Well, it looks like today’s a rant blog-type post about rugby, cultural identity and unfairness. Anyone who has followed the World Cup – particularly the Wales games – can probably guess where this is going. But for those of you who don’t:
Just the Facts, Ma’am
This will get more link heavy later but the short short version is:
- About twenty minutes into the France – Wales semi-final of the 2011 World Cup, the Welsh captain, Sam Warburton, was sent off with a red card (i.e. banned) for a dangerous tackle. You can see a film of the tackle here: [External Link]. In order to keep it as neutral as possible, I’ve managed to find the replay from the actual half-time breakdown – although please be aware that the pundits actually come down very much in Warburton’s favour.
- Wales went on to lose the match with a final score of 9-8. This breaks down into three penalties for France and one try (unconverted) and a penalty for Wales.
Establishing the base-line
This is my blog and I’m going to show you this through my eyes. Although by now I’ve had well over 24 hours to have a look at the situation and reconsider my initial urge to challenge the referee to a duel. That said, I need to explain where I’m coming from and why this is a matter of cultural identity for the fans as much as it is about the actual game rules. So…
I’m a mongrel. Admittedly all British and not much darker than a saucer of milk, but I am a mongrel and fairly proud of it (there’s a tattoo to prove it that I’m going to mention again later). Anyone who’s been involved in the genealogy stuff or read any of it will know about my amusement and pride in being from “all over”. I was also born outside of the UK (and even the British Isles). I’ve never really belonged to any one place. I’m honorary “Yorkshire” because that’s where I now live and grew up on the edge of it – which is the closest you’ll ever hear me get to saying I’m English, because I’m not. I’m British. (If anyone ever asks me in Welsh where I come from, I fully intend to practice the sentence “Dw i’n dod o’r Hen Ogledd”, no matter how pretentious it sounds.)
My English friends and relatives – and it’s not consistent throughout the family which nation people say they belong to, we’re mongrels, after all – have questioned the use of “British” in the past. To them, it’s either the same or a nonsense as I speak with a Northern English accent and live here.
“Them and Us” and why everyone hates the English
The thing about the Home Nations (England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, plus a few other islands who have some semi-independence: Isle of Man, Guernsey, Jersey, Sark) taken together is that we like to bicker. There’s nothing that gets us going quite like having an argument with the fellas from the next valley, which leaves us open to easy distraction: “Hey, look! Your neighbour’s stealing your sheep! Ignore this invading army I have with me!” It’s a principle called “Divide and Conquer” and it’s worked very well on us since the Romans dragged us kicking and screaming into recorded history. It probably worked pretty well on us beforehand but, as any historian will tell you, we don’t have any sources that prove it.
It’s behind well known rivalries such as the various North-South divides, and Lancashire v. Yorkshire. I would be willing to put money on the resentments being based on history most of us don’t even get taught, being far enough back to be considered irrelevant. However, what pisses everybody off the most is the “London is the centre of the world” approach of the media. It’s bad enough that politics and the legislators seem to think this without the news coverage agreeing with them.
ASIDE: Seriously, dudes, multiple parliaments? British parliament, not English parliament? What part of your anatomy did you engage, because it sure as Hell wasn’t your brains. Why didn’t you just say that English MPs can only vote on English or UK matters, Scottish on Scottish and UK and Welsh on Welsh and UK? I accept that Northern Ireland is a special case (very special) and that people like to have their own, local buildings (who wouldn’t) but current set-up? Weirdos…
To illustrate my point about the media and even the most impartial of British media, the BBC, fall foul of this one.
As a general rule, “National Media” – for which read stuff based in London that is supposed to cover the whole UK but tends to talk almost exclusively about England – tends to cover only… well, England. You would not believe the column inches that go into examining the minutiae of English teams and management and film-stars. Or maybe you would if you follow gossip columns. It’s rare, though, for them to go on about other Home Nation teams, management, etc to the same degree.
Basically, anyone who is winning or succeeding, whether at sport or business, is English or British (depending on their Home Nation). It has been known for a few people to confuse them on occasion, being claimed when there is no particular right to them. (i.e. Barry McGuigan, from the Republic of Ireland but sometimes competed for Northern Ireland and took on British Citizenship, thanks to Simon McGrory for that fact!). Film stars are British or English roses, studs or talents. Business men are wealthy British or English people, or talented English or British entrepreneurs. Even if they never return to these fair shores again.
