RugbyRebels

Nightynight wrote:

MrK wrote:

Nightynight wrote:This is more about welsh hoping Marler had been red carded on the day and then they would have won the match, sour grapes and nothing else

Of course it is. Keep on thinking that.

What a twat.

Digby "If they're going to ban Marler then they need to be consistent, and apply bans to anyone like Evans who's used the same term to describe the same player."




since the 'offended' are from a certain demographic group in the most part and it ain't the one in question, I am wondering if the comment had come from a welsh player to an English one would there be the same fervor over the matter. Would we be seeing the 'grow a pair' comments in the other forum since the offending term appears to be offensive but 'selective' to the person saying it already.

What utter nonsense, not least because most of the people complaining about the racist abuse on this thread are English. I guess some people will look for any excuse not to do something about racism, at least against gypsies.

really?

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Nightynight wrote:

MrK wrote:
Of course it is. Keep on thinking that.

What a twat.

Digby "If they're going to ban Marler then they need to be consistent, and apply bans to anyone like Evans who's used the same term to describe the same player."




since the 'offended' are from a certain demographic group in the most part and it ain't the one in question, I am wondering if the comment had come from a welsh player to an English one would there be the same fervor over the matter. Would we be seeing the 'grow a pair' comments in the other forum since the offending term appears to be offensive but 'selective' to the person saying it already.

What utter nonsense, not least because most of the people complaining about the racist abuse on this thread are English. I guess some people will look for any excuse not to do something about racism, at least against gypsies.

It doesn't change the fact the WRU overlooked Evan's comments whilst being surprised about the marler ruling, a bit sauce and goose or pots and kettles isn't it. An even handed approach, but I guess some people only want it one way.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:What utter nonsense, not least because most of the people complaining about the racist abuse on this thread are English. I guess some people will look for any excuse not to do something about racism, at least against gypsies.

Bit of a mix, partly I don't imagine for one moment what Marler or Evans have said about Lee was intended as racist. It's more akin to forwards being called fat and/or thick in the game, that backs are called girls (and we're yet to see a misogyny charge for that), that the likes of Toner and Stringer draw comment due to their heights, and the various jibes sent the way of Northerners, Southerners, Scousers, Brummies,the public school posh kids, the working class school dropouts, that the Welsh disturb their sheep, or that the French like to surrener, or.... In truth a lot of it isn't very pleasant, and arguably not funny when viewed from the outside certainly, but it is how the game is. Absent of any agenda to reform how the game is I do wonder why on earth WR would go rummaging around in this

Then I'll have a problem if Marler is the only one cited and/or banned. (And i'm not bothered if Marler is actually banned, indeed had he picked up 2-4 weeks for his attempt to plant a forearm I'd have not felt that harsh)

And yes that a comment was directed referencing gypsies does make me less inclined to think anything need be done about it.

Digby wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:What utter nonsense, not least because most of the people complaining about the racist abuse on this thread are English. I guess some people will look for any excuse not to do something about racism, at least against gypsies.

Bit of a mix, partly I don't imagine for one moment what Marler or Evans have said about Lee was intended as racist. It's more akin to forwards being called fat and/or thick in the game, that backs are called girls (and we're yet to see a misogyny charge for that), that the likes of Toner and Stringer draw comment due to their heights, and the various jibes sent the way of Northerners, Southerners, Scousers, Brummies,the public school posh kids, the working class school dropouts, that the Welsh disturb their sheep, or that the French like to surrener, or.... In truth a lot of it isn't very pleasant, and arguably not funny when viewed from the outside certainly, but it is how the game is. Absent of any agenda to reform how the game is I do wonder why on earth WR would go rummaging around in this

Then I'll have a problem if Marler is the only one cited and/or banned. (And i'm not bothered if Marler is actually banned, indeed had he picked up 2-4 weeks for his attempt to plant a forearm I'd have not felt that harsh)

And yes that a comment was directed referencing gypsies does make me less inclined to think anything need be done about it.

What Marler said was clearly intended to be racist. Particularly if as has been reported he also said "get back to your caravan".

