Widnes Nick Gregson Ban

[gingerjon]

4 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

And I'd be grateful if you would refer to me by name, rather than as "someone".

Martyn,

Similar is not the same as identical. The incidents are similar.

Yours,

Jon

[dkw]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

I agree, i think retweeting and liking tweets is possibly easier to defend than actually typing comments yourself.

I expect its also much more difficult to punish within the rules also, due to the ambiguity.

[LeeF]

48 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

I was hoping that this argument had ended, but I don't like being criticised in this manner.

The post in question said: "There was a similar incident in cricket four years ago with Ollie Robinson. England bowler Ollie Robinson suspended for eight matches for past racist and sexist tweets - BBC Sport"

If you are going to link a current incident to an earlier one, then it's clear that you assume the characteristics of the two incidents are similar and that the tweets in this case were also racist and sexist. The word "similar" plays an important part in the original sentence.

Whatmichaelsays claims that he wasn't implying that, which I'm prepared to accept, but in that case he would have been better advised to use an alternative form of words that lacked any ambiguity, avoiding the use of the word "similar".

So please don't accuse me of "stretching to try & make an incorrect point".

And I'd be grateful if you would refer to me by name, rather than as "someone".

Martyn - I disagree with your analysis and do think that you are stretching the point. Anyway it’s a forum so shall we leave it there

[Wilderspoolmemories]

On 20/03/2025 at 08:54, Martyn Sadler said:

You have a remarkable memory.

I'm shocked if I really did make that claim.

Perhaps I should be suspended.

I well remember your pre match comments in league express. 

Why would I lie? 

[Wilderspoolmemories]

On 20/03/2025 at 08:54, Martyn Sadler said:

You have a remarkable memory.

 

I do indeed. For example one of those memories where I look at any 11 digit mobile phone number once, for a brief period of time, then can repeat it to whoever, whenever etc, without error. 

Just a gift I suppose!

[Martyn Sadler]

16 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Martyn,

Similar is not the same as identical. The incidents are similar.

Yours,

Jon

So let's get this straight.

If I make a post on X saying that you are similar to Hitler, after you sue me for libel, I will be able to defend myself successfully by saying that I didn't imply that you were a Nazi because I didn't claim that you were identical to Hitler.

Now that would be a stretch!

[Martyn Sadler]

15 hours ago, LeeF said:

Martyn - I disagree with your analysis and do think that you are stretching the point. Anyway it’s a forum so shall we leave it there

I don't mind you disagreeing with me but if I'm stretching a point I'd like to know how.

[Martyn Sadler]

13 hours ago, Wilderspoolmemories said:

I well remember your pre match comments in league express. 

Why would I lie? 

I'm not accusing you of lying, simply that I can't remember what my prediction was for the 2009 Challenge Cup Final.

It's perfectly possible that I predicted that Huddersfield would win, as you claim.

[Dave T]

I'm here for the 16 year old match prediction callbacks.

About time we held people accountable for their views. 

[dkw]

33 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I'm here for the 16 year old match prediction callbacks.

About time we held people accountable for their views. 

I'm here for Godwins law....and now I'm happy.

[JonM]

On 21/03/2025 at 06:35, Tommygilf said:

What is worth saying with all these things is that the RFL etc aren't going out looking for these things. They were put in front of them to the extent they could not ignore it.

Not that I necessarily believe anything Gledhill writes, but he seems to be suggesting that he had a hand in drawing the RFL's attention to some recent tweets, and also that this is a response to the stuff with lovely Mr. Kilshaw and the noose.

[RigbyLuger]

1 minute ago, JonM said:

Not that I necessarily believe anything Gledhill writes, but he seems to be suggesting that he had a hand in drawing the RFL's attention to some recent tweets, and also that this is a response to the stuff with lovely Mr. Kilshaw and the noose.

He wouldn't want the RFL to investigate some of his outbursts and rescind his accreditation.

[LeeF]

58 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

I don't mind you disagreeing with me but if I'm stretching a point I'd like to know how.

Both individuals were charged with making inappropriate tweets when much younger was the main part of the discussion. The actual content wasn’t in that instance being discussed or referred to. That was the original poster’s view, my take and a number of others viewpoint as well. 
 

To make out that the racism contained in Robinson’s tweets implied that Gregson was guilty of the same comes across as stretching the point. The 2 individual’s cases have similarities but are far & away from being identical. 
 

I appreciate that you will have your own view especially with regards to the “stretching the point” part but that’s your choice just as it is mine to have my own view

[RP London]

13 hours ago, Martyn Sadler said:

So let's get this straight.

If I make a post on X saying that you are similar to Hitler, after you sue me for libel, I will be able to defend myself successfully by saying that I didn't imply that you were a Nazi because I didn't claim that you were identical to Hitler.

