Do you not see the discrimination in the fact that nobody considers your hurt unless you are a certain race,gender, age etc.....

does that happen? in real life?

Yes, I told you before it does and linked to a report, but here's the details again...

[urlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Sophie_Lancaster[/url

Common sense anyone?

is being a Goth a race, gender, age, faith, sexual orientation or disability?

You've not answered Smokey's question though: did anybody consider the murdered girl 'not hurt' because she wasn't "a certain race,gender, age etc....."

which was your claim.

Quite correct , then again if ' common sense ' was prevelant in the RFL dealing with a few gobby teenagers at a RL match at Cas we wouldn't even be discussing this subject

' Common sense ' would have resulted in a warning of a fine if the abuse happened again and some occupants of the stand in question explaining to the perpetrators that if they did do it again and a fine was forthcoming , this would result in a ' slap ' being forthcoming to them

' Common sense ' , Whatever happened to it eh ?

why is warning them better than fining them?

Dont want to get into one of your cut and paste-athons where you argue black is white and up is down so i'll just say this, the rfls respect policy does state that 'NO FORM of discrimination will be tolerated' not certain types of discrimination are allowed and other arent. It also states 'harassment and aggresive behaviour will not be tolerated' so the rfls own respect policy states that these actions will not be tolerated. If no action is taken then that is tolerating these actions and thats the problem people have is the rfl pick and choose when they are going to apply the respect policy, which means you might as well not have one.

Pyeman, it's pointless trying to argue this case with Smokey.
He is right in many ways - nobody is claiming that the chanting at the Leeds-Saints game was as serious as homophobic chanting. However, he struggles to understand the Respect Policy. His examples of "race, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, or faith" are just [iexamples[/i of unacceptable chanting and not an exhaustive list. Even when you quote the Respect Policy to him which clearly states that ANY abusive or obscene language is against the Respect Policy, he just doesn't get it. When we discussed this issue some time ago, he even claimed that the words "b*****d" and "w****r" were not offensive and are acceptable in today's society!
He can put forward some good points, but at the end of the day diverts the issue when he is shown to be in the wrong.

edit: to make it a bit simpler for you,

regardless of what you believe to be discrimination, regardless of any of your attempts to try and confuse the issue in an inane attempt to defend your own club, regardless of the arguments introducing gingers, fatties etc, regardless of the strange argument being made that whilst no-one actually believes the offence Leeds or Hull committed being the same as the one Cas did they should be punished the same for some yet to be declared reason.

Here is what is expected of the clubs, here is the general principles as applicable to the clubs of the RFLs respect policy. Copied verbatim.


In order to uphold these values participants in the game of
Rugby League - players, parents, spectators, coaches, match
officials, other volunteers and administrators of all ages - should:

• Discourage all instances of unsporting behaviour, foul or
illegal play, or acts of violence, both on and off the field.

• Respect the rights, dignity and worth of every person
regardless of their age, ethnic origin, gender, special needs,
including learning and physical disabilities, class or social
background, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, marital
status, pregnancy, colour or political persuasion.

• Accept the moral and legal responsibility to implement
procedures to provide a duty of care for children, safeguard
their wellbeing and protect them from abuse and poor
practice

• Condemn the use of recreational and performance enhancing
drugs and doping practices; their use endangers
the health of players and is contrary to the concept of
fair play.


now this is an exhaustive list of the principles of what is expected of the clubs.

Nowhere here does it mention anything regarding general abuse, or general 'discrimination' it mentions specifically, clearly exhaustively what is expected of the clubs. Cas failed to do this, there is no argument to defend them or lump other clubs in with them.

Smokey, you are digging your hole deeper. I refer you to the e.g element of your quote. This list is not exhaustive but just gives [iexamples[/i of discrimination that can be referred to the RFL.
This chanting is now under investigation by the RFL, so it must have been refered to them and they must feel an investigation is appropriate.

i have simplified it above for you.

I have given you an exhaustive list of what the RFL expect from clubs and by extension their supporters. They were also given advice of what to do should their be an incident. Cas didnt do it.

I don't think anyone (certainly not me) is arguing that Cas managed the chanting well and did not deserve punishment.
Again, as your arguments are pulled to pieces, you simply try to change the point you are making. You have also 'edited out' parts of your post that actually contradict your own argument when highlighted (unfortunately for you it does not edit it in my quote!), which just makes you look daft.