Then, of course, the inevitable failure – because no one wins all the time. So the star becomes the “dour Scot”, the “poor Welshman”, or the “unfortunate Irishman”. Not even the English escape this downgrading as those from the regions can become the “poor Yorkshireman”, the “unlucky West Countryman” and so on. They sometimes even remember that it’s the England and Wales Cricket Board (and team). This is assuming anything important enough for the Londoners to pay attention to is happening. After all, it took three or four days for the BBC to swing behind the Wales rugby team, even with Chris Evans banging on about it every morning.
There’s nothing like sport, of course, for bringing out this behaviour. In the case in point, almost as soon as the whistle blew for full-time, the BBC web-site was declaring “Wales crash out of the World Cup”. Excuse me? a loss by only one point does not equate to “crashing out”. Of course, the BBC website can be considered a living document. Headlines and content changes somewhat over time. Within a couple of hours, the content including talk about “gallant Welshmen” (they fought hard for 60 minutes with one less player on the pitch). The latest version [External Link] has swung back to a more middle ground, impartial view. Or it was at the time of blogging.
Sam Warburton’s value with the BBC has likewise done a bit of changing [External Link]. Initially there was quiet surprise that he had been red carded, then quiet support and now quiet condemnation as he’s been officially declared in breach of game rules (more on that later).
Finally, people are also starting to figure out that there were other opportunities in the game that were missed. There were a few kicks that could have made the one or two point difference. Most of us – the people I talk to about rugby scores – have agreed this already but now the media, or at least the BBC, have mentioned it. But, following the “official breach” bit, we just wonder if it’s to distract us: [External Link]. It’s easy to believe in conspiracy theories when you don’t want to believe in unprofessional or stupid behaviour.
I try not to fall into the whole trap of resenting three-quarters of my grandparents’ contribution to my heritage. This is why I have a tattoo of the Welsh Dragon and the English Dragon / Wyrm (the Old English term) on my back. While the Welsh mythology has them fighting until one becomes the victor, to me it’s a reminder that I have both inside of me – that I should be as proud of the English roots as the Welsh – but it’s bloody difficult come any type of sporting event.
Sports are industries, too
So, you have that need for “Them and Us” and you have the media exploiting it and you have… yet another industry set up to make money out of tribalism. Sports have people baying for blood in a way that governments haven’t managed to perfect, to date. I get a bit smug about supporting a sport that tends to have the violence on pitch so the fans don’t have to bother, but this doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen at all.
Anyway, like any industry police, the International Rugby Board (IRB) and their refs are supposed to be impartial and enforce the rules. But what did I learn from this weekend?
- Impartiality doesn’t matter – or more precisely the appearance thereof. Alain Rolland, the referee for the France – Wales game, is probably a great fella and was totally impartial on the outcome. However, his employees / the IRB should never created a situation where it could have been questioned. To explain for those who don’t know, Mr Rolland is a half-French Irishman and Wales beat Ireland last week. Like I said, I don’t actually think Mr Rolland was particularly partial to the French. His penalties aside from the red card did not favour any side over another. The red card only favoured the French because it left the Welsh a man down, not because it was flourished with intent. But he shouldn’t have been there because that’s the first thing any Welsh fan or player or member of team management would counter with in any situation. This is not something that should arise. Ever.
- Consistency doesn’t matter If the Environment Agency tried something like this on in my industry (waste), there would be an uproar and rightly so. The IRB rules favour the red card for dangerous tackles. The rules have been in discussion since the British and Irish Lions tour of New Zealand in 2005, when Brian O’Driscoll was injured by a spear tackle, and were put into force sometime after, I think 2008. However, they haven’t been fully enforced, with tackles that would qualify being yellow carded (sin-binned for ten minutes) throughout most of that period and definitely the 2011 World Cup. Watch that linked video again at the top and now you’ll understand what the pundits are talking about. This rule should have been enforced this strongly from the beginning of the tournament or this infringement should have been dealt with in the same manner as past infringements in this same tournament – with some public announcement afterwards that this would change.
- Credibility doesn’t matter To give them their due, the IRB did announce they were going to crack down on the infringements – but just before the semis. This is unfair because it’s not consistent (see above). In doing this, the IRB have behaved unprofessionally themselves (note that this is not really the referee that’s at fault as he behaved according to the rules and to some degree not the player, who did not plan this tackle to go this way) in responding to their employee’s earlier laxness. There will be no (public) enquiry into these other referees’ behaviour, or Mr Rolland’s, and there will be no publicly acknowledged punishment. There will be no rematches or adjustment of outcome because having a player sent off for the whole game changes the whole situation. This has all come about because the IRB want to be seen as credible but all they’ve done is confuse everyone involved – and turn two people into scapegoats, one for them and one for the Welsh supporters.
