What's the call

[Account Deleted]

I asked these questions on the Hartley thread: No one answered them, perhaps understandably in that thread.

Hartley's defence was, in part, that he was swearing at the Leicester hooker and not the ref so should that matter? Can you call a player a F@&*%ing Cheat and expect to get away with it?

Assuming a player called an opposition player a "F@&*%ing Cheat" what would your reaction as a ref be?

Assuming a player called an teammate a "F@&*%ing Cheat" what would your reaction as a ref be?

Obviously we will assume it is "clear and obvious".

 

[damo]

He can call his teammate whatever he likes.

Calling another player an f'ing cheat would, depending on the circumstances, generally amount to misconduct as it has the potential to spark an incident. In most cases it would be a penalty only, though if it was screamed at the player with a finger being poked then they might have a rest for 10 minutes to calm down.

 

[OB..]

Player: F*$%@#g idiot!
Referee: Penalty for abuse.
Player: But I was talking to myself, Sir.
Referee: When I am refereeing, nobody talks to you like that.

Probably apocryphal, but why offer a hostage to fortune?

 

[Browner]

Hartley's defence was, in part, that he was swearing at the Leicester hooker and not the ref so should that matter? Can you call a player a F@&*%ing Cheat and expect to get away with it?

Assuming a player called an opposition player a "F@&*%ing Cheat" what would your reaction as a ref be?
Assuming a player called an teammate a "F@&*%ing Cheat" what would your reaction as a ref be?
Obviously we will assume it is "clear and obvious".

PK & a strong caution, on either.

But then I don't referee Elite, where DH stated it's "the sort of comment which front rows often say about their opponents

TBH, i've not heard it all season, i'm now asking myself at which level it starts to come in & is routinely 'ignored ' by referees [or maybe DH was lying?]

 

[beckett50]

But he was looking at WB when he said it ?

 

[Robert Burns]

Judge it in your game. If you are repeatedly telling someone that their conduct and language is not acceptable, and then they say something like that, to me they are just trying to use misdirection.

WB handled it with excellent finesse considering the occasion and the level. He never lost it, he asked, warned and penalised.

Rugby is a better sport because of what he did. Don't accept it in your games either, but the sanction you give depends on how severe you believe it was.

 

[Robert Burns]

Also, if a player calls another player/ref a racial slur, 99% of the time we would red card immediately.

If a player calls into question the sporting integrity of the opposition/ref in the way Hartley did, why is it not as offensive? And why is it not the same outcome?

If they are talking to their own team, the slur is obviously still going to be ath opposition/ref. If they say it loud enough that the ref hears, then that is disputing a referees decision, if it's abuse, then that is abusing the match official and is equally as unacceptable.

Who the words are directed at, IMHO, does not matter.

 

[Browner]

Also, if a player calls another player/ref a racial slur, 99% of the time we would red card immediately.

If a player calls into question the sporting integrity of the opposition/ref in the way Hartley did, why is it not as offensive? And why is it not the same outcome?

If they are talking to their own team, the slur is obviously still going to be ath opposition/ref. If they say it loud enough that the ref hears, then that is disputing a referees decision, if it's abuse, then that is abusing the match official and is equally as unacceptable.

Who the words are directed at, IMHO, does not matter.

IMO abuse is abuse, sometimes it includes wording intented to pick on a physical characteristic of the target to personalise / enhance the abuse. In that context I see no difference between " you're a Fckunig xxxxxx Bsatrad " & you can now insert any of the following descriptive words into the XXXX to have equal abuse value
Ugly/Ginger/Gay/ Black/Lanky/ Bald/ Skinny/Gringo/Taffy/Pom/Bok/Jock/English/Kiwi/Paddy/Indian/ Fat/Goofy ...etc

In my experience, abuse is never given out soley due to the physical characteristic of the recipient, moreover that something they did likely pissed off the verbaliser [for every reaction there is a cause action], i've never seen/experienced real racism behaviour in the sport ... ie where someone is treated different soley because of their colour/race, but i've seen loads of superior behaviour based upon a persons other physical characteristics !

Ironically, treating the abuser differently because he chose 'one word rather than another' is almost a discriminatory/prejudicial approach in itself. Personally I prefer the way that world comedy deals with the Nationality Race Colour Religion etc , everyone is equally a fair target - irrespective.

The bit about the Hartley case that intriges me, is that throughout the rugby world [& the hearing] the 'C' word seems to be much further up the heirarcy of unacceptablity than the concept of swearing at the referee per se'

 

[Dixie]

Also, if a player calls another player/ref a racial slur, 99% of the time we would red card immediately.

If a player calls into question the sporting integrity of the opposition/ref in the way Hartley did, why is it not as offensive? And why is it not the same outcome?

