RugbyRebels

Denny Solomona of "Screw Castleford, I'm 'retiring'" and "My heart's not with England unless it's paid lots of money" fame has decided that breaking team rules to go out drinking and playing touch rugby on his England debut aren't making me hate him enough, and so has upped the ante with an alleged flurry of homophobic slurs in the Wuss vs Sale game.

There's no audio of the slurs on the game video, but Jamie Shillcock gets in a scuffle with him after a high tackle and then complains to the ref - "He can't say that; he's said a homophobic slur three times."

Investigation is apparently today - unless it's picked up on the ref's mike I doubt anything will come of it - but if you needed another reason to dislike him, there you go.

Puja

Puja wrote:Denny Solomona of "Screw Castleford, I'm 'retiring'" and "My heart's not with England unless it's paid lots of money" fame has decided that breaking team rules to go out drinking and playing touch rugby on his England debut aren't making me hate him enough, and so has upped the ante with an alleged flurry of homophobic slurs in the Wuss vs Sale game.

There's no audio of the slurs on the game video, but Jamie Shillcock gets in a scuffle with him after a high tackle and then complains to the ref - "He can't say that; he's said a homophobic slur three times."

Investigation is apparently today - unless it's picked up on the ref's mike I doubt anything will come of it - but if you needed another reason to dislike him, there you go.

Puja

Didn't want him involved with England in the first place, no matter how 'good' he is. Hopefully if he is found guilty that might put an end to his international aspirations.

Sticky wicket there I reckon, RFU can't really make an example of him since they accepted what Eddie said about the Welsh and the Irish and allowed him to retain his job with nothing more than a mild ticking off.

I agree though, he should be bang to rights if it can be proved.

I know nothing Shillcock as a person but it would be quite a strange and specific complaint to make up entirely.

I see your point above regarding EJ’s comments but I think that can quite convincingly be claimed as a shit attempt at humour. I’m struggling to think of which homophonic slur you could use repeatedly towards an individual that would feel the same way.

Oh and of course everything Puja said. And all his tries are walk-ins. And he refuses to give up his seat for old ladies on be bus.

There's no point anyone getting miffed about Eddie's daft comments, for a start I've heard a number of Irish, Welsh and Scottish comments at similar events about the English, and they're not exactly unstinting in their praise. If we're going to see people sanctioned for crass comments at sponsor events there'll be very few players, coaches and media types left in the game.

I've no idea what Denny said or why he said it, if he's guilty then he's going to miss a few games. Seeing as it was hardly held against Marler it wouldn't be reasonable to change when it comes to Solomona.

The Solomona Slurs sounds like an 80s metal band.

He sounds like a right charmer that one.

He's a jafa alright

No way. A league player from the NRL used a homophobic slur? I’m stunned.

Ummm...maybe he didn’t do it?

Did you hear that from the Russian ambassador?

Timbo wrote:Ummm...maybe he didn’t do it?

Given that Shillcock was adamant about what he heard (three times, in fact), I'd say it's, at the least, pretty likely that it happened. Solomona saying it strikes me as significantly more likely than Shillcock deciding to lie and fake outrage in the middle of a match.

Puja

Does anyone really care if nasty stuff is said on a rugby pitch at times? And what issue is being addressed when we get the isolated reporting of incidents?

Digby wrote:Does anyone really care if nasty stuff is said on a rugby pitch at times? And what issue is being addressed when we get the isolated reporting of incidents?

I care. If it goes unchallenged, then it's deemed acceptable, and I don't want my sport to say they don't care about me and people like me. This isn't just "nasty stuff" - it's as important as if someone used the n-word on the pitch.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Does anyone really care if nasty stuff is said on a rugby pitch at times? And what issue is being addressed when we get the isolated reporting of incidents?

I care. If it goes unchallenged, then it's deemed acceptable, and I don't want my sport to say they don't care about me and people like me. This isn't just "nasty stuff" - it's as important as if someone used the n-word on the pitch.

Puja

Two issues, these potential citings we're having must be interspersed with many thousands of nasty things being said that go unreported, and maybe even unnoticed. And then some people deciding some nasty things are nastier than some others and worthy of seeing bans brought.