Dont need it simplified at all smokey, when the rfl state 'no form of discrimination will be tolerated' that means no form of discrimination will be tolerated. It will never mean we tolerate some forms of discrimination but not others, in fact no forms couldnt be further from some forms.

Obviously the rfl see these actions as a case for breaching the respect policy or they wouldnt have launched an investigation.

Anyway smokey like i said i cant be bothered to argue with you for page after page with you twisting every fact and ignoring anything that doesnt suit your argument.

Night smokey.

quite clearly you do.....

and im sure when the RFL hand out the punishment set down for the offence Leeds and Hull may be found guilty of, and it totals £150, we will see the bitching and whining we have already seen from you repeated.

Because you cant understand a quite clear distinction that the RFL, and numerous people have spelled out in baby terms for you.

you are either a complete idiot or wilfully misunderstanding to try and defend the indefensible. Either way, everyone bar some Cas fans and those with an agenda against the RFL saw your nonsense quite early on. And everybody will happily go about their business, the RFL have made a fantastic statement against homophobia, we have received some great press and you can carry on moaning about nonexistant injustices. Enjoy

Resorting to insults already smokey? always a clear sign you know your wrong (and as always petrified to admit it).

I have not bitched or moaned about anything, all i have done i state what the rfls respect policy says and say that they should enforce it fairly and justly (which any decent rl fan without an agenda should want) and just because it doesnt fit in with your usual petty castleford hating agenda you've started acting like a petulant child (not for the first time). You on the other hand have decided to present part of the respect policy, whilst ignoring other parts as it suits your argument more. In a similar way to you deciding which offences commited under the respect policy should and shouldnt be punished, completley ignoring the fact that the respect policy CLEARLY states NO FORM of discrimination will be tolerated. i wont childishly claim that you cant understand it (as you would do) for i know your just choosing to ignore it as you have a a pathetic agenda.

I havent stated that the rfl were wrong to act either (so where you get the idea i'm defending anything is a mystery, well its not really you just made it up along with the majority of your post), i have questioned the severity of the punishment (like many others from nearly all clubs,who according to you must have an anti rfl agenda if they dont agree with you, the idea that someone should not share your opinion seems to result you trying to smear and steroetype people, as usual) as it is far greater than much worse offences that have happened in the past such as players being assualted by fans.

Would you like to claim i have said anything else i havent or are you done? Maybe a few more childish insults to let everyone know that you realised your wrong and afraid to admit it? or perhaps your usual trick of repeating the same nonesense over and over again till everyone gets bored?

Are they going to investigate everytime a RL crowd sings and abusive song of any nature? Geez I hope they've got a big team of staff on this!

No , they will quickly realise that they have over reacted and made a rod for their own back and quietly let it slip below the radar

Much the same as they did with , the Quins admin , the W1g$n Salary cap and the Celtic Visa mess

Hopefully in future they will actually get somebody with a modicum of common sense to check out what they are going to do and all the possible ramifications

Given that your stated preferred 'common sense' solution to homophobic chanting is fighting on the terraces, I think we can safely ignore your future comments.

Yes they should. Abuse is abuse. How people can say it's worse if the abuse is restricted to certain subjects is unvelievable. Who is anyone to say what affects people. It's discrimination to only make a stand for certain players feelings and not others.

Good point

How much is the fine for that ? , probably much less than 40 grand

you have still failed to read it properly. its ridiculous, honestly. How can you not see it. It literally tells you the clubs responsibilities, and it sets down the penalties for the offences, and it explains that homophobia is one of a few forms of abuse that will be treated different. Yet even though it is written in black and white for you, you refuse to believe and try and justify your idiotic notion on some strange technicality that isnt actually there.

so, you dont think the RFL were wrong, but you think they were wrong. Can we include you in Nottinghamtigers crew, who for some reason believe that even though you dont believe the offences at Leeds and Hull were as serious as those at Cas, and even though the RFL respect policy sanctions treat them differently, that the RFL should treat the Leeds and Hull offences the same as those at Cas because of some non-existent parallel?

indeed, cos when i called my nephew a silly banana when he bumped his knee, it was exactly the same as Ron Atkinson calling Marcel Desailly a lazy , after all abuse is abuse and who is anyone to say what affects people.