Given the completely uncontroversial nature of it, I cannot see what could possibly cause offence, but that really isn't the point.

It's completely obvious that standards and expectations change over time. Most of us don't really notice until it's pointed out. We just adapt, and our behaviour evolves, as society evolves.

Maybe 50 years ago my bowls club would have been awash with racist banter, but it isn't now.

You are though quite wrong about people wanting "post dated retribution to be exacted". I certainly don't, and I don't believe Rafiq does either, but he won't be the one to decide what happens, any more than either of us.

Rafiq was the messenger. The message has been received and will now be acted on. Not to punish those caught up in a cultural situation in which cricket has failed to evolve with society in general. Along with a few other dinosaurs, some of whom live in a cave called the Hol.

You know what happens to those who fail to evolve, don't you? That's why cricket is taking this so seriously. They need to adapt to thrive in a new environment.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

What are the subjects which are still acceptable as banter?

Struggling with the meaning of words again?

Puritanism, a religious reform movement in the late 16th and 17th centuries that sought to “purify” the Church of England of remnants of the Roman Catholic “popery” that the Puritans claimed had been retained after the religious settlement reached early in the reign of Queen Elizabeth I.

It wasn't a fantasy, and I have not yet seen a post on it here.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

There's no answer to that. It depends on the context.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

That’s the whole issue.

Look beyond the agenda and headlines.

Do you seriously believe that the kind of school boy antagonisms discussed here deserve to be called racism?

Of course we have all become more race sensitive, primarily because we have far more immigrants here. There is no doubt that insulting people using race related antagonisms is as unacceptable as any other insult in most situations. The one exception is when all parties deem any kind of insult as acceptable in a given situation, such as between good friends or colleagues.

Trying to pretend that these kinds of situations don't exist is simply dishonest. That is why the claims of Rafiq are so questionable, as he appears to have become offended retrospectively, whereas at the time he was happy to indulge in similar language toward others and be a willing participant in the 'banter' of that time.

It's no good just saying that racial antagonisms are no longer acceptable because that ignores the dynamics of a particular relationship. Furthermore, we are talking about conversations that happened several years ago, before the age of potty wokeism.