Assuming the abuse did occur, it would be good to get some specifics before we hang, draw and quarter him. For starters is Shillcock gay and, if so, does Solomona realise. Is Solomona calling him gay because he’s wingeing like Rob Kearney or because he’s feigned injury like Habana or has he told him that he hopes he dies of AIDS and burns in hell for enternity with all the other gays.
If Shillcock isn’t gay and Solomona is abusing him for wearing colourful trainers and whining about a bit of rough treatment then I’d ban Shillcock. If Shillcock is gay, Solomana knows it and the abuse is personal then ban him. All in all, I’d really like Shillcock to go “yep, I am gay and I ain’t bothered what you say” rather than whine to the ref, and Solomona make a sizeable donation to Stonewall with a suitable amount of publicity and be banned from playing for England*.


*The ban may not be wholly related to the allegeded abuse.

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:Does anyone really care if nasty stuff is said on a rugby pitch at times? And what issue is being addressed when we get the isolated reporting of incidents?

I care. If it goes unchallenged, then it's deemed acceptable, and I don't want my sport to say they don't care about me and people like me. This isn't just "nasty stuff" - it's as important as if someone used the n-word on the pitch.

Puja

Noon?

We have ‘protected characteristics’ in most work places now, so on one hand, I don’t think professional sport should be considered different. After all, the pitch is their work place.

However, on the other hand, without defending or excusing this kind of abuse, most work places don’t involve the physical confrontation and aggression present in a game of rugby. I do find it a bit easier to understand to some extent why someone might make an offensive statement that they wouldn’t make in a normal work place. Particularly when there is higher potential for provocation.

The problem is that even if World Rugby came out with a list of protected characterstics and fines for abusing them, it would still be difficult to police unless the offence was caught on the refs mic or on camera. Otherwise it’s one player’s word against another’s.

Some detail would be welcome.

Apparently there was nothing heard by the ref, or picked up on his mic, or heard by the asst ref.

If there is nothing from another player to corroborate Shillcock's version of events, this is unlikely to go any further.

Mellsblue wrote:Assuming the abuse did occur, it would be good to get some specifics before we hang, draw and quarter him. For starters is Shillcock gay and, if so, does Solomona realise. Is Solomona calling him gay because he’s wingeing like Rob Kearney or because he’s feigned injury like Habana or has he told him that he hopes he dies of AIDS and burns in hell for enternity with all the other gays.
If Shillcock isn’t gay and Solomona is abusing him for wearing colourful trainers and whining about a bit of rough treatment then I’d ban Shillcock. If Shillcock is gay, Solomana knows it and the abuse is personal then ban him. All in all, I’d really like Shillcock to go “yep, I am gay and I ain’t bothered what you say” rather than whine to the ref, and Solomona make a sizeable donation to Stonewall with a suitable amount of publicity and be banned from playing for England*.


*The ban may not be wholly related to the allegeded abuse.

Shilcock's sexuality has no bearing on it.

There's a world of difference between calling someone a fucking arse, cock, etc., and calling them a sexual or racial slur. The first is part and parcel, the second is unacceptable. I would have thought THAT is a pretty clear distinction.

Mellsblue wrote:Assuming the abuse did occur, it would be good to get some specifics before we hang, draw and quarter him. For starters is Shillcock gay and, if so, does Solomona realise. Is Solomona calling him gay because he’s wingeing like Rob Kearney or because he’s feigned injury like Habana or has he told him that he hopes he dies of AIDS and burns in hell for enternity with all the other gays.
If Shillcock isn’t gay and Solomona is abusing him for wearing colourful trainers and whining about a bit of rough treatment then I’d ban Shillcock. If Shillcock is gay, Solomana knows it and the abuse is personal then ban him. All in all, I’d really like Shillcock to go “yep, I am gay and I ain’t bothered what you say” rather than whine to the ref, and Solomona make a sizeable donation to Stonewall with a suitable amount of publicity and be banned from playing for England*.


*The ban may not be wholly related to the allegeded abuse.

