As someone who attended the game let me give a bit of context.
The game was very physical and can best be described as a typical Paul Rowley type performance.
After a few late hits on players it was getting out of control when Toronto scored and most players were in the same area as Bailey and Carney Bailey was giving a bit of sledging Carney reacted and said something in return what was said is down to debate.

The referee did not react, Bailey or his team mates didn't react, Salford players didn't react but the in goal judge reported what he heard/thought he heard that's about it.

If there is a racist comment then he deserves a long ban. The things that I question is did Bailey make a complaint and with the niggle in th game at the time why did all the players not pile in

Why are you assuming that I'm agitated? I'm simply pointing out that there is a wide disparity in the punishments when comparing two acts of abuse to how the criminal justice system would ajudicate on both individual cases. Allow me to reiterate again that I fully endorse the ban, i just think it's disproportionate to the outcome of the physical abuse hearing at the RFL this week. This is just my opinion and I respect that you have yours.

I don't understand your point; as has already been pointed out, this isn't a criminal case - so the burden of proof (and the sanctions available) are significantly different. If it were, for admitting racially aggravated verbal abuse, he could be looking at a hefty fine or even a prison sentence, rather than 6 weeks rest.

Would you like the RFL to robustly protect Salford's BME players form racial abuse, or would you feel the same way if the situation were reversed?

I want all RL players protected the same whether they play for my club or any other club. You don't seem to to understand what I mean when I keep repeating that I fully endorse the ban. Let me be clear. Just because I believe the RFL are wrong to punish a deliberate physical offence at only 12.5% of the punishment compared to a verbal offence, does not mean I think the ban should be any less. The RFL has a duty of care to protect the welfare of all players equally? If you were the person stamped on, would you think you got a fair outcome?

That's good - but yesterday you said:



which is entirely different. And the part in bold is the most problematic - you seem to believe that racist abuse on the field of play is broadly ok, and that the governing body would also think it were ok, if not for the PC brigade forcing them to pretend to care?

I've already explained that a racially aggravated incident carries a more serious penalty than a straightforward incident of foul play - for reasons which would seem obvious to most people.

Yeah it would have been much better had he just gone and kicked the sh*t out of him as that's far more acceptable, a bit like the French player one arrowing the Ref .