I'll also have a problem if there are lots more racist comments being made which have been ignored. Line them up and I'll condemn each and every one of them. That doesn't mean that when there is a clear offence committed the 6N committee can simply ignore it. I'm actually not more bothered that they ignored the racist comment than that they ignored the forearm to the face.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Digby wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:What utter nonsense, not least because most of the people complaining about the racist abuse on this thread are English. I guess some people will look for any excuse not to do something about racism, at least against gypsies.

Bit of a mix, partly I don't imagine for one moment what Marler or Evans have said about Lee was intended as racist. It's more akin to forwards being called fat and/or thick in the game, that backs are called girls (and we're yet to see a misogyny charge for that), that the likes of Toner and Stringer draw comment due to their heights, and the various jibes sent the way of Northerners, Southerners, Scousers, Brummies,the public school posh kids, the working class school dropouts, that the Welsh disturb their sheep, or that the French like to surrener, or.... In truth a lot of it isn't very pleasant, and arguably not funny when viewed from the outside certainly, but it is how the game is. Absent of any agenda to reform how the game is I do wonder why on earth WR would go rummaging around in this

Then I'll have a problem if Marler is the only one cited and/or banned. (And i'm not bothered if Marler is actually banned, indeed had he picked up 2-4 weeks for his attempt to plant a forearm I'd have not felt that harsh)

And yes that a comment was directed referencing gypsies does make me less inclined to think anything need be done about it.

What Marler said was clearly intended to be racist. Particularly if as has been reported he also said "get back to your caravan".

I'll also have a problem if there are lots more racist comments being made which have been ignored. Line them up and I'll condemn each and every one of them. That doesn't mean that when there is a clear offence committed the 6N committee can simply ignore it. I'm actually not more bothered that they ignored the racist comment than that they ignored the forearm to the face.

What was Lee saying back to marler? Maybe that's why Lee called it 'banter', this is all a bit one sided. 2 front rower's giving each other verbal during scrum down seems a hell of a lot more likely than marler being a raging racist to me

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:What Marler said was clearly intended to be racist. Particularly if as has been reported he also said "get back to your caravan".

Says you, myself I'm not sure how you conclude or prove his comments were intentionally racist, I'm pretty sure he intended to wind up Lee and was engaging in what he thought acceptable banter. Marler says he isn't racist and wouldn't use such language if racism would be inferred, Lee says he is willing to consider it banter only. Now one might say Marler's attempts at banter are so far wide of the mark he deserves sanction, both for his comments and as a warning to others, it's a stance but I think it OTT and a too isolated example of action being taken.

And now we have COS saying Marler was called a posh English (or possibly Saes) lady front bottom we already have one further case for WR to look into additional to the Marler and Evans cases, albeit we're still pending notice of the Evans case. And I doubt strongly those would be the only examples that would need looking into just from the England vs Wales game given WR's seeming new standard.

O'Shea also saying they should possibly reconsider the refs mic. I enjoy hearing the actual calls but I can see his point. The reason this whole thing blew up was because marler was overheard on the tv. Lee didn't actually complain and they had both "made up" before this even became an issue.

One stupid thing though is dragging it out this long, so there is press every day on it. It should have been dealt with the monday after the game.

twitchy wrote:O'Shea also saying they should possibly reconsider the refs mic. I enjoy hearing the actual calls but I can see his point. The reason this whole thing blew up was because marler was overheard on the tv. Lee didn't actually complain and they had both "made up" before this even became an issue.

One stupid thing though is dragging it out this long, so there is press every day on it. It should have been dealt with the monday after the game.

Basketball went the other way with the ref's mic and broadcast what the players were saying. This resulted in loss of sponsorship and earnings for the players who failed to meet an acceptable standard and the system ended up policing itself, or so I'm told, I can't say I watch any basketball.

CO'S has said that Lee called Marler 'a posh, English ****' prior to the gypsy boy comment. I reckon Marler will feel more insulted about being called 'posh' than Lee will about being called 'gypsy'.

Supposedly, Marler's also told Lee to get back to his caravan. No mention at which point during the exchange this one liner was uttered.

As a posh, English **** I take umbrage at Lee's comments. I hope the 'Posh English Association' releases a strongly worded statement about how disgraceful and insulting Lee's words were.

