Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 402

Try our Fantastic 5-Issue Bundle Offer! For just £18, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:
The Play-offs Issue - pictured (out 12 Sept) – Covering the climax of the Super League & Championship seasons
The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final excitement from both sides of the world plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

Castleford hit with pretty big fine


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
148 replies to this topic

#141 l'angelo mysterioso

l'angelo mysterioso
  • Coach
  • 40,883 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 07:16 AM

QUOTE (BringBacktheBiff @ Jun 29 2010, 09:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
No im still here, iv explained my comments so dont feel the need to further justify to those of you too stupid to see my point

and your too bigoted to see anyone elses
WELCOME TO THE ROYSTON VASEY SUPER LEAGUE 2015
Keeping it local

#142 sam

sam
  • Coach
  • 7,557 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 08:04 AM

QUOTE (Bulletproof @ Jun 30 2010, 01:39 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
How many similar punishments do you think the sport could stomach before it goes under?


quite a few.

foxes or poor people?

#143 RP London

RP London
  • Coach
  • 12,678 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 08:40 AM

QUOTE (Derwent @ Jun 29 2010, 10:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
From the report on the BBC website

http://news.bbc.co.u...ord/8772418.stm

the charges against the club were not that there was chanting, they were that the club failed to take its best endeavours to prevent or stop any chanting

you highlighted prevent.. and ignored "or stop" which was the other part of the judgment..

#144 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,910 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 08:46 AM

QUOTE (RP London @ Jun 30 2010, 09:40 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
you highlighted prevent.. and ignored "or stop" which was the other part of the judgment..


I'm not saying that they shouldn't have been charged with failing to stop it, just that failing to prevent it is a nonsense charge.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#145 Dave T

Dave T
  • Coach
  • 14,758 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 09:37 AM

QUOTE (Derwent @ Jun 30 2010, 09:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm not saying that they shouldn't have been charged with failing to stop it, just that failing to prevent it is a nonsense charge.
Again, you are ignoring other words around the word prevent.

It says 'best endeavours to prevent'. Did they make an announcement before the game. Do they do that at every game so that it becomes engrained? Do they have the Respect policy in the matchday programme?
Personally I would suspect that they would have these things in place, especailly after the issues last year, but the Judge and RFL clearly feel that they didn't do enough. I'm sure recommendations will be made, and that will be interesting.


#146 RP London

RP London
  • Coach
  • 12,678 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 09:38 AM

QUOTE (Derwent @ Jun 30 2010, 09:46 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I'm not saying that they shouldn't have been charged with failing to stop it, just that failing to prevent it is a nonsense charge.

but it was only part of the charge and if they didnt do the bits that the RFL tell them they should to help prevent it (no matter how small and stupid they may think it is) then they open themselves up for this kind of thing.. if they had done everything they could ad this happened then the RFL would have a "we did everything you asked us to but it was usless" argument thrown at them.. they didnt by the sounds of things so tough..

then the rest of the charge was stopping it..

but also they have failed to prevent another onehappening by not following up on this one properly..

#147 Derwent

Derwent
  • Coach
  • 7,910 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 09:50 AM

QUOTE (RP London @ Jun 30 2010, 10:38 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
but it was only part of the charge and if they didnt do the bits that the RFL tell them they should to help prevent it (no matter how small and stupid they may think it is) then they open themselves up for this kind of thing.. if they had done everything they could ad this happened then the RFL would have a "we did everything you asked us to but it was usless" argument thrown at them.. they didnt by the sounds of things so tough..


I suspect that Castleford probably do as much as any other club to prevent it - tannoy announcements, warnings in the match programme etc. I have not seen any club do anything other than those kind of things.

The point is that if what they do is not enough then virtually every club is guilty of not doing enough to prevent it under this judgement.

It has implications for all clubs, not just Castleford.

Workington Town. Then. Now. Always.


#148 Stew R

Stew R
  • Coach
  • 211 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 09:51 AM

QUOTE (Dave T @ Jun 29 2010, 11:29 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If I'm honest, I haven't got a clue whether 40k (20k) is too high or not. I would suspect the fact that they fined them 40k (20k) last year has meant they had their hands tied as they didn't want to suggest this is a lesser offence to last year's crowd trouble.

ALSO
Do you not think if there hadn't been the recent trouble the fine would have have been as high.
As with the courts once found guilty past offences can be taken into account when sentencing. Do you not think this had a little to do with the size of the fine?
I think the RFL may have a growing concern about what is going on with Cas fans in general and the moves by the club to combat this whether it be throwing bottles or homophobic abuse.

Edited by Stew R, 30 June 2010 - 09:57 AM.

"Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

"The quality of a person's life is in direct proportion to their commitment to excellence, regardless of their chosen field of endeavor."

#149 RP London

RP London
  • Coach
  • 12,678 posts

Posted 30 June 2010 - 10:11 AM

QUOTE (Derwent @ Jun 30 2010, 10:50 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I suspect that Castleford probably do as much as any other club to prevent it - tannoy announcements, warnings in the match programme etc. I have not seen any club do anything other than those kind of things.

The point is that if what they do is not enough then virtually every club is guilty of not doing enough to prevent it under this judgement.

It has implications for all clubs, not just Castleford.

as i say if they had done everything asked of them and it was not enough then they have the defence and the RFL would have to look at itself and what it asks clubs to do.. had they done everything asked of them that day or had someone forgotten/not been bothered.. that is what the investigation would be asking and it sound as though maybe they didnt.. if other clubs dont do it then they are liable for th same if the same happens so i would suggest they start going by the letter ofthe rfl..

also they failed to invesitgate poperly afterwards etc.. they failed on a lot of fronts by the sound of the judgment.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users