Me too, but the general point is that as some benchmark of accuracy, the 30% myth is just that, and the actual accuracy is under reasonable conditions likely to be very much higher.

Seemingly not, so go for it, you could be the first to publish the definitive study.

Suddenly it seems, some here are experts in linguistics.

It does? I'm not sure where or how, seeing as the thread is fsck all to do with linguistics. Maybe you could clarify, and also ID who the linguistics experts are as I haven't seen anyone claiming to be?

You were touting most skilled lip readers as achieving almost 100%. Where are you getting that from?

Now you're being very defensive at that accusation. So I'd ID you for starters.

No I wasn't. I said most skilled lip readers would expect to achieve close to 100% accuracy of a conversation recorded in ideal conditions ... that they had the luxury of being able to replay on video... and assuming normal conversation not eg some specialist subject.

Read my words. Where are you getting that information from?

See what I mean, they complain at the length of the thread then feel the need to post a rebuttal to everyone who gives their 2p worth.

Obviously picking up on the 100% figure was a given, a bit like picking up on the Nazi post earlier. Give em and inch and they will play on it to the point of distraction.

Suddenly pronouncing everyone as expert lip readers, well to a point we are all expert lip readers. I personal have 35 years of watching peoples lips move up and down and listening to the words that accompany them.

I would never say I am a professional lip reader, as I do not have the qualifications or get paid for doing so. but no doubt any pro lip readers will be secret Leeds haters.

If you think my comment was homophobic then it's no wonder the PC brigade are death riding this country. I simply highlighted the "LOOK AT ME" nature of your post. I don't care what team you or anyone else bats for........just get off the cross because we need the wood!

Please. We have two incidents where both times the referees have done absolutely NOTHING on the field of play about said incident.

Even before both games finish social media and on this very site it's already blowing up about "did Hardaker say that?" with Vines following shortly. Over the course of the next few days after a barrage of "he needs banning for the good of the image of the sport" we start hearing that the incident is being looked at and that the ref did actually hear it after all.

Anybody who believes that the refs heard what was said both times, yet chose to do nothing/simply slipped their minds mid-game need their heads testing, especially when one ref claimed it was aimed at him.

What is it with the pathetic modern usage of the term 'haters'? You sound like all those other Merkan cry babies who use that term. You wouldn't say that to your mates, would you? or are they as limp wristed with their language.

No I didn't think your comment was homophobic really. But me saying it was had you scampering for that reply of "I don't care what team you bat for", kinda summing up the treading on eggshells approach many adopt to homophobia. Gay people want to be treated equal....not to be treated with kid gloves.

a few points.
the match commissioner told the press straight after the game silverwood never heard anything. that has been confirmed by several members of the trade press.
then silverwoods match report says he did hear it. who is lieing? somebody is.

in a game earlier this year a huddersfield player shouted at bentham he was an effing cheating w**ker.
all captured on sky. this player was never charged. why?

the RFL have, not for the first time, handled the whole thing incredibly badly. if, and i have no idea if he did, hardaker called flanagan a puff, then a good QC would pull the RFL case to bits in minutes.

given the fact that silverwoods credability is, for the moment, in question insteading of standing him down for a week they send him to wigan v leeds.

you really couldn't make it up

the same silverwood who told the match commissioner he never heard anything.
then said in his report he did,

the same silverwood who has been suspended twice, the second time for drunkenly threatening a steward. classy bloke

No Silverwood doesn't have to have it in for Hardaker. But the RFL under pressure not to look like they're condoning what is, in many peoples opinion, a cut and dry case of homophobic abuse will not want to be tarred with the brush that they condone it if they can't find him guilty (even if it's only because of lack of clear cut evidence).

So a little talk with their employee and a hint to say you heard it all along to add significant weight to their desired guilty verdict and Bob's your fathers brother. What's Silverwood going to say to his employer.....no? Unlikely.

A genuine question for you Leeds fans - if Hardaker is found guilty of saying "fu**ing puff," whether that be by his own admission, a lip reader or evidence submitted by Silverwood and/or Saints players, then would anyone have any complaints with a ban?

People seem to be focussing more on the process that the RFL have taken as opposed to what Hardaker is being accused of doing.

The RFL haven't covered themselves in glory with the way they have acted here but it's a means to an end in a way. If Hardaker is guilty of saying "fu**ing puff" then he deserves to be banned, simple as that.

Any guilty verdict is now seriously compromised.

I do agree with that, despite my belief that if he is guilty then he deserves a ban.

I am a Leeds fan and a supporter of Zak Hardaker. If Hardaker is found guilty of saying "fu**ing puff," whether that be by his own admission, a lip reader or evidence submitted by Silverwood and/or Saints players then I will whole heartedly welcome his ban. If any player uses homophobic language then they should be banned. My only complaint is with those fans who seem to forget that a person is innocent until they've been proven guilty.

As for the process that the RFL are following, they couldn't have found a better way to cause a huge inflammatory storm if they tried!

How is it?
I haven't said Hardaker is guilty or innocent, I've said that the RFL need to investigate to prove guilt or pronounce otherwise. That you, others & the Leeds club want to dismiss this incident out of hand which you lot have been doing makes you all look narrow minded, bigotted and stupid.
If you can't see why all those three apply then I'm wasting my time explaining to obtuse types that bury their heads in the sand because clearly you have no comprehension as to why matters such as a potential criminal offence & one that is considered extremely serious by the RFL are important to investigate fully.
But yeah..investigating a potential serious breach of the RFL rules that is also a criminal offence is a disgrace..

i think it might just be a misleading stat, in that it may only be 30% of sounds can be identified by sight alone, that doesnt mean that it is 30% accurate.

i think there are now serious questions about evidence and impartiality. If those questions were answered then my only complaint would be if there werent a ban.

you do realise that the RFL have no power of criminal investigation dont you? Perhaps you could re-examine your hyperbole?

Dear dear, Tre Cool is really Tre Fool. Abuse based on national origin is a 4 to 8 game ban. If in your strange world Australians aren't a nationality I would imagine the moon is made of blue cheese as well. It always amuses me that the people offering opinions on others education are often the bluntest tools in the box. Nuff said said in your case.