I'd expect the minimum as he's apologised already, but if they let him off there'll be howls of double-standards from Cas after their apes gave Alfie abuse a couple of years ago.

Yes, Leeds must have been desperate to delay his ban until we got a match against a Championship side out of the way. Good job we've got the RFL in our pocket.

I see you're still bitter from Saturday.

Actually - that link never crossed my mind.
Not everyone on here is a swivel-eyed-single-minded loon who winges about loosing a game or constantly harps on about being "unfairly" relegated at every opportunity (however long ago it happened).

what does he say - black or bent?

either way - ban time!

I thought bent, but I'm no great lip-reader.

Can I ask where you've seen this charge as well?

I can't find anything for Zak Hardaker on the RFL disciplinary pages.

The RFL's post says "an independent tribunal" ruled on this - what is different between them & the normal discipline board though? You could imply that the latter aren't independent based on that...which would explain so many things.

Agreed.

I just found it on Sporting Life, but nothing on RFL site - Something fishy going on there, I reckon.

He said "flipping basket"

Saint Peacock would never say naughty words!!

I thought it was "Forking bean cans".

Maybe he was peckish and planning to eat a couple of tins of baked beans without warming them up first.

5 match ban

Worse punishment than for actual physical injury? Something wrong somewhere. And don't waste your breath accusing me of being omofobic, I am, end of.

It's spelled "homophobic" too.

Two ways to prove you're a moron in one sentence? Well done

Whilst I don't agree with his (zntryes') homophobic comment, I do agree with the underlying sentiment.

I have never understood haw calling someone a rude name carries a FAR harsher penalty than striking, head-shots, etc. - Dangerous and potentially career-ending stuff carries much the same penalties (5-6 matches).

It's not just in our sport. Luis Suarez was given 10 matches for "probably" using some form of racist language, in an argument that took place in Spanish, between a Uruguayan and a French-man, in England, despite no other member of either team hearing either of them call the other anything out of order.

Compare this to the regular 3-matches that are handed out for leg-breaking tackles (maybe 4-5 if it's EXTREMELY bad) and I wonder how they reach these conclusions?

I agree that racism has no place on the field (at least overt racism, as a recent study found that basically everybody is racist to a greater or lesser degree), but how the hell can calling someone a "fag" (as crass as that may be), carry a greater punishment than some of the physical assaults that we have seen in previous years?

Quite simply using homophobic or racist language is a 'hate crime' and it doesn't matter who it's aimed at either. Rugby league, as well as other sports, promote inclusivity and have to punish offences such as this. Now, Hardaker is a high profile player and whilst he may feel hard done to, and probably is no more homophobic than many others, he may learn from this. So might the others. If it's true that the ref is gay, then putting up with this sort of abuse (whether it was aimed at him or not it was within earshot so it makes no difference - his defence does sound a bit childish though "I was talking to someone else not you" ) will deter other gay men from taking up reffing or playing the game. And that is the real issue here.

I know that we don't need any history lessons here but gay people have suffered terrible abuse and discrimination in the recent past, and thankfully now society is becoming more tolerant. Let's hope that incidents such as this are stamped out and that gay people will feel that Rugby League is a game that will welcome their participation.

Comparing the severity of the punishment with dangerous or foul play is understandable, but comparing Luis Suarez's various misdemeanors is pointless. I doubt if he had been playing RL that he would still be playing the game. Head butting and breaking the nose of a ref at the age of 15 marked him out to be a particularly nasty psychopath. Because he wasn't banned sine die and because he is worth tens of millions to his employers he can now do literally anything and be safe in the knowledge that he will be supported. Cheating to win penalties is seen as a good thing. Those of us who love RL do so partly because of the absence of characters like that.

I applaud the RFL in this instance. They have done the right thing. Hopefully Zak will grow up and learn his lesson and become the great player that he is on the way to becoming.

zntyres, I understand and accept that wilfull ignorance and a lack of education are responsible for your attitude towards "omofobia," however, could you explain why myself and my lesbian partner are any less valuable RL fans than a self-confessed "omofobe?"

I have thicker skin than my life partner Terri, but Zak Hardaker's comments and comments from "omofobes" like you on messageboards and terraces will discourage her from attending matches with me and our adopted child. This will only harm RL in the long run through a smaller fanbase.

I also hope that ZN Tyres is an equal opportunities employer.

I'm not getting into name-calling (you've marked your card quite successfully yourself on that count). But if you take a look at the RFL's definitions in the disciplinary guidelines ([urlhttp://media.therfl.co.uk/docs/On%20Field%20Compliance%20Sentencing%20Guidelines%202014-Final.pdf[/url) then you might understand the punishment (but I won't hold my breath).

That last line is pure comedy genius

Well done Suzy

So it really is spelled: Homophobia, well bugger me.

Well said that man or woman. Massive overreaction to a bit of name calling and this is my view on most so called racist or homophobic incidents. I am prepared for the inevitable PC backlash that this opinion will create with those who actually believe that Zak Hardaker has committed a hate crime. Plainly ridiculous over exaggeration IMO. Too many are being tarred with either a racist or homophobic brush, to an extent that I believe actually harms the rightful efforts to stamp out true racism or homophobia.

How interesting that you should use racist terminology to express yourself.

Still, it's all harmless eh?

Racist terminology? In your opinion! Do you know enough about the origins of the phrase or are you just assuming you know? In which case I think you are being a tad racist!

How ironic!