Surely the point is that using homophobic slurs aren't acceptable regardless of someones sexual preferences? It's suggesting that being gay is a negative trait regardless, and that's the issue. Being a motherlover (to avoid swear filters etc) is rather more commonly viewed as deviant behaviour, and whilst still abusive, isn't painting a significant part of our normal population as some sort of deviants.

I did always wonder why being called a "lover" in general was that abusive, especially when the same group would probably laugh at someone for being a virgin too.

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Assuming the abuse did occur, it would be good to get some specifics before we hang, draw and quarter him. For starters is Shillcock gay and, if so, does Solomona realise. Is Solomona calling him gay because he’s wingeing like Rob Kearney or because he’s feigned injury like Habana or has he told him that he hopes he dies of AIDS and burns in hell for enternity with all the other gays.
If Shillcock isn’t gay and Solomona is abusing him for wearing colourful trainers and whining about a bit of rough treatment then I’d ban Shillcock. If Shillcock is gay, Solomana knows it and the abuse is personal then ban him. All in all, I’d really like Shillcock to go “yep, I am gay and I ain’t bothered what you say” rather than whine to the ref, and Solomona make a sizeable donation to Stonewall with a suitable amount of publicity and be banned from playing for England*.


*The ban may not be wholly related to the allegeded abuse.

Shilcock's sexuality has no bearing on it.

There's a world of difference between calling someone a fucking arse, cock, etc., and calling them a sexual or racial slur. The first is part and parcel, the second is unacceptable. I would have thought THAT is a pretty clear distinction.

As above. Who Shillcock likes to bang is entirely beside the point - using a homophobic slur as an insult is not acceptable regardless of who it's directed at.

fivepointer wrote:Some detail would be welcome.

Apparently there was nothing heard by the ref, or picked up on his mic, or heard by the asst ref.

If there is nothing from another player to corroborate Shillcock's version of events, this is unlikely to go any further.

Agreed that it's unlikely to go any further, as it appears there's no evidence aside from Shillcock's report and, while I can't see any reason why he would've invented such a thing, that's not enough to punish someone.

The best result to hope for is that it's reminded a few players that it's not acceptable to say and we won't see a repeat for a long while.

Puja

Stom wrote:

Mellsblue wrote:Assuming the abuse did occur, it would be good to get some specifics before we hang, draw and quarter him. For starters is Shillcock gay and, if so, does Solomona realise. Is Solomona calling him gay because he’s wingeing like Rob Kearney or because he’s feigned injury like Habana or has he told him that he hopes he dies of AIDS and burns in hell for enternity with all the other gays.
If Shillcock isn’t gay and Solomona is abusing him for wearing colourful trainers and whining about a bit of rough treatment then I’d ban Shillcock. If Shillcock is gay, Solomana knows it and the abuse is personal then ban him. All in all, I’d really like Shillcock to go “yep, I am gay and I ain’t bothered what you say” rather than whine to the ref, and Solomona make a sizeable donation to Stonewall with a suitable amount of publicity and be banned from playing for England*.


*The ban may not be wholly related to the allegeded abuse.

Shilcock's sexuality has no bearing on it.

There's a world of difference between calling someone a fucking arse, cock, etc., and calling them a sexual or racial slur. The first is part and parcel, the second is unacceptable. I would have thought THAT is a pretty clear distinction.

Says you, but I fail to see why you get to set what other people will find offensive

Digby wrote:Says you, but I fail to see why you get to set what other people will find offensive

It's all offensive, that's the point, but not all of it is making out that a perfectly normal section of society is all lesser than the rest.

Puja wrote:
As above. Who Shillcock likes to bang is entirely beside the point - using a homophobic slur as an insult is not acceptable regardless of who it's directed at.


The best result to hope for is that it's reminded a few players that it's not acceptable to say and we won't see a repeat for a long while.

Again I'd much rather they simply ban slurs, or just have the refs tell a player to shut up and/or award penalties against an offender. If we're going to ban specific slurs I don't like the idea that the groups being 'protected' are given a victim status, and I don't like other people deciding what I might find offensive.