It was meant as a insult and to belittle Lee,Marler trying to show his dominance over him,
If he said it to me,I'd either knock him out there and then if it bothered me that much or I'd telling what a tw@t he is.
Marler knew exactly what he was doing.Should it be dealt with? for me I don't like Gypsy's everyone I've had dealings with has tried to rip me or my family and friends off and have succeeded on some occasions so I never feel anything for them and before I get slated for having a view,find me 2 on each travellers site that are paying Tax and insurance and I'll change my view.
Mellsblue wrote:I'm offended by the repeated use of the work f**k, and derivations of. I expect any perpetrator to be banned from the EMB for at least a week.
Sandydragon wrote:
Im more concerned with the integrity of our sport to be honest. If Lee isn't hugely offended then Im not too concerned over the particular insult; although if members of the travelling community want to take offense for what they heard on the TV then that's their right; Im not going to take it for them.
What concerns me most is that a clear offence (a racist comment under English Law) was deemed to be unworthy of punishment by the competitions disciplinary panel. That sends a terrible message, both inside and outside of the sport.
Good points. Likewise it seems to me the forearm hit was pretty nasty too.
Part of the reason I feel uncomfortable with the Marler's language is that I want everyone in England to cheer the England team and to feel welcome within the rugby community. I just feel anyone of Romany or traveller background is unlikely to be encouraged to participate when someone at the pinnacle of the game appears to be derogatory towards someone with a similar background. I feel the same way when I've heard the homophobic 'banter' at several of the rugby clubs I've played for.
The report I originally read made me believe Marler had said something much worse, so I feel a bit of a prat on my high horse.
Mellsblue wrote:I'm offended by the repeated use of the work f**k, and derivations of. I expect any perpetrator to be banned from the EMB for at least a week.
Let's see how well that fucking works.
Puja
Absolute power, corrupts absolutely.
Oh no - I came precorrupted. The power's just a nice bonus.
As a Welshman who lives in England, I feel sorry for all my English mates who should be reading in the press and talking about England winning their first Championship in 4 years and potentially their first Grand Slam in 13 years. But all they have to put up with in the Marler firestorm.
The RFU should have taken the moral high ground and banned Marler for 4 weeks and got it out of the way so not to distract the squad and the press
Dacre wrote:As a Welshman who lives in England, I feel sorry for all my English mates who should be reading in the press and talking about England winning their first Championship in 4 years and potentially their first Grand Slam in 13 years. But all they have to put up with in the Marler firestorm.
The RFU should have taken the moral high ground and banned Marler for 4 weeks and got it out of the way so not to distract the squad and the press
I imagine it's quite nice for the majority of the team - rather than highlighting the number of players who have failed to win anything of importance that are playing this weekend. Or highlighting opportunities for the french team. Or focusing on someone like George Ford's lack of form… the focus is on whether a player should be banned or not and all the fervour around that.
Dacre wrote:As a Welshman who lives in England, I feel sorry for all my English mates who should be reading in the press and talking about England winning their first Championship in 4 years and potentially their first Grand Slam in 13 years. But all they have to put up with in the Marler firestorm.
The RFU should have taken the moral high ground and banned Marler for 4 weeks and got it out of the way so not to distract the squad and the press
As a welshman in the same predicament as you I think I will always be able to say the 2016 English Grand Slam - if they get it which is a big if - will have been won with 2 players in the starting 23 who should have received bans.
Dacre wrote:As a Welshman who lives in England, I feel sorry for all my English mates who should be reading in the press and talking about England winning their first Championship in 4 years and potentially their first Grand Slam in 13 years. But all they have to put up with in the Marler firestorm.
The RFU should have taken the moral high ground and banned Marler for 4 weeks and got it out of the way so not to distract the squad and the press
As a welshman in the same predicament as you I think I will always be able to say the 2016 English Grand Slam - if they get it which is a big if - will have been won with 2 players in the starting 23 who should have received bans.
