Hannant v WHO?

Also with Gibbs, why say something POST game…..........maybe in the heat of battle a comment that comes out poorly is understandable.

But he's had a go after the final whistle.

Dumb. He just never learns.
 
The flare up was a result of things said in the game. There was apparantly real niggle in the scrums. They were shaking hands and Hannant refused Gibbs handshake and it started from there.

As for religion who cares. It is not one of the things in the no go play book as far as I know.

Race, Disability & Children are the big 3\. Other than that harden up. Religion is a choice.
 
Wow…No wonder Gibbs was filthy if Hannant questioned his faith......
 
Canterbury Bulldogs beat Wests Tigers in NRL round six

* By David Beniuk
* From: AAP
* April 16, 2010 9:23PM
\
\
Tigers v Bulldogs
\
\
* Bulldogs 24 Wests Tigers 4

BULLDOGS star Ben Hannant was left deeply upset last night, with Canterbury insiders claiming the Mormon prop was the target of a religious slur from his Tigers opposite Bryce Gibbs.

The pair exchanged heated words immediately after the fulltime siren sounded on Canterbury's desperately needed albeit untidy 24-4 win at the SFS. They had to be separated by Bulldogs team manager Fred Ciraldo, and Gibbs raced up the tunnel before any of the other 33 players even had left the field.

Hannant was too upset to reveal what was said, but Bulldogs staffers told The Daily Telegraph an insult was directed at Hannant's faith.

"We believe it was about Ben's religion and he's very upset," one Canterbury insider who declined to be named said.

"We also think it was happening in the scrums and during the game, not just at fulltime."

When asked about the incident, an emotional Hannant shook his head and replied: "I'll keep it to myself … he [Gibbs] knows what he said. I don't want to comment on it."

Gibbs refused to comment, but his skipper Robbie Farah who finished the game with his left elbow on ice after a painful first-half blow acknowledged that heated words were exchanged.

"I saw Chris Heighington and Ben Hannant and one of their team managers … he [Hannant] was running his mouth off," Farah said.

"I grabbed Heighno and got him out of it."

The drama overshadowed Canterbury's return to the winners' list through a renewed attitude and some dreadful handling from the Tigers.

The game was punctuated by so many simple mistakes - Wests failed to find touch with a penalty and committed two shepherds in the first half alone - that the error rate even obscured Farah's one-on-one battle with Bulldogs rake Michael Ennis.

The fact Ennis posted a rare double made him a winner on the scoresheet, but both players would have been capable of much better if either side had not coughed up possession throughout the 80 minutes.

Ennis's first try opened the scoring after a tedious first 35 minutes, and his second in the shadows of fulltime, from a Brett Kimmorley kick, sealed Canterbury's second win of 2010.

After celebrating with gusto on the field, Ennis paid credit to Bulldogs coach Kevin Moore for inspiring the turn-around in attitude that saw Canterbury dominate field position. The fiesty rake also said the senior players had spoken at length during the week about their flat start, ending in a frank discussion on match eve about the need to play as a team rather than individuals.

"He [Moore] was excellent this week, he's a great man manager," Ennis said.

"I don't think he would have been sitting up there in the coach's box thinking he could have done anything more.

"On the day before the game, the senior forwards got together and said we can listen to everyone saying we've got guys out and lose and go to one and five. But we had a good team. We said that we had to rip in."

Moore acknowledged last year's fairytale team had a long way to go before they are treading a path to resemble 2009's yellow-brick road.

"We are nowhere near as good as we can be and our cohesion is out," Moore said. "When you spend a few weeks out of form it can take a while to get back. It all starts with attitude."

Farah suspected he might need scans on his elbow today, but a Tigers official last night told reporters the injury did not look serious and is not expected to sideline him from next weekend's clash against Penrith.
 
Smeg, you are missing the point mate.

Ther facts are that your opinion counts for nothing. The NRL is the only one that counts and they've made it clear religion is a no go zone.

