There's absolutely no reason why any player should be subject to abuse of this nature. Lambast them for their performance, if you really have to, because that's all you've paid to see. Anything else is frankly none of your business.

“And they couldn’t confront me. They stood in their thousands at the back of the crowd but would probably say nothing if I walked past them in the street. And that makes me feel stronger.”

...And that is why he should take it with a pinch of salt! Like "99%" of other RL players let his Rugby answer his knockers! I've seen some of the abuse team mates give each other on Myspace and facebook and it's brutal, Jeez grow a pair! Turn around and smile at the fans!
I remember several Wildcats fans singing chubby songs about Castleford's Michael Smith and he gave us all the world's smallest violin gesture.
Union players must are so straight!

It's a good topic of debate to be honest, you're going to get fans commenting about all manner of things, I think we've all been guilty at some stage, of even some chants that aren't true, Crabree "Gypo" Griffin "Teapot" Bird "Beefeater" it's where the line is drawn.
It's hard to chastise and control 5,000-10,000 fans and the fact, irony even, that a huge and tough quality Rugby player has claimed he fancies men will always get at least one youth calling him something or other. I think the more Thomas moans the more sledging he will recieve! Craig Smith just got on with the game and played it hard, not many ribbed him.

It's none of our business that's true but fans always look for an angle to put opposition off or indimidate, whether it's shouting "ooooooohhhh" when a kicker is about to kick a goal' if a player has taken drugs in the past, "Druggie!!!" or left their club in unfavourable terms, "Judas!!!"

It's always been evident in Rugby league, they mustn't be used to it in RU.

=#8000FFThe thing is fans know who they are but the club can't/won't do anything without "evidence", facebook statuses admitting it aren't enough it seems.

The bloke is pulling on the shirt and having a go in the toughest sport in the world, at 36 years of age. For that he deserves respect. His sexuality, colour , race etc is of no concern to me.

Really?

Here's the crux of the matter, maybe it should be a poll - Do you (as in anyone on here) think it's ok to shout homophobic abuse at a rugby league player? If he played for Wakefield (and who's to say one of our, or any other teams players, isn't gay), how would you react to others having a go at one of our own? Is it ok for players/officials/spectators to have to hide their sexuality because of backward thinking people?

None of this 'PC gone mad' rubbish - this is nothing to do with it - simple questions, simple answers?

I agree, it is.

When I was a kid, I remember the monkey chants coming from a large section of the crowd when Des Drummond played against us. Black players were a rarity in the game in those days, as indeed were black people in Wakefield. I wouldn't expect to see any of that kind of behaviour at a league game now. There may well be a good number of fans who are prejudiced against black players, but they know to keep their traps shut and not to shout abuse at games (well, the majority, at least). The same is true in this case. You may think it's banter, but who are you to judge?

The club can't control the reactions of such a large number of people, but the stewards can act to remove people they see/hear making homophobic remarks. It seems draconian to some now, but in the same period of time it's taken fans to realise black players are not monkeys, fans may realise they were bang out of order on this issue too.

Homophobic: a strong dislike and fear of homosexual people

If Gareth dropped the ball and somebody shouted "did you think it was a big block of soap Thomas," would that really be homophobic?

Maybe have a few vote options?

Homophobic abuse.
Homosexual related banter.
No gay remarks at all.

Spot on!

Do black people eat bananas?

Good point!

Sadly one remark would get you a night in the cell and the other not.

Does that make one right and the other not?

No it means both are insulting but with different consequences. I personally wouldn't want fans getting at me for recently coming out but I would expect it, understand it and take it from the terraces. Some forms of insults are more socially exceptable than others but I'd like to think our fans can stay away from the upper limits that nears abuse.

If that's the case, I think Ted may as well stand in the car park with a bag full of the Brough money and the 2 points from the Cas game and hand it over to the RFL guy when he arrives. Save us all the bother. Then the knuckleheads can sing and shout to their hearts' content too.

I've heard a rumour that a gang of Gay blokes are turning up tomorrow to shout sexually related remarks at all the straight guys out on the pitch. Is this acceptable?

happy men , in Wakefield! what utter nonsense

Did anyone stand near those girls behind the sticks at the Giants game? The girl from Outwood with the giant zoom on her Pentax?

Wrong; hate crime legislation covers incidents that are both racially motivated and homophobic in nature.

Nope it will be deemed bullying unless there's is actual assault or damage of property involved which makes it an homophobic hate crime.

Soap remarks will be judged as mocks as far as the Law is concerned.

Although the discussion has actually been dragged to a reasonably sensible discussion in the last few pages (well done guys!) I think we still missing the point.
The remarks to Thomas are not just a problem for Thomas, and I'm sure he is man enough to take some grief.
The point to Wakefield is that it creates an atmosphere of exclusion. The crowd appears to be full of bullies who identify and pick on those they see as different and react in an aggressive way.

What those people shouting may see as banter, the people in the crowd with young families, or are in fact gay, or have been bullied in the past, or are simply not happy with an atmosphere where it is not just about enjoying the game will start to stay away. And that, I assume, quite large group of people, not coming back to the ground would hurt the club badly.

We talk about the Wakefield family when we are supporting each other with issues like serious illness and unfortunately death, yet if we act like a the small number of Cas fans quoted in the original story, we are acting like a family of ASBO kids and people will stay away from that family.

You make some good points and i have to say "if" we have a problem then i would rather "remove" the problem than lose out to such people in the long run, the club and the game are far more important than a few "run offs" who feel they can abuse players and fans a like.

The problem is how do you define abuse/banter, some people have different values.

I think we're both partly right. There is a distinction between a hate incident and a hate crime, which is nicely explained [url=http://www.stonewall.org.uk/at_home/hate_crime_domestic_violence_and_criminal_law/2638.asp//urlhere.[/url

Either way, I hope that we prove today that what happened at Cas was the exception to the rule and that any idiots who do choose to taunt Thomas are dealt with by the people around them.

Let us hope that no one collects the ball in their in goal area, wouldn't like a BBC commentator to make a comment

'He has received it behind the posts'

even worse if someone makes a suggestion that Thomas is covering at the rear

Decent try from Thomas. Well worked and finished.

mortons fault