The thing is no comment was heard over the refs mike towards Marler (but then I can't hear him say anything about "caravan" either) so thats why action needsto be taken. As far as I would be concerned, Marler has apologised, Lee has accepted the apology and Marler has been told off. Surely that should be the end of the whole stupid affair?

oldbackrow wrote:The thing is no comment was heard over the refs mike towards Marler (but then I can't hear him say anything about "caravan" either) so thats why action needsto be taken. As far as I would be concerned, Marler has apologised, Lee has accepted the apology and Marler has been told off. Surely that should be the end of the whole stupid affair?

We could perhaps settle on a 12 month ban being given to Hartley for failure to control his player, clear dereliction in the line of duty.

Digby wrote:

oldbackrow wrote:The thing is no comment was heard over the refs mike towards Marler (but then I can't hear him say anything about "caravan" either) so thats why action needsto be taken. As far as I would be concerned, Marler has apologised, Lee has accepted the apology and Marler has been told off. Surely that should be the end of the whole stupid affair?

We could perhaps settle on a 12 month ban being given to Hartley for failure to control his player, clear dereliction in the line of duty.

Could somehow Youngs be included in the ban as he is one of the co captains?

oldbackrow wrote:

Digby wrote:

oldbackrow wrote:The thing is no comment was heard over the refs mike towards Marler (but then I can't hear him say anything about "caravan" either) so thats why action needsto be taken. As far as I would be concerned, Marler has apologised, Lee has accepted the apology and Marler has been told off. Surely that should be the end of the whole stupid affair?

We could perhaps settle on a 12 month ban being given to Hartley for failure to control his player, clear dereliction in the line of duty.

Could somehow Youngs be included in the ban as he is one of the co captains?

So too Farrell and Brown, we're onto something here, but Billy needs to be dropped quickly and quietly from his role as vice-captain.

Hold on, the Ref didn't do anything about it, world rugby should be brought to court post haste on charges of allowing a racist c^%t of a Ref be allowed to referee an international rugby match

Digby wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:What Marler said was clearly intended to be racist. Particularly if as has been reported he also said "get back to your caravan".

Says you, myself I'm not sure how you conclude or prove his comments were intentionally racist, I'm pretty sure he intended to wind up Lee and was engaging in what he thought acceptable banter. Marler says he isn't racist and wouldn't use such language if racism would be inferred, Lee says he is willing to consider it banter only. Now one might say Marler's attempts at banter are so far wide of the mark he deserves sanction, both for his comments and as a warning to others, it's a stance but I think it OTT and a too isolated example of action being taken.

And now we have COS saying Marler was called a posh English (or possibly Saes) lady front bottom we already have one further case for WR to look into additional to the Marler and Evans cases, albeit we're still pending notice of the Evans case. And I doubt strongly those would be the only examples that would need looking into just from the England vs Wales game given WR's seeming new standard.

The question isn't whether Marler is a racist - there is no offence of being a racist and he can think what he likes. The offence is saying a racist thing in public in the hearing of others. You say he was trying to wind him up. That is clearly the intention. Can you perhaps explain to me how language about someone's race in order to wind them up isn't racist abuse? That would certainly be a phenomenon unknown to the law.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: The question isn't whether Marler is a racist - there is no offence of being a racist and he can think what he likes. The offence is saying a racist thing in public in the hearing of others. You say he was trying to wind him up. That is clearly the intention. Can you perhaps explain to me how language about someone's race in order to wind them up isn't racist abuse? That would certainly be a phenomenon unknown to the law.

For the same reason I don't think Evans' comments about Lee being a gypsy were racist, I don't think either Evans or Marler were aiming to use racist language, indeed I'd be astonished if they were. It might be that use of the language is deemed of itself racist and they're both bang to rights, but I'd like to think we're capable of drawing a distinction, and that absent of an assessment that there was hatred behind the words allowing the coach to step in and say don't be a prat is plenty adequate.

It can certainly be argued that ignorance of what constitutes a race isn't sufficient as a defence and thus using a word intended to rile someone which happens to denote a race is racist, but I'd hope WR has some better things to spend its time on.

I'm also not convinced that Marler's comments would represent discrimination, as I doubt there's anyone on the Welsh side he wouldn't be happy to be rude to. So Lee hasn't been marked out to be treated differently. The only person being treated differently is Marler, Evans as yet has no hearing for his use of the same word, and I've never heard of a player being sanctioned for calling someone a saes c**t, or come to that a bog trotter, a sweaty, a sheep bother, a frog....