The racial slur is both contrary to rugby law (10.4m - good sportsmanship) and contrary to the law of the land (certainly in the UK and the US). The latter in my view makes it a bigger deal - call someone a "f%^&*(g cheat" and apart from the potential to cause a breach of the peace, you break no obvious law of the land and risk no prison time, unlike with the racially-aggravated offence.

I broadly agree with OB on this, though: swearing at another player (team-mate or otherwise - disagree with Damo about it not being a problem) is a 10.4m foul play offence, which makes it among the most heinous rugby offences. We should have no sympathy with it. The excuse often put forward for soccer players is that they have spent every aspect of their lives to date swearing with impunity at other people, so it's unreasonable to expect them not to do it at work. Crap! If they weren't footballers, they'd be manning the checkout at Tesco. Try swearing in that manner at the customers or the managers and see how long the job lasts.

 

[crossref]

i've never seen/experienced real racism behaviour in the sport ... ie where someone is treated different soley because of their colour/race, but i've seen loads of superior behaviour based upon a persons other physical characteristics !

perhaps you might need to keep your ears open more...

We have a sikh player in our U16Bs. He's as mild mannered a boy as you can imagine (I have to say he's not entirely cut out for rugby!). I'd say about once/twice a season he experiences racial abuse enough for a referee/coach to notice. One two occasions when opponents realise he has a cloth hair covering under his scrum cap (which is of course of religious significance for sikhs) they've tried to knock the scrum cap off.

 

[4eyesbetter]

Also, if a player calls another player/ref a racial slur, 99% of the time we would red card immediately.

If a player calls into question the sporting integrity of the opposition/ref in the way Hartley did, why is it not as offensive? And why is it not the same outcome?

If they are talking to their own team, the slur is obviously still going to be ath opposition/ref. If they say it loud enough that the ref hears, then that is disputing a referees decision, if it's abuse, then that is abusing the match official and is equally as unacceptable.

Who the words are directed at, IMHO, does not matter.

Players are not there to be unbiased observers. They're there to play, compete and win. Cheating is not absolutely incompatible with playing the game in the same way as it's absolutely incompatible with refereeing it. The laws do not assume that the players will always play fairly (if they did, most of them would be unnecessary); but they do assume that the referee will apply them fairly.

 

[SimonSmith]

perhaps you might need to keep your ears open more...

We have a sikh player in our U16Bs. He's as mild mannered a boy as you can imagine (I have to say he's not entirely cut out for rugby!). I'd say about once/twice a season he experiences racial abuse enough for a referee/coach to notice. One two occasions when opponents realise he has a cloth hair covering under his scrum cap (which is of course of religious significance for sikhs) they've tried to knock the scrum cap off.

Living in Virginia, this question raises its head more often than I'd like. I also have to deal, on occasion with the imputation from Coaches that whilst the referees are not racist, they don't have the confidence or management skills to deal with black players.

I'm lucky. My defence of "I AM that big an asshole to all players - just ask around" stands me in good stead. But in a Commonwealth with the checkered history of Virginia, it can be a minefield.

 

[Browner]

perhaps you might need to keep your ears open more...

We have a sikh player in our U16Bs. He's as mild mannered a boy as you can imagine (I have to say he's not entirely cut out for rugby!). I'd say about once/twice a season he experiences racial abuse enough for a referee/coach to notice. One two occasions when opponents realise he has a cloth hair covering under his scrum cap (which is of course of religious significance for sikhs) they've tried to knock the scrum cap off.

My ears are wide wide open ........... but i'm wise enough to know the difference

I've got x2phillipeano's, x5 mixed race, x1 jamaican, x2 Polish, x2 Welsh, x2 Scots, x2 Irish, x2 Asian, x1 Ukrainian, & x1 Cornish & x2 Ginger players/parents in our 44 player squad/s & I gtee you , not a single 'real' issue in the last 7 years

Note.... I did on one occassion need to speak to the parents of one of my mixed race players to tell them of a 'serious' incident involving their son ... The dad looked at me all concerned with deep furrowed brow as i started to recount the incident....

Interestingly Dads face quickly changed to a jokey smile, when i advised that it was his son that had called a teammate a dirty gypsy.....[ for not showering after the game ! ] ....... the polish lads parents all laughed it off cos the two lads are best mates at school & the parents go on holiday together ! by consensus everyone thought it was quite witty.

Crossref, how do you & the opposition coaches handle the Sikh lad's incidents, Formally report to the RFU & start a court case?

Maybe the teammates of Sikh'y should all jump to his support & re-educate the opposition, a great rugby way to sort such crap - collective distate demonstrated by teammates .......... " you pick on one of us - you get all of us "

 

[Davet]

Pick on one, pick on all!

Or, 99 as we used to say.