Meh, 2nd is as good (or bad) as last for Sir Kev

Another hysterical 'discrimination' screamer I see - I've not condoned anything Fury has said, and have stated I fundamentally disagree with his view.... But crack on kid....

I hate to sound like I'm defending him, because I really am not, but people are going over the top... Where does he equate gay people to paedophiles? I heard some stupid comment about who'd have thought in the 70's gay marriage would be acceptable, and that once Paedophiles are accepted the devil would rise - but no 'gays are he same as paedophiles'..... He's an absolute cretin and a complete ignorant fool, but you can't deny a man his right to air his beliefs (which it's worth pointing out do fall in line with his choice of religion - one that is prominent in this country)....

And for those stating not all gypsies are of the same view, I'm sure some aren't, but I know the majority are... It's their views/beliefs, I think it's a ridiculous belief system, but hey ho, each to their own.... I wish my wife shared some of the female gypsy views (but only so I'd never be expected to wash the pots).

Oh, and as for my laughing at the the slang word for gypsy being banned - I've never met a gypsy who would find that term derogatory.... I've played rugby with a group of brothers for many a year, it's a tag they're quite proud to wear.... They're not as touchy as some of the moral high grounders

Has anyone on here actually said he should be locked up for saying what he has?
If not then that is freedom of speech.

Freedom of speech isn't where you can say what you like and no-one is allowed to criticise you for it. Other people are allowed their free speech in saying he's an idiot whose views should have died a long time ago.

I'd wager a few have signed the petition

can you point out where i say discrimination, or said that you condoned anything?

The same right that ensures Fury can air his beliefs, is the same right that others are using to criticise him.


im sure the traveller community are glad you feel empowered to speak on their behalf, but it is irrelevant. Travellers views arent free from criticism, and your seemingly rampant desire to use that term isnt of any importance.

I find the level of hysteria amongst some people regarding Fury's comments quite funny to be honest. You can bet everyone that is voting for Fury to be kicked off the awards will also have voted for Donald Trump to be banned from entering England. A lot of silly lefties have nothing better to do with their time than start campaigns about people that don't fit their agenda. Whilst Fury's comments could be judged to be controversial, I don't see anything illegal being uttered. The people signing the petition will be quite happy to watch Shadow Chancellor John MCDonnell on our TV screens, despite the fact he called for IRA terrorists to be honoured, and you can bet none of them were signing a petition to get Abu Hamza off our streets, despite his inflammatory rantings and cost to the taxpayer of millions of pounds that could have been better spent elsewhere. I can't but help think it's a vocal minority of politically motivated people that kick up such a fuss over people like Fury. As long as Andy Murray doesn't win I will be quite happy. Whether he even has a personality is open to debate.

There are a lot of people who dont want to defend fury, dont agree with what he said, think what he said was bad but...

Those people however do want to mitigate what he said, do want play down its importance, do certainly want to jump in and criticise and denigrate anyone who does criticise him and find the fact he has been criticised ridiculous. They also start a lot of sentences with "i dont want to defend him, but...." and "I dont agree with his views, but...."

I see what you're driving at but surely anyone sharing those views wouldn't lack the balls to admit it, particularly through a medium where their real identity remains hidden?

I've got no issue with Fury holding whatever views he wants to hold.

I've got a major issue with news outlets giving him the opportunity to express those views that have absolutely nothing to do with his sport.

I'd have been interested to see what sort of reaction a Muslim preacher going on TV and proclaiming women to be inferior and in need of being subjugated by men, or the acceptance of homosexuality being a sign of the apocalypse would have got, I suspect many of those dismissing Fury as "a bit of a lad" would be frothing at the mouth.

If certain people weren't so quick to jump up and down and get all offended, they'd see I said right at the beginning I've no problem with people mocking and condemning Furys view - what I find pathetic is the things like petitions and the fact people actually wasted the time of our criminally under resourced Police Service by reporting Fury based on what he's said to the press.... Faix morally outraged Imbeciles of the highest order...

You keep using the word "faux". To quote the Princess Bride, "I do not think it means what you think it means".

Faux - as in 'imitiation, artificial, fake'.... It means what I think it means and how intended it to be meant....

Anyway, back on topic - the Sinfield interview with JD from Radio Leeds again shines Sinfield in a very good light.... All the talk of 'role models' - I'll be delighted if my young lad turns into a bloke as hard working, humble and genuinely decent as Sinfield comes across - obviously a lot of bias, but I'd have to put him up there as one of the best professionals and most decent fella I've ever seen in any sport, absolutely deserves every ounce of credit he's every had, and a damn site more too... Top top man!

Even the tabloids are now realising that this can happen: www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... nt-6996099 Multi-votes from landlines the key. If we call spend £3 on calls (20 calls) that should see him home.

Even the tabloids are now realising that this can happen: www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... nt-6996099 Multi-votes from landlines the key. If we call spend £3 on calls (20 calls) that should see him home.

Was thinking about the whole 'Bob Nudd' situation when the BBC 'lost' thousands of his votes to stop him winning it years ago and if the vote could now be manipulated with technology and had a thought... I've posted the below on the VT, but thought I'd stick it on here and see what people think....

Going off on a bit of a tangent here, but I wonder if it would be possible to use a 'dialler' type system as used in outbound call centres to create mass votes..... If so, would it be worth it for a sponsor or rich RL owner to pay for it? By my reckoning, 15p a vote, plus the cost of running a dialler for 1 night, I reckon £20k-ish would get you 100k votes.... £20k for prime time BBC advertising of RL and then all the associated national press coverage.... Hell, I'd say it would even be worth the RFL looking to fund it (if possible)...

I know it's cheating, but I was always taught 'if you're not cheating, you're not trying....'....

Seriously though, Sinfield would hate winning it that way - but it would be for the greater good of our game.