If someone racially taunted Hasem El Masri, it would be front and back page of the news. Gibbs and ALL players know that you can't go there.

You blokes need to stop defending Gibbo just because he's our player. He's going to be in trouble this week for the incident and it's a bad look for our club. Expect him to cop it.
 
How would racially insulting El Masri be even remotely comparable?

To my understanding the NRL has never gone after anyone for a comment on religion.

Whats next? Raking a player over the coals for sledging someones Political leanings?

This has nothing to do with it being one of our players. If he sledged on any of the 3 areas I mentioned above he would have the book thrown at him and rightly so. No question
 
Did Gibbs say something about it on the field or only had a go at him because Hannant wouldn't shake his hand?
 
It's going to be great when we play the Bulldogs next time. There's no way the media won't rekindle these flames. I just hope we have Payto, Galloway and an in-form Jason Cayless in the team by then.
 
This raises an interesting point.

What deity can one mock and get away with??

Dawkins would know the answer to this.

I reckon God,Allah,Oprah and Doctor Phil are big no no's.

But you could sledge Buddah,Mr Squiggle and Samantha from bewtiched and it would be ok.

I think Gallop has to make a stand on this.

And where would L-Ron sit in all of this???
 
And I pose another question.

Is the handshake part of OUR religion,and has Hannant slurred Gibbs' religion by not accepting his hand???

Would it compare to not bowing to a Japanese man after he has paid for dinner???
 
Bottom line

Religion, like political leaning, is a choice you make. It is fair game.

Harden up
 
@simonthetiger said:
@Tigerdave said:
Can you have a go at Zeus? Odin?

Yep.

sweet, so Zeus and co are fair game, but any current religions are a big no? or just the Judeo-Christian ones are untouchable?

You did mention L-Ron before Simon, so is Scientology a no go or is that open slather as well?
 
@smeghead said:
Bottom line

Religion, like political leaning, is a choice you make. It is fair game.

Harden up

I agree, Hannant and the Dogs need to take a spoonful of cement on this one
 
@Tigerdave said:
@simonthetiger said:
@Tigerdave said:
Can you have a go at Zeus? Odin?

Yep.

sweet, so Zeus and co are fair game, but any current religions are a big no? or just the Judeo-Christian ones are untouchable?

You did mention L-Ron before Simon, so is Scientology a no go or is that open slather as well?

Well if ol Smithy,whacked out on mushies can form his own band of merry men, and its a no go,then L-Rons a no go as well.
 
<big>**Big deal !!!!**</big>

If this is true then Hannant is a bloody sook !!

Deadset. Who cares !?!

religion is a choice it is not something you were born with like colour or as Smeg said, illness or a disability.

Gibbs should be congratulated.

Great game Bryce and sledge the bloke all you want.
 
@smeghead said:
The flare up was a result of things said in the game. There was apparantly real niggle in the scrums. They were shaking hands and Hannant refused Gibbs handshake and it started from there.

As for religion who cares. It is not one of the things in the no go play book as far as I know.

Race, Disability & Children are the big 3\. Other than that harden up. Religion is a choice.

yep religion is something you choose to follow, its not like being a coloured race where you have no say in the fact.

people make fun of scientology all the time, hannant needs to harden up if it was a crack about his religion, also i got told that heigno really wanted to have a go at hannant and he wanted to square off after the game. Hannant isnt innocent in all this from what ive been told
 
It`s all good. This might make the whole side fire up a bit more than what they did last night next time they meet. You don`t get anywhere if you like the other side, every game should be treated like it`s a war !!!
It appears this side had bonded as close as the `2005 side and a strong team bond goes a long, long way.

I don`t want Bryce to be a nice bloke on the field, I want him to go out and hurt the opposing players, I don`t care how he does it as long as he`s inflicting pain. I think he`s one of the form props in the game at the moment and it`s because he`s now starting to back up his aggressive attitude with aggressive performances on the field.
 
Back
Top