Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

The Joe Marler decision has thrown referees under the bus

(Photo by Steve Bardens/Getty Images for Harlequins)

The latest instalment of the Joe Marler soap opera seemed like a best-forgotten storm in a teacup, but then in stepped the RFU whose clumsy, ill-thought response instead guaranteed it will run and run. In case you somehow missed it, English rugby’s biggest self-publicist earned himself a six-week ban – with four suspended for reasons best known to those who sit in judgement on such matters – for verbally abusing Kiwi forward Jake Heenan about his mother during Harlequins’ Gallagher Premiership meeting with Bristol Bears last week.

ADVERTISEMENT

At the subsequent disciplinary hearing, we discovered that Marler considered “Your mum’s a f***ing whore” to be standard vocabulary during a rugby match and that this only changes when the mother referenced is being treated for cancer.

In truth, while this language is pretty unsavoury it is far from new. Think back 30 years to Brian Moore winding up the French before, during and after every Five Nations meeting between England and France. Was it an exchange of polite front row chit-chat that so enraged Vincent Moscato on an infamous day in 1992 when France finished with 13 players? Probably not.

Video Spacer

Being Barbarians – Rugby Documentary

Our new rugby documentary follows Scott Robertson and Ronan O’Gara in a brand new saga following the Barbarians rugby team, one of the most famous sides in the world. In this clash, they take on New Zealand XV.

Video Spacer

Being Barbarians – Rugby Documentary

Our new rugby documentary follows Scott Robertson and Ronan O’Gara in a brand new saga following the Barbarians rugby team, one of the most famous sides in the world. In this clash, they take on New Zealand XV.

What has changed, however, is context. Back then English rugby’s powers that be made no attempt to claim the moral high ground. In those days beating your opponent up, shaking hands, buying him a beer and sharing a song was about as far as it went. Core values, mission statements, inclusivity and political correctness were something for the future.

Whether you think Joe Marler is a fun, off-the-wall, loveable rogue or you are with me in finding him an attention-seeking self-publicist whose attempts to build Brand Marler and fill his pockets are grindingly obvious and dull is irrelevant to this debate.

Related

When you want parents to believe respect for others is at the heart of your sport it is impossible to simultaneously laugh off Marler’s latest indiscretion as boys being boys. The RFU cannot concurrently condone his sledging while also pompously playing the respect card – and this is why they lost no time in issuing the England loosehead with a ban.

However, by taking this course of action, the Twickenham shoot-yourself-in-the-foot brigade have immediately placed a huge Marler-shaped elephant in the corner of the room for those tasked with refereeing our sport. Referees across England have in recent years been tasked with delivering a pre-match lecture to both captains regarding their responsibility for ‘upholding rugby values.’

ADVERTISEMENT

This catch-all relates to appealing for decisions, diving, mocking opponents who have made mistakes and dissent amongst other things. Policing this is far from straightforward but compared to the task that English rugby’s governing body have now set the men in the middle, it is a positive breeze.

This is because every time someone now opens their mouth to hurl invective, the opposition are fully aware that this is an offence which carries a two-match ban (sorry, I can’t acknowledge the nonsense about suspended sentences) and which the referee, therefore, has to deal with.

In turn, this requires officials across the land to actually pay some attention to the kind of verbal diarrhoea squabbling rugby players routinely spout and then make a decision on what is and isn’t acceptable. The alternative approach referees have historically favoured – tune it out – now risks the official spending his/her afternoon being criticised for inaction and blamed for any subsequent reprisals.

“Can you look out for their flanker hitting our scrum-half late” has been the kind of poser which has confronted referees since time immemorial, but they will seemingly also now need to decide whether commenting on an opponent’s mother’s preferred method of earning a living crosses an undefined ‘bad taste’ line. “He has hurt me” can now also be “he has hurt my feelings.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Where a TMO is present, might we also find the effects microphone being cranked up? “I’m sorry Karl, I can’t quite hear if Harlequins’ No1 called the Bristol No7’s mother a whore or a bore. Can I have your best audio again please, director?”

Next time you hear someone banging on about rugby values and contrasting it with football via that old adage involving thugs and gentlemen, pause for a second and remember Joe Marler. But also – as the RFU are about to discover – never disregard the law of unintended consequence.

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 6 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

146 Go to comments
TRENDING
TRENDING The Waikato young gun solving one of rugby players' 'obvious problems' Injury breeds opportunity for Waikato entrepreneur
Search