I think it is a good statement and well written. He will take whatever punishment the RFL dish out (the wording in the statement implies there will be one) on the chin and we'll all move on.

The End.

Nope. I would have respected his honesty, and would have said so.



I would still expect him to receive a punishment though. There are consequences to all our actions and this is an important moment IMO, especially given links with Stonewall and the Tackle It project. The RFL cannot be seen to compromise on this and if they do so then their credibility will be up the spout as this story has made national news and will I am sure be followed up.

Did you read the RFL's own guidance on homophobia that I linked to in the other thread? If not then you probably need to as it was just the kind of reasoning you come out with that they are against. So you can call fans and journalists all you want, the RFL has laid out how things are, the law of the land has made it clear that homophobic abuse in the workplace is illegal, and therefore action is needed to make sure this doesn't happen again, regardless of whether it has happened before.

Not 'band-wagon jumping by opposition fans' per se. I am a Leeds fan, and other Leeds fans have spoken out on here too. Admittedly, yes, some probably are on here just to try and fan the flames, but a lot of what i have read from those critical of ZH (whether fans of Leeds or anyone else) have been fair enough really.

So if you call someone a fu**ing c**t as long as they are covered with hair, have a pretty large mouth and smell of fish it`s ok?

Well, that covers the ladies of Hull, but what about everyone else?

IMO everything has already been posted on these forums in regards to what Zak has said and to whom so I'm going to leave it there and let the RFL decide the outcome



Sledging is common place in all sports and players regularly dish it out freely and without any penalties or bans being handed out as a result when it is aimed at the opposition's players



I would however like to add that IMO any abusive or foul language whatsoever from players directed towards match day officials should be a sending off offense without hesitation as long as they are 100% certain it was aimed at them



The problem is how are the RFL going to be able to decide who the abuse was aimed at if there are more than one of the "alleged allegations inserted here" are on the field at the same time both on the opposing side and who was refereeing the match ?



Hypothetically speaking here, lets imagine a non televised SL game

IF George Stokes refereed "any SL side" against Hull KR and in the last minute Kris Welham <who's also got ginger hair> scores to win the game after stealing the ball and as a result an opposition player shouted out that he was a "Cheating Ginger c--t



Would that be deemed to be aimed at the referee or the player?

And should he be banned?

Really? Because what I read seemed to do just that.



He said he was saddened by how the comment was perceived, which implies the issue was with how it was perceived, not the fact that it is blatantly offensive.



He said people should think about the words they use as they can cause unintended offence. You don't call someone an effing fag unluss you intend to offend them.



He said certain words have powerful meanings other than those intended.



He doesn't really seem like he's owning what he has done. I'm not really convinced that he isn't cynically using Monaghan to diminish the severity of it either.

Exactly.

:2t6dlma8 No it doesnt, it implies he was saddened that his words were perceived as an attack on homosexuals.



:2t6dlma8When you call someone a d1ckhead you dont actually mean they are literally the tip of a penis. When you call someone an h0le you dont literally mean they are a hole in an ar5e



:2t6dlma8 and that is pretty obvious.



and that just seems mental, and disappointingly simply plays into the hands of those saying a big deal is being made about this because it is a mistake that needs rectifying, but because of sad rival supporters trying to score points.

His words were perceived as homophobic, which they were. There was really no need to say he was saddened by people's perception.





What's that got to do with the point I made though? He made a homophobic comment and his intention was to insult someone with it.





But again he just looks like he's wriggling.





I'm definitely not trying to score points mate. I wish Hardaker hadn't said it, he's not the sort of player I've ever had a problem with, he's generally well liked across the board and I'd prefer not to be criticising him right now.