Joe Marler Punishment

First topic message reminder :

What is your opinion on it?

mikey_dragon wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Hoonercat wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Even my grandparents said this was a ridiculous punishment, and they're more racist than anyone I know.

Ridiculous as in too harsh or too lenient?

Too harsh - I could understand a ban, but not the fine. We also agreed it was not a racist slur, but then again we are realists not caught up in the world of PC.

The fine was the correct decision. WR have considered Marlers comments to be worthy of a ban in the following game. A game that earned him over £20k. Not much of a punishment if he gets a couple of weeks off, but is allowed to keep money for a game in which he shouldn't have been playing, is it?

So anyone who has an opinion you don't share, isn't a realist?

I kinda stated the reason I consider us realists. Surely it isn't that hard to decipher.

No, it isn't, and what has that got to do with my point?

I answered your question. I didn't dispute your point about the decision to ban and fine Marler. My opinion is that just a warning or ban would have sufficed, had it been dealt with there and then. I don't like how this has dragged on for weeks, and over the use of a term I don't really consider offensive, albeit a professional sportsman should know better than to use it in the context which he had intended to on the field. Personally I would have let it go and those around me (family and friends) agree, but I also understand why world rugby felt the need to intervene. I also think that just a ban would have been bad enough from Marler's perspective. It's not just nothing like you seem to think, it's Joe being prevented from playing the game he loves - someone could come into the Quins team and oust him too, so there could be further ramifications.

You've been a prominent figure across these discussions, I'm guessing you were formerly a gypsy yourself?

I know some people that call themselves "gypsy".  It derives from an ethnic origin believed to be from Egypt.  If someone shouted "Caucasian Boy" would they be banned for being racist?  Is "Yankee" racist.  Is "Limey" racist.  Is "Pommie" racist.  I just don't get it.

What I find strange is the term "gypsy boy" is being repeated in headlines on the BBC and elsewhere. If the term was racist why would they be headlining it and repeating it over and over to tens of millions of people and children.

mikey_dragon wrote:I answered your question. I didn't dispute your point about the decision to ban and fine Marler. My opinion is that just a warning or ban would have sufficed, had it been dealt with there and then. I don't like how this has dragged on for weeks, and over the use of a term I don't really consider offensive, albeit a professional sportsman should know better than to use it in the context which he had intended to on the field. Personally I would have let it go and those around me (family and friends) agree, but I also understand why world rugby felt the need to intervene. I also think that just a ban would have been bad enough from Marler's perspective. It's not just nothing like you seem to think, it's Joe being prevented from playing the game he loves - someone could come  into the Quins team and oust him too, so there could be further ramifications.

You've been a prominent figure across these discussions, I'm guessing you were formerly a gypsy yourself?

No, you didn't answer my question. You just posted a cheeky comment that was 'a hit and a miss'. You hold yourself a 'realist', as you don't believe the comment was racist, and so dismiss those who disagree with your opinion as not being 'realist', even though we have stronger grounds for believing so.

You and I might not find the comment offensive, but our opinion on what we find offensive will mean little to nothing for those that do. It wasn't us that were being offended. It was Lee, who did find the comment offensive, and some of those from the traveller community, who also found the comment to be offensive. It also sets a very poor example for those that follow the game, and are impressionable.

I have never said 'it's not just nothing'. I understand that Marler would want to be involved in the last few games of the season, but Marler would still be getting £20k for a game that he would rightly have been banned from, if 6N's had have acted appropriately. That's justice.

Nore Staat wrote:I know some people that call themselves "gypsy".  It derives from an ethnic origin believed to be from Egypt.  If someone shouted "Caucasian Boy" would they be banned for being racist?  Is "Yankee" racist.  Is "Limey" racist.  Is "Pommie" racist.  I just don't get it.

What I find strange is the term "gypsy boy" is being repeated in headlines on the BBC and elsewhere.  If the term was racist why would they be headlining it and repeating it over and over to tens of millions of people and children.

