Tony Clubb at the disciplinary.

[Old Frightful]

Grade F : Unacceptable language based on national or ethnic origin.

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/58008/disciplinary--match-review-panel

[Tommygilf]

Tribunal presumably will set precedent?

[Cheshire Setter]

If found guilty he'd better be ready for the worst.   I don't for one minute think he's some sort of right-wing nut job, but we've got no choice but to make an example.   Hopefully he's been in touch with Savelio who will report back that he's accepted his apology.

[Hela Wigmen]

Eight was the ban for Carney, what seems quite a few years ago now. I have nothing to base it off of course because these cases are few and far between but you’ve got to look at double digits as a minimum. 

[Tommygilf]

You'd have to be very confident they had no evidence to have not issued a public apology by now

[Angelic Cynic]

More brilliant publicity for the sport,then.

Not content with squirrel grips,the elite players in Super League, dependent on money from the Sky broadcaster,who are just a bit big on 'Taking The Knee' - and the anti-racism stance,now gain even more bad publicity.

I am just amazed parents aren't ensuring their children boost the participation numbers,and families aren't queuing around the block to attend rugby league games.

Right now, at a time some soccer fans may be slightly disillusioned with their sport.

Rugby League never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity...

[DoubleD]

Grade F is 8+ matches. I’m not aware there’s a top limit but given there’s a precedence of 8 matches for Carney, the tribunal might find it difficult to justify more than that 

* if assumed guilty

[Tommygilf]

13 minutes ago, Angelic Cynic said:

More brilliant publicity for the sport,then.

Not content with squirrel grips,the elite players in Super League, dependent on money from the Sky broadcaster,who are just a bit big on 'Taking The Knee' - and the anti-racism stance,now gain even more bad publicity.

I am just amazed parents aren't ensuring their children boost the participation numbers,and families aren't queuing around the block to attend rugby league games.

Right now, at a time some soccer fans may be slightly disillusioned with their sport.

Rugby League never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity...

I think the "bringing the sport into disrepute angle" is one that aught to be explored

[Northern Eel]

2 hours ago, Old Frightful said:

Grade F : Unacceptable language based on national or ethnic origin.

https://www.rugby-league.com/article/58008/disciplinary--match-review-panel

In the absence of any visual or audio evidence from the broadcasters, it is presumably going to come down to whether any other player on the pitch heard it, and then the extent to which they are prepared to testify as to what they heard/saw.

In the absence of that evidence, one man's word against another would mean that one party would be particularly miffed at the outcome, whichever way it went.

[Cheshire Setter]

3 minutes ago, Northern Eel said:

In the absence of that evidence, one man's word against another would mean that one party would be particularly miffed at the outcome, whichever way it went.

Yes.

I think it would take a brave adjudicator to throw it out though  ... Does Clubb have anything controversial on his record already?   That may influence it.

[Mr Plow]

1 hour ago, Cheshire Setter said:

If found guilty he'd better be ready for the worst.   I don't for one minute think he's some sort of right-wing nut job, but we've got no choice but to make an example.   Hopefully he's been in touch with Savelio who will report back that he's accepted his apology.

It might have just been a stupid throw away comment. Even so, it’s unacceptable and I think the RFL will have to make an example with him especially after this weekend with the social media blackout 

[JohnM]

1 hour ago, Cheshire Setter said:

Yes.

I think it would take a brave adjudicator to throw it out though  ... Does Clubb have anything controversial on his record already?   That may influence it.

As I understand it, in a court of law, previous offences are not taken into account when deciding innocence or guilt.  However, they are or can be, I think, taken into account when determining sentence, as are mitigating factors such as remorse, guilty pleas etc.  

Given it seems to be Unacceptable language based on national or ethnic origin, then players need to careful addressing each other by their nationalities. 

Maybe the best thing to do is build a wicker man,  entice Chubb inside ...etc etc...

[BadlyOverdrawnBoy]

The worst punishment for a Wigan player is Sine Pie.

[Scubby]

Will be a very interesting judgement for a lot of reasons.

[Damien]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

As I understand it, in a court of law, previous offences are not taken into account when deciding innocence or guilt.  However, they are or can be, I think, taken into account when determining sentence, as are mitigating factors such as remorse, guilty pleas etc.  

Given it seems to be Unacceptable language based on national or ethnic origin, then players need to careful addressing each other by their nationalities. 

Maybe the best thing to do is build a wicker man,  entice Chubb inside ...etc etc...

Previous similar offences can certainly be taken into account in a court of law to show if someone would be predisposed to carry out an offence. In a one person's word against another type of case it can certainly make a difference. 

[JohnM]

38 minutes ago, Damien said:

Previous similar offences can certainly be taken into account in a court of law to show if someone would be predisposed to carry out an offence. In a one person's word against another type of case it can certainly make a difference. 

Thanks. Appreciated. I didn't know that. (just one of the myriad things I don't know) https://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/disclosure-previous-convictions-court-proceedings/

[John Drake]

Various posts removed.

If this thread goes the same way as the last one, it'll end up locked as well.

[Damien]

13 minutes ago, JohnM said:

Thanks. https://hub.unlock.org.uk/knowledgebase/disclosure-previous-convictions-court-proceedings/

On my jury service the prosecution solicitor pointed it out several times and it was a big part of his closing summary.

[David Dockhouse Host]

We discussed this over the weekend, short episode below.

 

 

 

 

 

[RigbyLuger]

When clubs don't employ those who have been banned/disciplined for racist/homophobic/any abuse, then we can say they are taking it more seriously than 13 seconds per game.

[Sports Prophet]

I would be keen to know how he has been charged.

In a legal sense, the prosecution determine if there is enough evidence to charge a citizen of a crime.

Does that mean in this instance there is enough evidence (more than the word of one person other than a referee) that he has been charged and needs to defend himself?

[fieldofclothofgold]

If Clubb is found to have made that comment he will probably get a severe punishment and deservedly so, but remember we've all heard people make racist comments and it probably wasn't the first time it was made on the playing field by other players 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Sports Prophet said:

I would be keen to know how he has been charged.

In a legal sense, the prosecution determine if there is enough evidence to charge a player.

Does that mean in this instance there is enough evidence (more than the word of one person other than a referee) that he has been charged and needs to defend himself?

It is a good point. I agree you'd expect for a charge to be passed then the prosecution would be at least quietly confident they had enough evidence. However I'm not sure whether the RFL disciplinary works like that so maybe the hold out for "not enough evidence" is still a viable, if cynical, strategy.

[Sports Prophet]

1 minute ago, Tommygilf said:

It is a good point. I agree you'd expect for a charge to be passed then the prosecution would be at least quietly confident they had enough evidence. However I'm not sure whether the RFL disciplinary works like that so maybe the hold out for "not enough evidence" is still a viable, if cynical, strategy.

Yeah, not sure what he is accused of saying and whether something was misheard or not.

You would think some suitable evidence is held in order to avoid an embarrassing “he said, no I didn’t and no-one else heard me” situation that could only draw a not guilty result and potentially play out terribly in the media.

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

14 hours ago, Northern Eel said:

In the absence of any visual or audio evidence from the broadcasters, it is presumably going to come down to whether any other player on the pitch heard it, and then the extent to which they are prepared to testify as to what they heard/saw.

In the absence of that evidence, one man's word against another would mean that one party would be particularly miffed at the outcome, whichever way it went.

Surely other players close by will of heard and it won’t be 1 person’s word against another. I’d of thought they’d be asked for confidential  statements or something like that.