8 Games

[Jim Prendle]

Just now, Tommygilf said:

Not got strong feelings on that tbh, but I would note that either course of action carries with it a PR responsibility.

You need to give some serious thought as to what making an example of him would achieve though.

You could ban him for three years, and send him to live in a hut in Outer Mongolia, but it won’t have the effect you would probably like.

It might put an end to racist comments, but it wouldn’t do a great deal towards putting an end to racism.

Racism won’t be ended in a few minutes by the judicious use of long bans in the sporting arena. It will be ended in the long term by education and greater integration.

[hunsletgreenandgold]

15 minutes ago, Damien said:

A pretty good statement that answers plenty of questions in my opinion. I did think that the character statements were probably provided by Leuluai and Lam. If they are happy enough and comfortable enough to testify that Clubb is not racist then that is good enough for me.

Yeah I think that statement has helped understand things and as I said earlier (pages and pages ago) this is the right outcome. 

Nb. Club/Clubb was used 19 times in that statement. 

[Tommygilf]

Just now, Jim Prendle said:

You need to give some serious thought as to what making an example of him would achieve though.

You could ban him for three years, and send him to live in a hut in Outer Mongolia, but it won’t have the effect you would probably like.

It might put an end to racist comments, but it wouldn’t do a great deal towards putting an end to racism.

Racism won’t be ended in a few minutes by the judicious use of long bans in the sporting arena. It will be ended in the long term by education and greater integration.

Of course this won't end racism.

But in turn, not setting an example will have consequences is showing how committed the sport is to taking the problem seriously.

[JohnM]

3 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Of course this won't end racism.

But in turn, not setting an example will have consequences is showing how committed the sport is to taking the problem seriously.

That is exactly what this verdict, punishment and Wigan statement had done. 

.. And that's another one gone.. 

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Clogiron said:

Agree entirely with your points but would again ask does anyone think the game has come out of this looking good? As soon as the incident happened, it was a car crash, in the prevailing circumstances it couldn't have been worse if Clubb had bitten his ear off whilst wearing a Prince Phillip mask, the way it has been managed by all has been shocking, bringing the game into disrepute, which it has, should have been the charge levied and considered in the punishment. It will take a long time for the games reputation to recover from this as once again it provides the ammunition for it's detractors to fire at it.

I don't think we should judge RL harsher than we would other sports. 

A case last year on this saw an RU player get 8 matches, and we have seen shorter bans in football.

I think an 8 match ban shows this is serious - far better than the 5 for Hardaker, and 5 for Makinson.

A player made a racist comment on the Thursday, by the Tuesday (well in advance of the next game) he has been charged and punished. I don't like the panel's statement, but that is a common thing in RL.

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, JohnM said:

That is exactly what this verdict, punishment and Wigan statement had done. 

.. And that's another one gone.. 

You'd hope so anyway, but its not for 1 person to decide

[Jim Prendle]

6 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Of course this won't end racism.

But in turn, not setting an example will have consequences is showing how committed the sport is to taking the problem seriously.

The sport has to do far more than severely punish one individual to prove it is serious about tackling racism.

I don’t honestly think that giving Clubb an even harsher sentence would have told the public anything. It may even have given the impression that RL is tackling racism by waiting for examples to pop up and then being showy about how it deals with them.

In my opinion this has been dealt with quickly, correctly and with an appropriate sanction resulting from it. 
 

 

[EagleEyePie]

An employee at a German football club was sacked for a racist message today. Most of us would be sacked if we were found to have racially abused someone in the workplace. I'm not saying Clubb should be sacked, but there's a vast gulf between 2 weeks wages and some education and losing your job.

In terms of making Clubb undergo further education, it seems some clubs have already made their players do equality and diversity education. Warrington did it in August last year. I think it was mentioned on Sky that Wakefield had also done it and that it was offered to all clubs. So if that's the case - why didn't Wigan do it. Or if they did, what do they hope to gain from making Clubb re-do it if it made no difference the first time, even with  13 second reminder and banners around the stadium pointing out that racism isn't acceptable.

For whatever reason players seem to be treated differently. I've not doubt that if a non playing or coaching staff member said something like that they would no longer be in employment.

Plus, if Clubb is indeed not racist, what use is this education going to be? How much education does a non racist person need to understand that you can't racially abuse someone?

[fighting irish]

13 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Honestly then, what point have you made? Because all else I've seen is deflective points about the equivalence of being called a fat this or that, which if I'm honest don't really warrant the time of day as a debating position in 2021. I had read, in a newspaper article (a link to which appeared  on this website) that the term Polynesian is considered derogatory by pacific islanders when used about them by Australians in Australia. I just asked if Tony Clubb  was aware of that. That is the point.

