I blame Maurice Lindsay.

I guess they don't play the Rfl respect message before games at the job?

Off with his ugly head.

And there is many definitions in the dictionary's of the word "Fag" which is what Hardaker was previously done for. However, none of them define it as an homosexual comment.

Really?

rlhttps://www.oed.com/view/Entry/67610?rskey

It was all in the moment, and doesn't mean that Wane actually thinks that the ref was actually copulating, nor that he is corrupt/biased, nor illegitimate. Wane should be able to control his mouth better, and probably will in future, but really, nothing to see here. FFS.

Like I say, I have no doubt that he didn't mean it and it was in the heat of the moment. Same as Hardaker. But neither were acceptable. I don't see what reason he has to "control his mouth" if there isn't a consequence fit his actions? I'm not talking the same as Hardaker, but it definitely needs addressing otherwise it basically means you can say what you like about anyone you like from the touchline.

You can't just use "heat of the moment" as an excuse for saying things that are totally unacceptable.

The vast majority of fans are closer than Wane was, should they be policed too? Surely the same rules must apply to all equally? Maybe we should all have a Siri enabled microphone that can constantly monitor what's being said and a swear box be passed around? And then, a chip for the thought police to monitor.

I'm no lover of Wane but his phrase is just an instantaneous exclamation about a situation, if he'd 'mouthed' "That's a fooking disgusting decision", would that be contrued as something to use against him, if not how does that differ to the alledged comment he's made?
Isn't actually the problem in part down to how the broadcaster is constantly looking for moments just like this after contentious decisions, we see it all the time, some people react in different ways, the likes of Wane will vent their frustration directly in words. In that scenario it ISN'T public just because sky have covered it and it isn't directed personally as he isn't addressing anyone just making an angered exclamation.

If this is to be punished and scrutenised and from what some have written it is then we as a society are completely screwed

When he's representing the club and the game, man needs to keep those kind of comments to himself. You can't just say what you like because "it was the heat of the moment."


It's not about being sensitive. It's about doing what is expected of you when you represent someone. Calling referees bent in public is just not acceptable.

The fans so not represent the club or the game in a professional capacity, so no they should not apply equally. It's a ridiculous conclusion to draw from what I've said.

Because there's a difference between the meaning of the word "bent" and the word "disgraceful". The latter could mean that the decision to go to the VR is poor and that he should have been able to make that on the field. It questions the ref's judgement. The former suggests that going to the video ref means the ref had it in for his team. It questions the ref's motives and integrity, and that should be a big deal.


When your attending a game in a professional capacity at a stadium with 40,000 people inside broadcast on national television, you are most certainly in public.

The broadcaster pays millions for the right to broadcast the game. That money has a huge influence on how much Wane gets paid in his role. If he doesn't like that they show his face, he shouldn't be a coach.


Not really. People need to realise where he gets his money from. Too few people seem to get this point. The game gets him his money. The game gets money from sponsors and broadcast rights. That comes from having a certain image. Questioning the ref's integrity, heat of the moment or not, is not an image that they will want.

The game has moved on. The game is more professional. It gets more money because of this. If you don't want the money and want to be saying those things, coach at amateur level for free.

My point is I know a lot of teachers.

And also that you're the only one still banging on about how a coach making a comment out loud but pretty clearly to himself, and who - purely by chance - was caught on camera, should face some form of punishment. You're seeking to impose YOUR lily-livered standards on the rest of us, the majority of whom can see it was a bit naughty, but also can understand the context and brush it off as a non-issue.

Not you. You think a highly emotive outburst should be taken literally. So, you're either a ridiculously delicate little flower who is genuinely offended, or you're a knee-jerk reactionist who truly believes facebook/twitter/instagram levels of outrage belong in the real world. Social media is, for the most, a stupid beast and should be kept at arm's length.

Just because YOU think it was 'totally unacceptable', and YOU bizarrely think Wane is genuinely accusing Bentham of being 'bent', and YOU think he should face punishment, doesn't mean your standards are applicable. Not offence, but shove yer offence up yer arris.