I'm still not bothered if Marler cops a ban, I am bothered this is a nonsense way to run discipline within the game. If WR really want to get to grips with some of the language which passes as standard in the game then fair enough, but I'd like them to mention that in advance, perhaps consult on it (though I'm less bothered about that), and then roll out the new policy.

Digby wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: The question isn't whether Marler is a racist - there is no offence of being a racist and he can think what he likes. The offence is saying a racist thing in public in the hearing of others. You say he was trying to wind him up. That is clearly the intention. Can you perhaps explain to me how language about someone's race in order to wind them up isn't racist abuse? That would certainly be a phenomenon unknown to the law.

For the same reason I don't think Evans' comments about Lee being a gypsy were racist, I don't think either Evans or Marler were aiming to use racist language, indeed I'd be astonished if they were. It might be that use of the language is deemed of itself racist and they're both bang to rights, but I'd like to think we're capable of drawing a distinction, and that absent of an assessment that there was hatred behind the words allowing the coach to step in and say don't be a prat is plenty adequate.

It can certainly be argued that ignorance of what constitutes a race isn't sufficient as a defence and thus using a word intended to rile someone which happens to denote a race is racist, but I'd hope WR has some better things to spend its time on.

I'm also not convinced that Marler's comments would represent discrimination, as I doubt there's anyone on the Welsh side he wouldn't be happy to be rude to. So Lee hasn't been marked out to be treated differently. The only person being treated differently is Marler, Evans as yet has no hearing for his use of the same word, and I've never heard of a player being sanctioned for calling someone a saes c**t, or come to that a bog trotter, a sweaty, a sheep bother, a frog....

I'm still not bothered if Marler cops a ban, I am bothered this is a nonsense way to run discipline within the game. If WR really want to get to grips with some of the language which passes as standard in the game then fair enough, but I'd like them to mention that in advance, perhaps consult on it (though I'm less bothered about that), and then roll out the new policy.

Utter bilge which doesn't even begin to address the point I made, but it's of a piece with this thread so I'll stop.

Hang on, this exchange took place on private land in an extreme contact encounter between bitter rivals where emotions run high and pain is expected.
If live tv makes this public domain and the ref.mic is used as a snoop-device,how is this different to scripted and contrived obscenities pouring forth daily on national tv soaps/comedy panel/chat shows etc., with swearing apparently seen as trendy or just banter ?
most minorities get a pasting on these platforms..
some of these edges are becoming very blurred.Marler's done bad but a ban for this
means other forums revealing vocalisations of this nature need roping in. ( I can think of 30 celebs who could be out of work tomorrow!)

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Utter bilge which doesn't even begin to address the point I made, but it's of a piece with this thread so I'll stop.

At least we have an agreed stance on the other's position.

Galfon wrote:Hang on, this exchange took place on private land in an extreme contact encounter between bitter rivals where emotions run high and pain is expected.
If live tv makes this public domain and the ref.mic is used as a snoop-device,how is this different to scripted and contrived obscenities pouring forth daily on national tv soaps/comedy panel/chat shows etc., with swearing apparently seen as trendy or just banter ?
most minorities get a pasting on these platforms..
some of these edges are becoming very blurred.Marler's done bad but a ban for this
means other forums revealing vocalisations of this nature need roping in. ( I can think of 30 celebs who could be out of work tomorrow!)

Anywhere to which the public has access is basically public. You don't have to go through and see if Sainsbury's plc owns the freehold of a piece of land to know whether racist abuse in a supermarket is done in public.

If you can't see how abuse intended to offend a person by reason of his race is different from drama then I think that's a problem that you'll have to wrestle with because surely at this stage of your life none of us can help you.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: If you can't see how abuse intended to offend a person by reason of his race is different from drama then I think that's a problem that you'll have to wrestle with because surely at this stage of your life none of us can help you.

Yes it's an intent to offend, but only within what passes for normal within rugby. Both Evans and Marler will have said gypsy with a notion they were mocking, but only in a normal take the piss way for the environments they find themselves in, neither will have meant I'm sure to have allowed themselves to come across as racist nor anything close.