That is a fundamentally incorrect understanding of the language. The term you just used for Travellers is an offensive one regardless of context. I know full well, what the term means, please don't try to patronise me. I did not mention any context what so ever so you're last comment here is meaningless. 

By contrast, the word Polynesian is perfectly fine in the majority of daily discourse anywhere in the world to refer to the islands it describes or the ethno-linguistic group of cultures and peoples that live and descend from there. Indeed in Australia, it is actually one of the proper terms for those people/places. That was my belief Tommy, until I read the newspaper article mentioned above. If the article has any credence, then calling Savelio  a ''polynesian'' is tantamount to calling me a pikie.

I hope that removes the confusion for you. I am not confused. 

Its not a perjorative term in and of itself anywhere in the world, please move on from this. See the references above to the newspaper article, (the source and motivation for my enquiry).

Only by using the words around it in an obviously derogatory manner did Clubb made it a perjorative. (Same again!)

Guilty of making a comment based on a players ethnicity or race. Cleared that up for you. I don't need you, to clear anything up for me. I'm quite clear about what Clubb said and about the judges conclusions.

Him not being judged to be generally a racist person (which is fine for me) doesn't lesson the racism of the comment. It would though have a significant impact on his future and would indeed have changed my opinion of him. 

I didn't conclude he is a racist at all, you've mixed up somewhere there. Come off it Tommy?

I stated on numerous occasions that I judged his comment to be a racist one - unequivocally - which is different from stating Mr Clubb is a racist, and was in fact a judgement vindicated by the judgement of the disciplinary tribunal.  Wriggle on.

 

[Jim Prendle]

8 minutes ago, EagleEyePie said:

An employee at a German football club was sacked for a racist message today. Most of us would be sacked if we were found to have racially abused someone in the workplace. I'm not saying Clubb should be sacked, but there's a vast gulf between 2 weeks wages and some education and losing your job.

In terms of making Clubb undergo further education, it seems some clubs have already made their players do equality and diversity education. Warrington did it in August last year. I think it was mentioned on Sky that Wakefield had also done it and that it was offered to all clubs. So if that's the case - why didn't Wigan do it. Or if they did, what do they hope to gain from making Clubb re-do it if it made no difference the first time, even with  13 second reminder and banners around the stadium pointing out that racism isn't acceptable.

For whatever reason players seem to be treated differently. I've not doubt that if a non playing or coaching staff member said something like that they would no longer be in employment.

Plus, if Clubb is indeed not racist, what use is this education going to be? How much education does a non racist person need to understand that you can't racially abuse someone?

Maybe, if he isn’t a racist, his education needs are more along the lines of how to control his anger and how it manifests itself.

What will not help is even more righteous outrage. I am absolutely certain that yelling “Don’t be a racist” at someone 24 hours a day will have zero effect on their inherent levels of racism. 

[Hela Wigmen]

17 minutes ago, EagleEyePie said:

An employee at a German football club was sacked for a racist message today. Most of us would be sacked if we were found to have racially abused someone in the workplace. I'm not saying Clubb should be sacked, but there's a vast gulf between 2 weeks wages and some education and losing your job.

In terms of making Clubb undergo further education, it seems some clubs have already made their players do equality and diversity education. Warrington did it in August last year. I think it was mentioned on Sky that Wakefield had also done it and that it was offered to all clubs. So if that's the case - why didn't Wigan do it. Or if they did, what do they hope to gain from making Clubb re-do it if it made no difference the first time, even with  13 second reminder and banners around the stadium pointing out that racism isn't acceptable.

For whatever reason players seem to be treated differently. I've not doubt that if a non playing or coaching staff member said something like that they would no longer be in employment.

Plus, if Clubb is indeed not racist, what use is this education going to be? How much education does a non racist person need to understand that you can't racially abuse someone?

Notts County’s assistant manager was sacked last week for a racist comment, too. 

[RP London]

34 minutes ago, Davo5 said:

I agree,but the fact Clubb hasn’t yet been publicly stoned in Wigan town centre will continue to rankle some.

I've edited above just to be accurate.. 

[Hela Wigmen]

I’ve no issue with Wigan keeping hold of Clubb, they’ve been quite consistent at offering players second chances, but after that, there’s no public apology from the guilty party. 

[Tommygilf]

9 minutes ago, Jim Prendle said:

The sport has to do far more than severely punish one individual to prove it is serious about tackling racism.

I don’t honestly think that giving Clubb an even harsher sentence would have told the public anything. It may even have given the impression that RL is tackling racism by waiting for examples to pop up and then being showy about how it deals with them.

In my opinion this has been dealt with quickly, correctly and with an appropriate sanction resulting from it. 

I don't necessarily disagree out of hand with your last point. That's where the rest of the post you cut from before comes in.

Which sounds like a sport taking talckling racism within it seriously most?