Now that would be a stretch!

Surely it depends on context doesn't it? 

If he has a toothbrush moustache and a brown shirt you could say "he's like Hitler" and everyone knows you mean in appearance rather than jumping straight to racist bigoted anti Semite...

In the same way as talking about an incident where someone is being convicted (by the account from Widnes) for tweets going back to 2012 is somewhat similar to Ollie Robinson who was banned for tweets that dated back to 2012... Without having to jump to "gregsons tweets must have had the same content"

 

Looking at the replies on here, it would appear you seem to have been the only one to jump over the obvious similarities into something else. 

Edited March 23 by RP London

[The Phantom Horseman]

On 21/03/2025 at 12:00, Martyn Sadler said:

I've asked them again today and they say they are going to.

But, like you, I haven't seen anything yet.

Any chance of chasing them up over this? Haven't seen any updates so still no clarity about whether this really was punishment for tweets when he was 16/17 or whether it involved much more recent incidents.

[Martyn Sadler]

59 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

Any chance of chasing them up over this? Haven't seen any updates so still no clarity about whether this really was punishment for tweets when he was 16/17 or whether it involved much more recent incidents.

I've been told that something should be coming out today.

[jacksy]

I'm not defending this guy but 16?

You are not an adult until 18 in the UK unless the laws changed.

If it's recent stuff too, then tough.

Edited March 26 by jacksy

[Martyn Sadler]

11 minutes ago, jacksy said:

I'm not defending this guy but 16?

You are not an adult until 18 in the UK unless the laws changed.

If it's recent stuff too, then tough.

At the moment I'm not sure what he said and when he said it.

I'm not keen on passing judgement in the meantime.

[LeeF]

31 minutes ago, Martyn Sadler said:

I've been told that something should be coming out today.

That would make sense as don’t they have 7 days to appeal any ban etc

[The Phantom Horseman]

57 minutes ago, LeeF said:

That would make sense as don’t they have 7 days to appeal any ban etc

I think it's 14 days for off-field offences but the initial brief report said he had accepted his guilt and that the 3-match suspension would start right away.

[LeeF]

33 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

I think it's 14 days for off-field offences but the initial brief report said he had accepted his guilt and that the 3-match suspension would start right away.

You can appeal the sentence though separately despite admitting the offence. 
 

Whether it’s 7 or 14 days I wouldn’t expect full details to be published until either that timeframe has passed or he has confirmed that there will be no appeal

[The Phantom Horseman]

4 minutes ago, LeeF said:

You can appeal the sentence though separately despite admitting the offence. 
 

Whether it’s 7 or 14 days I wouldn’t expect full details to be published until either that timeframe has passed or he has confirmed that there will be no appeal

Doesn't the fact that both the RFL and Widnes stated that the ban started last weekend mean that the timeframe for an appeal has gone? For instance, for Championship players the Match Review Panel meets on Thursdays but bans don't come into effect until the weekend after (ie 8-10 days later) allowing for the possibility of an appeal on the Tuesday after the MRP decision.

[LeeF]

18 minutes ago, The Phantom Horseman said:

Doesn't the fact that both the RFL and Widnes stated that the ban started last weekend mean that the timeframe for an appeal has gone? For instance, for Championship players the Match Review Panel meets on Thursdays but bans don't come into effect until the weekend after (ie 8-10 days later) allowing for the possibility of an appeal on the Tuesday after the MRP decision.

Not always. Bans have started in the past but an appeal on the length of the ban has still happened.
 

In this instance who knows until there is a definitive statement as whilst the original RFL article is a standard one there are discrepancies between that & the one Widnes put out

[The Phantom Horseman]

1 minute ago, LeeF said:

 

 whilst the original RFL article is a standard one there are discrepancies between that & the one Widnes put out

Absolutely, the devil is in the detail. This story has a very different look if the posts only came from when he was under 18 as opposed to if some of the tweets were from those days but some were from much more recently.

When Widnes published the story on their Facebook page with the phrase "dating back to 2012" they received over 200 replies with a huge number of them referring to his age at the time.

[Martyn Sadler]

For those interested I've received a summary of the findings of the independent off-field Operational Rules Tribunal that was held on March 18.

There were three tweets in 2012 to 2013 and three in 2024.

• 3 in 2012-2013 when NG was on Wigan register were found to be Unacceptable Language by the independent Operational Rules Tribunal.
• 1 in March 2024 was found to be Unacceptable Language by the independent Operational Rules Tribunal.
• Player accepted guilt but states he was not looking to offend anyone. 

• Tribunal found that the language used could not be viewed as anything other than discriminatory.
• Player has undertaken EDI training in 2021 to 2024.
• Player despite this training still used Unacceptable Language on social media.
• RFL has zero tolerance approach to discriminatory language and behaviour.