Jack Smith is an incompetent referee who struggles to keep up with the game and would be reffing amateurs if it wasn't for the RFL using his story to get some media attention. With that in mind, I wouldn't be shocked at all if he's way wide of the mark in what he thinks he's heard.

But Justin Poore got banned when he played for Hull KR for swearing at his own team mate but James Child(?) thought it was aimed at him and still got banned. The RFL will take the refs word over anyone elses even with evidence supporting the player at times.

It was Mick Weyman to Roby iirc got banned but it was overturned on appeal.

Am I right that Carney has admitted to calling his colleague a c**t - but that the dispute is over whether he prefaced that with 'black' or 'fat?'

That being the case, it was right to send him off for foul and abusive language; the issue then becomes whether he made a racial slur - if he did, he'll be quite appropriately in hot water - if not, he'll be exonerated.

On that basis, I'm not sure what people think the ref has done wrong?

As someone who attended the game let me give a bit of context.
The game was very physical and can best be described as a typical Paul Rowley type performance.
After a few late hits on players it was getting out of control when Toronto scored and most players were in the same area as Bailey and Carney Bailey was giving a bit of sledging Carney reacted and said something in return what was said is down to debate.

The referee did not react, Bailey or his team mates didn't react, Salford players didn't react but the in goal judge reported what he heard/thought he heard that's about it.

If there is a racist comment then he deserves a long ban. The things that I question is did Bailey make a complaint and with the niggle in th game at the time why did all the players not pile in

Justin Carney charged Grade F Verbal abuse based on race/colour (EGP not available).

Surely they are going to ask Bailey?

I recall jake emmitt, being sent off for foul language in his time at leigh. He denied it the winger from batley also submitted a statement stating emmitt didnt say anything, rfl agreed with touch judge and banned him. Granted no inference of anything racial in that instance, but the rfl are likely to back their official in this.

That's the one! Knew it was a big Aussie

Justin Poore played for Wakefield.

And Hull KR.

i think it's about time someone took the RFL to the Court of Arbitration for Sport to give them a big slap in the way they are dealing with matters unfairly.
Their dealing with judiciary cases is bewildering to say the least and decisions made with very little actual evidence, or based on supposition and sometimes making a guilty decision on a player who could not have done anything physically different despite initial movelment being legitimate and not careless (I'm specifically thinking of the Watts/Gale incident) and that a player falling into another who is making a legitimate tackle if the falling player does not fall(or brought to the ground by another) especially since the arms are not raised in the slightest/by the tacklers side and at waist height at point of contact cannot be guilty of a 'head high'/careless challenge, that's utterly ridiculous. And in the same game the RFL/officials completely ignored McShane running in and ting the now kneeling Watts with the elbow to his head/supper shoulders and another Cas player at another point in the game elbowing a standing FC player in a tackle.
plenty more besides in the near past that leaves you scratching your head as to how the RFl ignore some things and then contrive to make something out of nothing elsewhere.
If their is more than one witness to what Carney actually said and are absolutely 100% sure that is what he said then you would have a case, however if Carney states that's not what he said (in terms of the racial aspect) then the RFL are on thin ice because it's not just against the RFL laws but it is a criminal offence too and as such Carney should be saying it's my word against another, you need to give absolute proof to prove me guilty, not me prove my innocense because that is not how UK law works and should not be the reverse for sports.

RFL rules can't contravene the law, but they arent they law. There isnt the same burden of proof. Its not even necessary for there to be a presumption of innocence (doping regs are an example of this)

When is the hearing for this?

Tuesday 2nd as part of that weeks disciplinary hearings

Came on here expecting someone to have commented on the panel's hearing.

Carney found guilty, banned for 8 games and £300 fine. He's already missed the Widnes game, so 7 games remaining.

Apparently the hearing went on for over 3 hours, with Carney pleading guilty to the charge of verbal abuse based on race/colour, but was contesting the severity of the charge.