Because the words themselves are not classed as foul language. It's the intent, and the context, that matters.

Munchkin, I consider myself a realist for being untainted in a world overrun by PC gone mad. If you don't think there's surreal elements of PC involved in this then I think that's wrong. Reading back I can't see where I dismissed anyone's opinion. I respect yours but I also have my own.

mikey_dragon wrote:Munchkin, I consider myself a realist for being untainted in a world overrun by PC gone mad. If you don't think there's surreal elements of PC involved in this then I think that's wrong. Reading back I can't see where I dismissed anyone's opinion. I respect yours but I also have my own.

I get as annoyed at the PC brigade as the next man, mikey. It isn't being overly PC to say that the comment was racist though. It was. Marler isn't a racist, and shouldn't be treated as such. He said something stupid in an attempt at winding up the opposition. He just said the wrong thing, and crossed the line on what is acceptable. He knows this himself.

Speaking for myself I don't believe it to be racist but I happen to agree with everything else you've said there. What's done is done now, I can't see anything similar to this happening again any time soon - I guess that's what world rugby were looking to achieve. Marler will no doubt have a 'smarter mouth' in future . Hopefully all is forgiven soon and we get back to the rugby!

I'm sure Marler will be a little more careful, in future.

Yes, let's get back to the rugby

Why do you think he deserves a ban then Mikey?

Someone in this world will find offence about just about anything anybody says and the media circus will larch onto it and blow it out of all proportion. If 20 people disagree with an issue be it a comment, planning application or whatever, with social media and the press always looking for something to headline, it will become a big issue (not the magazine which I have a lot of time for).

It is about time we learnt to ignore these minor pressure groups that don't really represent anybody but themselves but can make big headlines as the media is always looking for a negative comment from someone, often anyone.

It's an interesting point Well Past that too many things are taboo now. In this case for instance Marler quickly realised he was out of order (or thought he was), obviously in your view this isn't the case so who who should decide?

7 1/2, I thought Marler was wrong and a severe censure or similar by the RFU or 6N would have sufficed.

It is the press blowing things out of all proportion and then WR and the like jumping on the band wagon that winds me up. They go to these small minority groups and speak to a self appointed spokesperson for a whole community (in this case) or village or other, knowing that they will get an inflammatory answer. Did they go around and speak to travellers about it and canvas opinion, it didn't make the news if they did. These "spokespersons" are nearly all extremists in their field, look at the old trade unions, Scargill and his cronies did not represent the views of their members, but they were motivated by their extremism to get into power, unless you have extreme views, most people cannot be bothered and therefore the management od the organisations, groups, or whatever is open to those with the extreme views and an agenda.

It's still the 'heat of the moment' thing which was badly wrong from the 6Ns point of view. It's just not a valid excuse, second that happened people were going to pipe up more.

To be fair Well past it, WR didn't jump on the bandwagon, they were forced to step in due to RFU/6N bumbling of the issue. The justification of 'heat of the moment' infuriated a lot of people.

The media have also canvassed a lot of 'gypsys' / 'Travellers', unfortunately they canvassed well known sports people, who loved the chance to play moral judges, despite them having previous for being ignorant morons!

On this occasion a quick slap on the wrists for Marler would've more than sufficed, RFU/6N decided to justify it without an exterior dudication, and caused the mess.

I have to say, 2 games and 20k is a very reasonable response, and WR have acted pretty well on this occasion, done and dusted...

No 7&1/2 wrote:Why do you think he deserves a ban then Mikey?

Did you read my comments?

Yes. Why do you think it deserved a ban?

My comments said it was harsh. I said personally I would not have banned him.

I read that 'My opinion is that just a warning or ban would have sufficed' as you would have been erring between it. What did he do wrong in your opinion then?

Well I'd say the way he acted and the context in which he meant the remark was unprofessional. I can see why WR banned him, because people are offended and they are setting an example. What I meant with that is that I understand the ban, but I don't like it and this is the first I've heard of players being fined for these sort of remarks.