Now if Marler or Evans want to go on the record and say damn straight we meant it as racial hatred and we intend to discriminate against Lee in a way we wouldn't consider for others then I think there's a problem, but that seems absurdly unlikely. So we're left with some wise individuals sitting on the outside projecting that Marler had an intent that went beyond another with the exact same use of a word, and they can only be guessing at that, and too we're left on the outside wondering why only Marler is potentially being singled out, and further we're left wondering why the use of gypsy can draw opprobrium but not posh English c**t, nor sheep botherer, or any of the many, many terms of insult used. And I don't see the point of citing this is racism when the code of conduct the covers behaviour draws not one bit of distinction between being discriminatory on the basis of race vs sex or national origin, or religion, or...

Digby wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: If you can't see how abuse intended to offend a person by reason of his race is different from drama then I think that's a problem that you'll have to wrestle with because surely at this stage of your life none of us can help you.

Yes it's an intent to offend, but only within what passes for normal within rugby. Both Evans and Marler will have said gypsy with a notion they were mocking, but only in a normal take the piss way for the environments they find themselves in, neither will have meant I'm sure to have allowed themselves to come across as racist nor anything close.

Now if Marler or Evans want to go on the record and say damn straight we meant it as racial hatred and we intend to discriminate against Lee in a way we wouldn't consider for others then I think there's a problem, but that seems absurdly unlikely. So we're left with some wise individuals sitting on the outside projecting that Marler had an intent that went beyond another with the exact same use of a word, and they can only be guessing at that, and too we're left on the outside wondering why only Marler is potentially being singled out, and further we're left wondering why the use of gypsy can draw opprobrium but not posh English c**t, nor sheep botherer, or any of the many, many terms of insult used. And I don't see the point of citing this is racism when the code of conduct the covers behaviour draws not one bit of distinction between being discriminatory on the basis of race vs sex or national origin, or religion, or...

Actually what Evans and Marler said are quite different in content and intent and to whom they were said. Evans was recounting his first impressions and his prejudices to a journalist. Marler was abusing someone with intent to make that person annoyed.

I'm giving up. I can't be arsed to explain why this is racist any more. If you don't think it is then good luck to you and pray you don't get nicked. For his part Marler will apparently be admitting the offence as he did before the 6N committee.

I was referring to free chat mainly not drama,
and who decides what is wind up/ banter and what is intent to offend.
I think JM was trying to rile SL and wind him up..I don't think he was trying to racially offend SL and
I don't believe SL was racially offended by JM in
the context of the game.
Thank you for your consideration of support/counselling/education - graciously declined.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
Actually what Evans and Marler said are quite different in content and intent and to whom they were said. Evans was recounting his first impressions and his prejudices to a journalist. Marler was abusing someone with intent to make that person annoyed.

I'm giving up. I can't be arsed to explain why this is racist any more. If you don't think it is then good luck to you and pray you don't get nicked. For his part Marler will apparently be admitting the offence as he did before the 6N committee.

For me you're inferring that Evans was recounting his prejudices whilst Marler alone had an intent to offend. It might be true, it might not. And misconduct doesn't only apply to statements made on the field of play, it will apply to to statements off the field and certainly where given to the media.

Also it's always going to be tricky to work out what people mean when they try to express themselves. As a for instance somewhere up this thread you noted you'd 'stop' and now you're noting you're 'giving up' - from which I might be inclined to infer that when you said you'd stop, you didn't actually mean you'd stop, and instead had some other use of the word stop in mind. Clearly I'd have to be being deliberately obtuse to assign such specific and sole meaning to your words, and not simply allow the rather more likely explanation that you were going to stop and then changed your mind, but it is tricky if we're going to infer specific meanings on behalf of others and then hold them accountable for our reflections.

It'd not surprise me if Marler was going to plead guilty as before. If WR are going to cite the previous panel wasn't independent so it's important they convene a new panel to find him guilty he mayn't have much wiggle room, and he'd have very limited scope to appeal so may as well limit the damage. Though we see WR don't perhaps grasp the notion of independent. He certainly could be banned given the code of conduct as is, but it's preposterous to me at least to pick one example out of the game of rugby and hold it up to the light, and just to highlight that using another reecnt example there's one well known player of an English team who playing in the HEC but a few weeks back noted his view that the other side were fucking finian bastards (not sure how that will look after the auto-edit gets to work) and maybe it's just me, but even putting my derision of gypsies to one side we seem as a game to be lacking consistency, again.