalities it could come under the category of 'Hate Crime' depending on what evidence is submitted and the statements of those involved. It could also be a storm in a tea cup. As RG said let the powers that be decide.

...and this is where you lose all credibility.

Yes Tomkins was boo'd while playing for England
Yes the game was played at Headingley
Yes the boo's came from the Southstand

But the Southstand was full of supporters from every (and I really mean every) team in the SL and a majority of the other professional clubs - not solely Leeds fans (thus proving that everyone hates Tomkins, not just Rhinos supporters).

So did Tomkins subsequently stick the V's up at every other teams supporters? No - just Leeds.