Wasn't there the example of Fitz from the early 90s pointed out this week but true, I haven't really heard of racist comments on the field. I suppose the reason I ask you is if you don't feel they are racist, why do you think a reprimand was needed? Why was it more unprofessional than anything else said to put off players?

7.5 I think I've explained that as well as my stance across multiple comments. I guess the reprimand was needed to prevent further sh*t storms in the future, which stinks. It's neither more or less unprofessional than other things, which is why I said there were elements of PC intervening on this one.

Which I understand, but don't get why you would think it fair enough for a ban if you think there were no racial undertones in the comments. Take out the racism and it's a pretty benign set of comments.

Heaf wrote:There is nothing wrong with the word Gypsy itself - there is even a Gypsy Roma Traveller Police Association ... there are some terms that are offensive on their own but Gypsy isn't one of them.

Maybe it was the use of 'Boy' When clearly he is a man.


Men (606ers) should get out more and get down the pub as they are beginning to sound and act like women with all their bitching and taking offence at how things are said and blowing things out of proportion.
Eat a Yorkie, drink Ale, fart and scratch your ass in public and join in some friendly Banter with your fellow man for heavens sake!

You do of course realise that political correctness is a linguistic philosophy? IE what you are referring to is not political correctness at all but something all together different.

Political correctness is a linguistic philosophy whereby all words with pejorative meanings and / or connotations involving assumptions of sex, sexuality or similar matters are discarded so that no value assumptions about people involved the matter being discussed can be derived from the terms used. IE using "convenor" rather than "chairMAN"

Do I score extra pedant points for this?

TightHEAD wrote:

Heaf wrote:There is nothing wrong with the word Gypsy itself - there is even a Gypsy Roma Traveller Police Association ... there are some terms that are offensive on their own but Gypsy isn't one of them.

Maybe it was the use of 'Boy' When clearly he is a man.


Men (606ers) should get out more and get down the pub as they are beginning to sound and act like women with all their bitching and taking offence at how things are said and blowing things out of proportion.
Eat a Yorkie, drink Ale, fart and scratch your ass in public and join in some friendly Banter with your fellow man for heavens sake!

Absolutely perfectly written...

If it had been said in the pub, over a pint there would be no issue here, however said on mic in front of 80'000 people, and millions more live is unprofessional.

If I were to walk into my office and call someone 'Black boy' (neither racist terms by your definition, black and boy aren't offencive right?) I would be reprimanded in an instant.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Which I understand, but don't get why you would think it fair enough for a ban if you think there were no racial undertones in the comments. Take out the racism and it's a pretty benign set of comments.

Well for me it's been a haphazard situation, so there's bound to be a little confusion here and there...

TJ wrote:You do of course realise that political correctness is a linguistic philosophy?  IE what you are referring to is not political correctness at all but something all together different.

Political correctness is a linguistic philosophy whereby all words with pejorative meanings and / or connotations involving assumptions of sex, sexuality or similar matters are discarded so that no value assumptions about people involved the matter being discussed can be derived from the terms used.  IE using "convenor" rather than "chairMAN"

Do I score extra pedant points for this?

No points, but interesting to be informed of this.

Now that World Rugby have banned Marler for two games and fined him £20,000 - can the newspapers add the label "racist" to him, such as "the racist Joe Marler".  "Joe Marler, who has served a ban for racism, denies being a racist", "should the racist Joe Marler represent England ever again".  

Similarly while he is playing, is it okay for his opponents to call him a racist in the general banter / sledging that occurs on the field.

Being racist isn't a set state anyway, so probably on dodgy grounds for that. Making a racist statement also doesn't necessarily translate to being racist. And I'm sure someone will try to wind him up in the future.

Nore Staat wrote:Now that World Rugby have banned Marler for two games and fined him £20,000 - can the newspapers add the label "racist" to him, such as "the racist Joe Marler".  "Joe Marler, who has served a ban for racism, denies being a racist", "should the racist Joe Marler represent England ever again".  

