because the decision was made it was preferable these words werent used

Why not?

But your trying to make it as bad as the Castleford offence

At the end of the day it was a bit cheaky, bit rude, but nothing as shameful as the Jungle incident

No I'm not, homophobic abuse is worse, no question. What I'm saying is it is still against the 'Respect' Policy and as such the RFL should investigate in the interests of fairness.

because they are words which can carry a little more weight than others,

have you read it? i have posted the brochure for you, it does explain the difference

Are you a politician? You, I and everyone else can see that you are arguing against the obvious, most of society find these words offensive and as such as filtered on this site and not allowed to be breadcast before the watershed.

RFL would spend most of the working week investigating

I'm in the middle of it now. I have read the bit re: sexual orientation and this is more specific in this document, I agree. I had only ever seen the overarching 'Respect' Policy as quoted earlier in the thread. Perhaps the RFL could give this brochure to speccies so we have more guidance on what we can and cannot chant?
However, I still think the use of the abusive language already detailed is in breach of the 'Respect' policy.

Yet they are still allowed to be broadcast.

You want to compare the difference, look at the reaction to the utterances of Ron Atkinson, Carole thatcher, Michael ,jade goody, tim hardaway, beanie Mann who made homophobic or racist statements.

and then compare them with the hundreds, if not thousands of times a week b'a'stard and w'a'nker are uttered on british tv programmes with not one complaint

A nothing answer as usual

Try the 2 nd part again

If there are Homophobic , racist orsexist chants heard at the KC stadium , the LSV or the Stobart stadium

Who gets fined ?

Try the 2 nd bit


If there were Homophobic , Racist or sexist chants at the KC stadium , the LSV or the Stobart stadium

Who gets the fine ?

it depends on the situation, the fans of the club doing it, and the response of the club

if its the Hull FC fans, and at the KC, and the stewards challenge and eject those doing the chanting, the PA make an announcement regarding the chanting, and the club ban those ejected, and the club conduct a proper enquiry, nothing,

if its the hull fc fans, at the KC, and the stewards, PA, and Club do nothing, then as per the Castleford precedent a £40k fine with £20k suspended

with plenty in between

or as i originally said [iit depends on the situation, the fans of the club doing it, and the response of the club[/i

The reason for the fine is totally unjust. I'm not saying that the chanting wasn't wrong, but the fine is not for what happened but for what Cas apparently didn't do.

What was chanted has been heard at sporting venues up and down the country season after season. Until now, as far as I am aware, no club has ever been fined as a result of it.

No-one who was at that Cas game would have left the ground expecting repercussions - it's never been an issue. Go to any of the RL clubs where it's been chanted in the past and ask to see their investigation. There won't be one. Ask for evidence of what they did about it over and above what Cas did, there'll be nothing. Why? Because the RFL turned a blind eye or, it could be argued, even condoned it. It's not right, but it's how it was.

I've no problem if the RFL want to stamp something out, but give the clubs some notice first. You cannot go from that situation whereby the RFL sit back and do nothing year in, year out and then go to a £40k fine overnight. That's why it's wrong.

They made a rash and ill thought out decision, wanting to be seen to be PC and with it increased the negative publicity generated around this ten-fold.

in your opinion,if these chants were being made at the KC stadium by cas/leeds,hkr fans,whos accountable for the 40thou fine?