"8 game ban for racist comment to opponent"

"Minimum sanction applied for racist comment to opponent"

From a purely PR perspective the latter sounds pretty dreadful, yet it is what has been proffered to some because of the sentence being the minimum possible, given the charge - its as factually correct as the first point. A harsher sentence need only be 1 match or a nominally larger fine, but that would alleviate the latter point fron being bandied about - far better from a PR perspective.

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I don't necessarily disagree out of hand with your last point. That's where the rest of the post you cut from before comes in.

Which sounds like a sport taking talckling racism within it seriously most?

"8 game ban for racist comment to opponent"

"Minimum sanction applied for racist comment to opponent"

From a purely PR perspective the latter sounds pretty dreadful, yet it is what has been proffered to some because of the sentence being the minimum possible, given the charge - its as factually correct as the first point. A harsher sentence need only be 1 match or a nominally larger fine, but that would alleviate the latter point fron being bandied about - far better from a PR perspective.

The full line is as follows:

The RFL’s Match Review Panel had considered the incident a Grade F offence – the most severe grading available and one which carries a minimum punishment of eight matches. 

I think this makes it perfectly clear that they have taken it seriously and that it has been categorised as severely as possible. They have also explained why the ban is 8 games and how they came to their decision. I don't really see the big issue from a PR perspective.

[Tommygilf]

2 minutes ago, Damien said:

The full line is as follows:

The RFL’s Match Review Panel had considered the incident a Grade F offence – the most severe grading available and one which carries a minimum punishment of eight matches. 

I think this makes it perfectly clear that they have taken it seriously and that it has been categorised as severely as possible. They have also explained why the ban is 8 games and how they came to their decision. I don't really see the big issue from a PR perspective.

Its a potential issue that I've only seen a few sources pick up on, but it is still the minimum.

They couldn't have given him less is the potential PR point I think - certainly the potential headline.

[gingerjon]

Brett Hodgson being reported as saying, in his personal view, that the punishment is too lenient.

But then he's just a keyboard warrior with no understanding of what happens in the heat of the moment.

[Damien]

4 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

Its a potential issue that I've only seen a few sources pick up on, but it is still the minimum.

They couldn't have given him less is the potential PR point I think - certainly the potential headline.

So we have a minimum but cant use it in case it looks bad? Under what circumstances would anyone get the minimum or should it just not be allowed as a punishment? That seems daft.

[Tommygilf]

1 minute ago, Damien said:

So we have a minimum but cant use it in case it looks bad? Under what circumstances would anyone get the minimum or should it just not be allowed as a punishment? That seems daft.

Because its a minimum for Grade F charges, and as the most severe charge it is a bit of a catch all - a squirrel grip got similar recently I remember. That is the nature of catch alls in that they are imperfect.

[Dunbar]

1 hour ago, Jim Prendle said:

You need to give some serious thought as to what making an example of him would achieve though.

You could ban him for three years, and send him to live in a hut in Outer Mongolia, but it won’t have the effect you would probably like.

It might put an end to racist comments, but it wouldn’t do a great deal towards putting an end to racism.

Racism won’t be ended in a few minutes by the judicious use of long bans in the sporting arena. It will be ended in the long term by education and greater integration.

While all of this may well be true, what else is true today is that there are very few places in the UK where you can use racially charged abusive language while exercising your duties as an employee and have your suspension lifted and keep your job less than a week later.

A professional Rugby League club is one of those places.

We can all make our own minds up about whether we are happy with that.

[Just Browny]

It's all a bit confusing isn't it, there are a few paradoxes going on. 

8 matches is the fitting punishment for the crime, and yet Wigan have stacked on a fine of two weeks' wages.

Clubb is definitely not a racist, but Wigan are sending him on a course to learn how not to be a racist.

[Davo5]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

I've edited above just to be accurate.. 

yeah,I’m pretty sure that isn’t allowed 

[Jim Prendle]

Just now, Just Browny said:

It's all a bit confusing isn't it, there are a few paradoxes going on. 

8 matches is the fitting punishment for the crime, and yet Wigan have stacked on a fine of two weeks' wages.

Clubb is definitely not a racist, but Wigan are sending him on a course to learn how not to be a racist.

Education regarding diversity is not just about racism though is it?

A lot of it is related to increased tolerance, which Clubb sounds like he needs.

[Spidey]

Just now, Jim Prendle said:

Education regarding diversity is not just about racism though is it?

A lot of it is related to increased tolerance, which Clubb sounds like he needs.

Clubb needs increased tolerance to what?

[Jim Prendle]

3 minutes ago, Spidey said:

Clubb needs increased tolerance to what?

To all manner of things by the sound of it, but particularly to heated situations in which he obviously finds it difficult to keep his trap shut.