Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:20 pm  

Clearwing wrote:

Only realistic answer to that is that Kath must have ordered him to.

Hadn't thought of that but it's the only answer that makes sense.

Presumably she was a bit sensitive to the witch hunt comment.

Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:35 pm  

hetherington was spot on. had it been a wigan, saints or other player clubs player you can be sure they would have commented on what was a farcical situation too.

Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:45 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Lets say what GH said was true. Surely that needs to be out in the open. Surely the club cannot be complicit in hiding those actions? Surely, if what he said was true, there is a duty to Hardaker and to the game to make sure that people are aware the RFL are behaving like this?

The RFL publicly accused a player of making a homophobic comment, left him hanging there for weeks, and then decided well there isnt actually any evidence for it. That isnt good enough, the RFL have failed there already (and you would think they would avoid drawing attention to that fact but this is Nigel Woods RFL we are talking about) if the Ref did subsequently change his match report, that needs investigating, if the RFL did not pursue this case with the same vigour and tools they pursue others that also needs investigating.

I think people trivialise a little bit what GH said because it was prefaced with such a confrontational term as 'witch hunt', but i dont think it is a small thing at all that the Chief Exec of one of the leading clubs legitimately feels, and has at least some evidence that, a referee changed a match report to include an offence he originally stated he hadnt seen. That really is a huge accusation and not one that should either be made or taken lightly.

I also think it makes the RFL, who publicly accused a player of homophobia with no evidence, look a bit hypocritical to then charge a CE for making an accusation at them. If it was ok for the RFL to tacitly make an accusation, then its ok for GH to tacitly make one against them.

Except they didn't accuse Hardaker of making (another) homophobic comment. They announced they were investigating a complaint about Hardaker making a(nother) homophobic comment. The RFL accused Hardaker of nothing

Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 6:50 pm  

Guilty as charged.

Pressure getting to him?

Perhaps it's the end of an era for the club in more ways than one?

Pay the fine GH and lift yer game.

Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:04 pm  

tad rhino wrote:

hetherington was spot on. had it been a wigan, saints or other player clubs player you can be sure they would have commented on what was a farcical situation too.

I think you are right, more and more comment should come from other clubs on how the game is mis run by the RFL, its seems the RFL and its officials are immune from any form of criticism and are being a dictatorship in just handing out fines with little chance of successful appeal.

Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:26 pm  

Judder Man wrote:

I think you are right, more and more comment should come from other clubs on how the game is mis run by the RFL, its seems the RFL and its officials are immune from any form of criticism and are being a dictatorship in just handing out fines with little chance of successful appeal.

I must be missing summat here.

The RFL administer the game on behalf of and with the consent of the Clubs' chairmen/owners. The RFL are not some kind of mythical deity that was spirited down to earth to dictate to the men with money.

It is well within the remit and powers of club chairmen/owners to change virtually whatever they want to, all that is required is concensus

Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:38 pm  

The only issue I have is why its taken them so long to come for GH. I had no problem with him coming out with the comment, and I also bet he knew he'd get fined as a result. There won't be any 'fight' - he'll just pay the fine.

Everyone knows the rules on this sort of thing - are coaches ever shocked when they get fined for suggesting refs are rubbish? They say it anyway, perhaps mainly in the hope that changes are made, which may have been GH's aim.

Re: GH Charged : Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:57 pm  

BrisbaneRhino wrote:

The only issue I have is why its taken them so long to come for GH. I had no problem with him coming out with the comment, and I also bet he knew he'd get fined as a result. There won't be any 'fight' - he'll just pay the fine.

Everyone knows the rules on this sort of thing - are coaches ever shocked when they get fined for suggesting refs are rubbish? They say it anyway, perhaps mainly in the hope that changes are made, which may have been GH's aim.

The investigation into Hardaker's comments were ongoing. IMO GHs comments inflamed the situation even worse than it was. If the RFL had charged GH then the Leeds fans probably would have gone total scouse and started printing t shirts.

The RFL merely made a statement saying they weren't going to respond to an ongoing investigation. They have now concluded that investigation and are going forward with their case against GH.

Re: GH Charged : Wed Sep 24, 2014 12:23 am  

Come on, people need to wake up and start smelling what they're shovelling in.

Had Leeds and GH kept quiet and let the RFL come to their conclusion then Hardaker would've got banned because it'd give good headlines that RL "doesn't tolerate homophobia" and "is a family and all inclusive sport."

It's what happened before when James Child CLEARLY didn't hear Hardaker say anything as he took F**K all action on the field. Yet a few days later thought it was aimed at him.

Basically the RFL started an investigation based on the Vine that was doing the rounds on the Internet. Fair do's.....problem is they made public they were launching an investigation based solely on that piece of 'evidence' (Silverwood clearly didn't hear anything as they wouldn't later reach a "lack of evidence" conculsion). Granted they didn't name Hardaker publicly but it was as clear as day everyone knew what it was about regardless. Why did they make it public based on so little and flimsy evidence? To quell the baying mob obviously.

Like I said, they'd have reached a guilty verdict if it wasn't for GH taking a stand, that meant the RFL had to come up with concrete evidence with the public spotlight on them and once they realise the delayed report of Silverwood wasn't enough/could be picked apart by Leeds then they could only say "no charge".

Re: GH Charged : Wed Sep 24, 2014 2:26 am  

A 3 week investigation to come up with zilch? I think they were stalling in the hope it would go away.
Anyway is that lip-reader still knocking about? That tirade from Flower towards Ferres might be worth a look. In the interest of the family game of course!