Devalued tournament in other words
Aren't they all? I'd struggle to name one that was of a good standard.
Dacre wrote:As a Welshman who lives in England, I feel sorry for all my English mates who should be reading in the press and talking about England winning their first Championship in 4 years and potentially their first Grand Slam in 13 years. But all they have to put up with in the Marler firestorm.
The RFU should have taken the moral high ground and banned Marler for 4 weeks and got it out of the way so not to distract the squad and the press
As a welshman in the same predicament as you I think I will always be able to say the 2016 English Grand Slam - if they get it which is a big if - will have been won with 2 players in the starting 23 who should have received bans.
Digby wrote:
Aren't they all? I'd struggle to name one that was of a good standard.
I'm torn on the quality debate. The last 3/4 years has seen a big shift in world rugby. The SA v NZ game in the 2013 championship has been the benchmark I've been using. And the Ire v NZ match a few months later. This 6 N's hasn't been sparkling rugby but it has been quite tough and England have stepped right up to it.
Many rugby stereotypes have been visited in the last year by most of the 6n's teams but not so much England recently. They are trying to do something different.
The standard 'depends which French team turn up' stereotype doesn't apply this time. I expect England will take them apart.
Explains why there's been no criminal prosecution.
May explain the 6N decision, but given there hasn't even been that degree of openness from them about their decision, who knows?
There's even been anonymous RFU officials expressing displeasure about the whole thing to the Telegraph now. Gods only knows if they're of any importance but this is all building up to a belated ban next week. Maybe.
Explains why there's been no criminal prosecution.
May explain the 6N decision, but given there hasn't even been that degree of openness from them about their decision, who knows?
There's even been anonymous RFU officials expressing displeasure about the whole thing to the Telegraph now. Gods only knows if they're of any importance but this is all building up to a belated ban next week. Maybe.
I've read the first paragraph. It was recorded ffs. There's no evidential issue. He must have been speaking to very bad lawyers. Policemen are generally very bad lawyers.
Eta Threatening, abusive and insulting words and behaviour is a public order offence. It explicitly does not need an "IP" (injured person).
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
Explains why there's been no criminal prosecution.
May explain the 6N decision, but given there hasn't even been that degree of openness from them about their decision, who knows?
There's even been anonymous RFU officials expressing displeasure about the whole thing to the Telegraph now. Gods only knows if they're of any importance but this is all building up to a belated ban next week. Maybe.
Eugene is right, that article is somewhat flawed. I suspect the reason why the police haven't taken any action is either,
In the absence of a specific complain they are using their resources elsewhere. Not every crime gets investigated.
They reasonably feel that the rugby authorities should deal with the matter.
World rugby's decision to hold a hearing brings the game into disrepute, IMO. The matter has been dealt with and should be closed.
I suppose parents will be happy to let their kids play now they won't be subject to minor insults. It's a shame their kids will still be subject to incidents like the BOD pile-driving which world rugby did not bother to take on once that disciplinary process ran it's course.
Oakboy wrote:World rugby's decision to hold a hearing brings the game into disrepute, IMO. The matter has been dealt with and should be closed.
I suppose parents will be happy to let their kids play now they won't be subject to minor insults. It's a shame their kids will still be subject to incidents like the BOD pile-driving which world rugby did not bother to take on once that disciplinary process ran it's course.
Well better they focus on the gypsy boy comments than anything minor -
Oakboy wrote:World rugby's decision to hold a hearing brings the game into disrepute, IMO. The matter has been dealt with and should be closed.
I suppose parents will be happy to let their kids play now they won't be subject to minor insults. It's a shame their kids will still be subject to incidents like the BOD pile-driving which world rugby did not bother to take on once that disciplinary process ran it's course.
Well better they focus on the gypsy boy comments than anything minor -
Who didn't think a combination of French domestic rugby and military personnel would lead to a mass brawl.