Nick Cain column: Lay off Joe Marler, PC brigade – boys will be boys!

When did the word gipsy, which has been used to describe Romany people in Britain for centuries, become non-permissible? To my knowledge, never. For crying out loud there’s a famous band of Spanish/French Romany origins called the Gipsy Kings and a television documentary show called My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding.  Nor has the noun ‘boy’ ever been outlawed.
That’s why I disagree fundamentally with the decision to try to pin a charge of a racial slur on Joe Marler for calling Samson Lee, the Welsh tighthead he was playing opposite at Twickenham last Saturday, “gipsy boy”.
When South Africa won the 1995 World Cup final thanks to Joel Stransky’s drop-goal, the Springbok coach Kitch Christie said in the Press conference afterwards that they owed the victory to “our Jew-boy”.
The IRB made no protest at the time, and nor did Nelson Mandela or the ANC. It was accepted as a term of affection within a team that valued its Jewish connection.
Would there have been the same furore if the Marler had said to Lee, “what’s up Welsh boy”, or Lee had said to Marler, “watch it English boy”? Not a chance. How about using “Brummy boy” or “Scouse boy” as a substitute? Is that discrimination? The broadcasting ‘thought police’ wouldn’t have spent a second debating whether to turn up the volume, they would simply have moved on.
Moving on was also the common sense solution proposed by the two opposing coaches, Warren Gatland and Eddie Jones, after the match. However, when the PC brigade that is currently rife in UK schools, universities, town halls, broadcasting – and now the Welsh Rugby Union – get their hooks into a story with a ‘victim’, especially one from a minority, watch out!
Just as the word gipsy cannot be classed as derogatory, nor – despite the opinion of some PC ‘experts’ – can the word ‘boy’. At least, not in this country. ‘Boy’ definitely has a pejorative and insulting meaning to black Americans which reaches back to slavery and its oppressive and divisive role in the history of the USA.
However, in many parts of Britain ‘boy’ is also a long-standing term of male endearment, and it is used as such on a widespread basis.
We also have a long, precious, hard-earned tradition of freedom of speech, and we should guard that right jealously.
I abhor racism, and those who use it stoke the fires of enmity between people, but I don’t believe that there is any proof of that here.
That’s not to suggest that when Marler put the two words together during a bout of push-and-shove in last weekend’s showdown he meant them as a term of endearment towards Lee. Quite the opposite, he meant them as a belligerent message to the prop opposite him not to get involved any further.
Given that the Welsh player has given interviews in which he has talked about his gipsy heritage, and his pride in it, Marler was aware of his background.
Posturing, yes. Aggressive, yes. But then what would you expect of two Test props who play directly opposite each other, and spend large parts of the match in a brutal embrace at the scrum in which they are trying to shove the other blokes head where the sun doesn’t shine?
Racially abusive, no. There is not a single pejorative or racist word in what Marler said to Lee. There was nothing in the loosehead’s terminology to rank alongside the casual “Pommy bastard” barbs habitually directed at visiting English tourists – especially those playing sport – by our Aussie and Kiwi hosts when we are in their backyard.
They’ve never bothered me when I’ve travelled Down Under in the past, and they wouldn’t now. Give as good as you get, and you usually end up having a laugh and a beer. Anyone who has played rugby knows that as far as verbal wind-ups go, “gipsy boy” is at the tame end of the spectrum.
It would not stand in a court of law as discriminatory – and it was right that the Six Nations disciplinary panel took no action following Marler being reminded by England coach Jones of his responsibilities as a Test player.
Wales coach Gatland, who initially described the incident as “just banter” explained later: “He (Lee) believed Joe made his comment in the heat of the moment, he later regretted it and apologised, but Samson believes it wasn’t racist in intent and accepted Joe’s apology.”
If that sounds like a balanced summary, the WRU were less forgiving, objecting that Marler was not banned and complaining to World Rugby. However, what stirred the Welsh nest was probably not so much righteous indignation at Lee’s treatment as frustration that Marler was also exonerated for a forearm smash on their loosehead, Rob Evans. By contrast, Welsh replacement tighthead Tomas Francis got eight weeks for gouging his England opposite number Dan Cole.
On the second count TV replays showed that Welsh indignation had some justification because Marler was bang to rights, and deserved a disciplinary sanction for violent play. As for the first, there was no case to answer – other than boys being boys.