Similarly while he is playing, is it okay for his opponents to call him a racist in the general banter / sledging that occurs on the field.

Get off your high horse, you fanny.

Nore Staat - no - he has not accepted being racist - he has accepted using racist language - a fine but important distinction.

On Context - Black american rappers often call each other and refer to each other as n*****. Not a racist term in that context. However if I go up to a chap of African descent who I do not know and call him a n***** - that would usually be construed as racist.

I will accept that the way context is all is a very slippery concept and difficult to both define and grasp- leads to a lot of the difficulties folk have with this.

Man up people.

TightHEAD wrote:

Heaf wrote:There is nothing wrong with the word Gypsy itself - there is even a Gypsy Roma Traveller Police Association ... there are some terms that are offensive on their own but Gypsy isn't one of them.

Maybe it was the use of 'Boy' When clearly he is a man.


Men (606ers) should get out more and get down the pub as they are beginning to sound and act like women with all their bitching and taking offence at how things are said and blowing things out of proportion.
Eat a Yorkie, drink Ale, fart and scratch your ass in public and join in some friendly Banter with your fellow man for heavens sake!

Because real men drink ale, scratch their ass, fart in public and accept racist comments. Grrrrr!!!

Munchkin wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

Heaf wrote:There is nothing wrong with the word Gypsy itself - there is even a Gypsy Roma Traveller Police Association ... there are some terms that are offensive on their own but Gypsy isn't one of them.

Maybe it was the use of 'Boy' When clearly he is a man.


Men (606ers) should get out more and get down the pub as they are beginning to sound and act like women with all their bitching and taking offence at how things are said and blowing things out of proportion.
Eat a Yorkie, drink Ale, fart and scratch your ass in public and join in some friendly Banter with your fellow man for heavens sake!

Because real men drink ale, scratch their ass, fart in public and accept racist comments. Grrrrr!!!

And type arse rather than ass

Hoonercat wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

Heaf wrote:There is nothing wrong with the word Gypsy itself - there is even a Gypsy Roma Traveller Police Association ... there are some terms that are offensive on their own but Gypsy isn't one of them.

Maybe it was the use of 'Boy' When clearly he is a man.


Men (606ers) should get out more and get down the pub as they are beginning to sound and act like women with all their bitching and taking offence at how things are said and blowing things out of proportion.
Eat a Yorkie, drink Ale, fart and scratch your ass in public and join in some friendly Banter with your fellow man for heavens sake!

Because real men drink ale, scratch their ass, fart in public and accept racist comments. Grrrrr!!!

And type arse rather than ass

heh, I will add that to my list of things to do, to be a real man. Now I'm all set to pull a woman So, go to pub, buy an ale, meet a woman, fart loudly, tell her she's a great arse while munching a Yorkie. It can't fail!

Did anyone watch that episode of South Park where Randy says a racist word on that live game show? Man that was funny.

TJ wrote:Nore Staat - no - he has not accepted being racist - he has accepted using racist language - a fine but important distinction.

On Context - Black american rappers often call each other and refer to each other as n*****.   Not a racist term in that context.  However if I go up to a chap of African descent who I do not know and call him a n***** - that would usually be construed as racist.

I will accept that the way context is all is a very slippery concept and difficult to both define and grasp- leads to a lot of the difficulties folk have with this.

Does the word you're referring to start with a 'n' and ends with 'a'? It's a term of endearment when used between black males and completely different to the 'n' word. Yet when you try to type it on this forum, it is auto replaced with the following:
HI EVERYONE I'M A RACIST. Seriously, try it.
As you brought up black rappers in a thread regarding racism, I find it odd that songs such as Cave Bitch can still be bought on UK websites. Is that how equality works? (that's a rhetorical question, I'm sure no one would think that the below lyrics are acceptable, but it does show the level of hypocrisy, though from whom I'm not sure - the law?).

