Can we start a thread, petition or hashtag campaign to get Stevo sacked for referring to the "incident" as "handbags" ?

Perhaps if he does it again after being suspended from work and promising to learn from it.

The blown kiss is odd but hardly offensive in its own right (I'm not suggesting you're saying it is, though others have) - it was seemingly in response to whatever Flanagan had said but we don't have the video in context.

Good point, if we're all doing Detailed Political Correctness Analysis.

* a fight is a fight. People get proper punched.
* If it's not a proper fight, a popular term has become "handbags" (the original term was either "handbags at dawn" or "handbags at 5 paces" but has become shortened to just "handbags").
* this is a direct reference to women, and takes it as read that the audience shares the mock view that
(a) women in general can't fight properly; and
(b) instead they typically just swing their handbags at each other , landing either no blows or ineffectual ones.

So Stevo saying that an incident was just "handbags" actually means that the fighting was ineffectual, like the proverbially incapable women, and not proper fighting like real men.

So Stevo referring to the conduct of players as "handbags" is sexist abuse in exactly the same was as calling a player a "puff" is homophobic abuse. Because both are deprecating in being intended to convey in an insulting manner that neither homosexual men nor women can fight properly, or that neither are posing any realistic physical threat, as compared to the implied prowess of the maker of the insult.

Does this mean we should get the message out say Stevo should follow Messrs. Keys and Gray?

He isnt responsible for people saying he said something he didnt. (which in this premise he didnt)

but that leap is unnecessary. There is no need to invent something he didnt say and then hold him responsible for the furore and approbrium levelled at him because of that mistake. If Hardaker didnt call Flanagan a Puff then it isnt hardaker who is responsible. It is those who incorrectly castigated him for something he didnt say.

there is no responsibility for the investigation. An investigation does not imply guilt. It simply says that we dont know what happens and we want to find out. Hardaker isnt responsible for people not knowing what happened. It may be the investigation finds him innocent, it may find him guilty. But he isnt responsible for someone thinking he did something wrong, then realising in fact, they were mistaken.

that works both ways. I dont want to see those things on an RL field. If Hardaker is guilty i would certainly support a strong punishment, as i did last time. However, i dont think it is wrong to question the motives of people who are so keen to cast judgement and so definite about punishment when the evidence by any reasonable measure, is pretty flimsy right now. You have to question why some are so keen to not only castigate him for something he may have done, but also castigate him for them being mistaken.

I was working on the assumption that he was found guilty of saying something homophobic. The blown kiss creates the context of the word. I think the RFL were right to send a message out last time, and even if he is shown to have not learned his lesson I still don't think it would merit half a season. You can break someone's jaw with a deliberate high shot and not get the equivalent of half a season. Zak may have pushed them into a corner if he has said it, which is why I think they'll judge that they can't be certain what was said. Gets everyone off the hook.

Congratulations guys the witch hunt we as successful. Not in the match report no complaints from the field, trial by social media. Hopefully we will all be eagle eyed for the up coming games and can try and find something another player has done. If hardaker doesn't get banned you get another bite at the cherry when we play Wigan.

Would be interested to know how it is reviewed. Balance of probability or beyond all reasonable doubt? No one to me can say 100% what hardaker said other than him and the people around him.

So why are you so upset he's being investigated? If he is investigated and is found no case to answer to, the case is put to bed. If he is found guilty, then he will be rightly punished for his actions. I don't see why some are so upset he is being investigated when they themselves don't know what he's said.

Players get charged regularly with incidents that the referee hasn't seen and the players haven't reported it. That's what the video review panel do.

Quote Ferdy="Ferdy"Congratulations guys the witch hunt we as successful. Not in the match report no complaints from the field, trial by social media. '" I don't remember Leeds fans being so outraged about trial by social media here: His gesture during a controversial and compelling game outraged RL fans who swamped message boards with complaints. One wrote: “Silly boy – it’s things like this that make people dislike him and it will do nothing to endear him to the RL public.” www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... z3CAbbyoPX Was that in the match report? Any complaints from the field?

Quote Ferdy="Ferdy"Congratulations guys the witch hunt we as successful. Not in the match report no complaints from the field, trial by social media. '" I don't remember Leeds fans being so outraged about trial by social media here: His gesture during a controversial and compelling game outraged RL fans who swamped message boards with complaints. One wrote: “Silly boy – it’s things like this that make people dislike him and it will do nothing to endear him to the RL public.” www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... z3CAbbyoPX Was that in the match report? Any complaints from the field?

I hope we have a thread this long calling for an England player to be banned for 8 games if dares to call an Australian player an "Aussie bar steward", or likewise an Aussie for daring to call an England player a "pommie t!!t". Abuse of any player based on sexuality, colour or even where you come from is defined in exactly the same way. The next time anyone from over the big hill decides to chant "Dirty Yorkshire bar steward" you are breaking the law as layed down by the RFL. It is every bit as bad as homophobic or racist chanting, not my opinion, the RFL's opinion.

Some are assuming that nothing has been included in the referees report but has this been confirmed anywhere? IIRC the last time it was not announced until later that the referee had indeed included it in his report.

Quote FearTheVee="FearTheVee"I don't remember Leeds fans being so outraged about trial by social media here: His gesture during a controversial and compelling game outraged RL fans who swamped message boards with complaints. One wrote: “Silly boy – it’s things like this that make people dislike him and it will do nothing to endear him to the RL public.” www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... z3CAbbyoPX Was that in the match report? Any complaints from the field?'" That's just a silly comparison. That was a V-sign directed [uat the fans[/u. Complaints from the field were irrelevant in that case and fans don't get a say in whats in the match report (well, they didn't used to anyway now its not so clear )

Quote FearTheVee="FearTheVee"I don't remember Leeds fans being so outraged about trial by social media here: His gesture during a controversial and compelling game outraged RL fans who swamped message boards with complaints. One wrote: “Silly boy – it’s things like this that make people dislike him and it will do nothing to endear him to the RL public.” www.mirror.co.uk/sport/rugby-lea ... z3CAbbyoPX Was that in the match report? Any complaints from the field?'" That's just a silly comparison. That was a V-sign directed [uat the fans[/u. Complaints from the field were irrelevant in that case and fans don't get a say in whats in the match report (well, they didn't used to anyway now its not so clear )