Give me a black goddess sister I can't resist her. No stringy haired, blonde
hair, blue eyed, pale skinned buttermilk complexion. Grafted, recessive,
depressive, ironing board backside straight up and straight down. No
frills, no thrills, Miss six o'clock, subject to have the itch, mutanoid,
caucazoid, white cave bitch...

Rap is often misogynist to extremes - I don't like it all all for that reason. N***** is the same word ending in a is merely an affectation in the spelling same as Wassup / Whats up

The fine is probably fair, however i would have given 4 games but i guess all the bad press Marler got as well as how long it took makes up for it.

The real embarrassment are those who runs the 6N. I thought better of the tournament to be brutally honest but can't say i'm 100% surprised either.

The lasting memories of this years six nations are that Joe Marler got banned for a couple of weeks and fined $20k, remind me was it England or Wales that won the tournament?

TJ wrote:N***** is the same word ending in a is merely an affectation in the spelling same as Wassup / Whats up

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one, though you might want to tell this chap he needn't have changed the spelling and that the 'traditional' spelling wouldn't have caused uproar.

https://www.residentadvisor.net/review-view.aspx?id=16784

YOu cannot tell the spelling from the spoken word - so my point still stands - its merely an illustration of why context not the actual words really matter. Try this then. The word "queer" meaning homosexual. Used by homosexual men amongst themselves as they try to reclaim it its not an insult. when used by hetrosexual men to describe one another it becomes an insult

TJ wrote:YOu cannot tell the spelling from the spoken word - so my point still stands - its merely an illustration of why context not the actual words really matter.  Try this then.  The word "queer" meaning homosexual.  Used by homosexual men amongst themselves as they try to reclaim it its not an insult.  when used by hetrosexual men to describe one another it becomes an insult

Yet n***a is generally not viewed as a derogatory term when written by one black person to another (social media for example) whereas n****r is. Apart from on 606. Like I said, agree to disagree, can't be bothered arguing the point.

aucklandlaurie wrote:
The lasting memories of this years six nations are that Joe Marler got banned for a couple of weeks and fined $20k, remind me was it England or Wales that won the tournament?

Guy I work with (Big England fan) pretty much asked the same question the other day, such a shame.

Were you trying to wind him up?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Were you trying to wind him up?

Again, consider how that adds to the discussion, and wether your input is necesary in this way. No wonder you spend more time bickering and not discussing issues.

So he was giving some back then!

Munchkin wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

Heaf wrote:There is nothing wrong with the word Gypsy itself - there is even a Gypsy Roma Traveller Police Association ... there are some terms that are offensive on their own but Gypsy isn't one of them.

Maybe it was the use of 'Boy' When clearly he is a man.


Men (606ers) should get out more and get down the pub as they are beginning to sound and act like women with all their bitching and taking offence at how things are said and blowing things out of proportion.
Eat a Yorkie, drink Ale, fart and scratch your ass in public and join in some friendly Banter with your fellow man for heavens sake!

Because real men drink ale, scratch their ass, fart in public and accept racist comments. Grrrrr!!!

Reminds me of Valley girls off the leash and on the lash in Cardiff.

Fanster wrote:

TightHEAD wrote:

Heaf wrote:There is nothing wrong with the word Gypsy itself - there is even a Gypsy Roma Traveller Police Association ... there are some terms that are offensive on their own but Gypsy isn't one of them.

Maybe it was the use of 'Boy' When clearly he is a man.


Men (606ers) should get out more and get down the pub as they are beginning to sound and act like women with all their bitching and taking offence at how things are said and blowing things out of proportion.
Eat a Yorkie, drink Ale, fart and scratch your ass in public and join in some friendly Banter with your fellow man for heavens sake!

Absolutely perfectly written...

If it had been said in the pub, over a pint there would be no issue here, however said on mic in front of 80'000 people, and millions more live is unprofessional.

If I were to walk into my office and call someone 'Black boy' (neither racist terms by your definition, black and boy aren't offencive right?) I would be reprimanded in an instant.

Just asking...What if it were said in the pub, over a pint and somebody recorded it on their phone who took offence and reported it to the Feds?