Can rugby really embrace diversity?

By Nicholas Bishop / Expert

It was the British and Irish Lions tour of Australia in 2001.

As the crowd of Saturday shoppers in central Brisbane grew louder and denser, I tucked into steak, salad and a couple of glasses of red with ex-London Welsh, Wales and Lions flanker John Taylor.

We didn’t notice the thickening press around us as we moved into the second hour of conversation, and beyond.

John Taylor was one of the most interesting rugby conversationalists you could hope to meet. He was notable not just for his playing achievements, and for kicking ‘the greatest conversion since Saint Paul’ in Wales’ last-second win over Scotland in front of 103,000 fans at Murrayfield in 1971:

In the amateur era, Taylor was one of the few rugby players who connected the sport to its political context, and the wider world surrounding it.

He had withdrawn from the selection process for the 1974 Lions tour to South Africa on a point of principle, after his experience of Apartheid in South Africa back in 1968:

“I’d already been on the 1968 tour and I realized I’d made a mistake as soon as I got there. I’d had misgivings but I desperately wanted to be a Lion – too desperately.

“The bigger decision was making myself unavailable for Wales when the Springboks toured the UK in 1969-70, so in reality, I’d already made my choice.

“I understood that there was this sort of massive arrogance that the brotherhood of rugby meant more than the brotherhood of man – that they couldn’t be bad chaps because they played rugby.”

Although the Welsh selectors claimed that his political stand wouldn’t affect Taylor’s international career, he was ignored for four matches in the 1970 season. He was also left out of the Barbarians’ historic match against the All Blacks in 1973 when Mervyn Davies withdrew from the team with flu.

“The brief for that game was to recreate the 1971 Lions Test side, when we’d beaten the All Blacks in New Zealand. [Captain] John Dawes was asked who should replace Merv, and he said, ‘You’ve got to bring in JT. He should have been in the team in the first place.’ At which the Baa-baas President, Brigadier Glyn Hughes, apparently exploded: ‘He’s not playing – the man’s a Communist!’”

Taylor had been an integral part of that 1971 Lions team, playing for the greatest coach of the era, Carwyn James. A deeper, more intimate shade of sadness coloured his tone when the topic turned to Carwyn:

“Of course, you know the rumours about Carwyn – that he was gay.”

John Taylor went on to describe a tormented soul who could never reveal his true identity in the masculine world of rugby. There was an evident empathy between the two.

Like Taylor, Carwyn James saw the world outside the sport. He was variously a lecturer at Trinity College Carmarthen, a talented linguist who had decoded Russian messages for MI5, a white-robed bard of the Gorsedd, and a political candidate who had stood at the 1970 general election for Plaid Cymru, the Welsh National Party. Like Taylor, he was an outspoken opponent of Apartheid.

Carwyn James was probably the first ‘consensus’ coach of the modern era. He coached by inclusivity, tapping into the intellectual resources of his senior players extensively on the Lions 1971 tour to New Zealand. He coached by prompting and suggestion, coaxing players to learn, and make decisions for themselves – and to be adventurers in all they did.

Yet this man ahead of his time, who had created the template for modern coaching was never asked to coach his country. He saw himself battling against attitudes that were simply too entrenched: “You’d sooner talk rugby with a couple of dozen schoolkids than with some of the Welsh Rugby Union elders.”

As he once told his good friend Cliff Morgan, “there is a great loneliness upon me, you know”. The source of that loneliness was a conflicted sexual identity which could never be revealed in the vocational sphere in which Carwyn James lived, and tried to function.

Journalist Mark Reason described it graphically, and from his own personal experience, in this article.

‘A bard among bricklayers’, Carwyn James died alone, without wife or family, in the Hotel Krasnapolsky in Amsterdam on January 10 1983. He was only 53 years old.

His biographer Alan Gibbard put it succinctly: “the only pillar of his life which brought rejection and disappointment, was Rugby.”

The uproar surrounding the social media posts of Israel Folau should be seen in the context of Carwyn James’ experience. They are a measure of why diversity, in all its forms, is very much a live issue for Rugby. They are a measure of whether it can embrace the outcast – especially when the outcast is so central to its development.

(AAP Image/Paul Miller)

On the playing front, the potential absence of Folau gives the new Wallaby selection panel a chance to diversify in the back three. Replacing him is a challenge – Folau’s ability in the air and running the wide attacking channels is unrivalled in the international game. But it is also an opportunity – Folau had a moderate kicking game from the back and only rarely managed contact situations on his own terms.

Dane Haylett-Petty is a shoo-in for the Australian back three, and he may now be joined by Kurtley Beale, reverting to what is probably his best position. Two other candidates played for the Brumbies against the Lions on Saturday: Tom Banks and Henry Speight.

The All Blacks gleefully targeted Israel Folau in contact situations for many years, counter-rucking and jackaling over the top of him for turnover. None of the Brumbies’ back three of Banks, Speight and Toni Pulu lost a single ball in contact against the Lions, and that was a big feather in their caps.

This is Banks, showcasing his terrific first step and explosive speed through the hole, and generating quick ruck ball. At the end of the first example, the man standing above the ruck in midfield is none other than his right winger, Henry Speight.

When Banks set up the Brumbies’ first score of the game with his break down a skinny short-side, it was not just the break that mattered, it was his ability to hang onto the ball and present it cleanly to Joe Powell when he was isolated downfield, that really mattered. That created the continuity for Lachie McCaffrey to convert into the full five-pointer three phases later.

Later in the game, Banks created another opportunity by ‘stealth in contact’:

This won’t show up as a clean break or even a defender beaten on the coaches’ spreadsheets after the game, but what Banks has done has concrete value:

He has consumed both of the Lions edge defenders – Lionel Mapoe and Elton Jantjes – in the same ruck, and that gives Tevita Kuridrani the chance to run at Ross Cronje on the next play in a physical mismatch.

Henry Speight did not boast any big line-breaks for the stats sheet either, but what he did for his team was mightily effective – and beyond the reach of an Israel Folau – throughout.

Speight chased kicks and did not allow any breaks on his edge from them during the game. The strength of his chase and work at the first breakdown were crucial to the Brumbies (at 2:48 on the above reel). It is Speight who drives Aphiwe Dyantyi off the ball and creates a seam for Kuridrani to dance around the last defender down another short-side:

Speight worked to come off his wing infield when the Brumbies had the ball on attack:

Here he is the first man in support, backing up the tapped penalty by Tom Wright with a resounding cleanout on the first Lions threat at the tackle.

When Tom Banks scored in the 54th minute (in the sequence beginning at 4:15 on the reel), Speight was busy coming off his wing and following the ball infield. On the scoring play, he is providing a short option and helping take the focus off Banks:

One instructive sequence towards the end of the first half illustrated the amount of work both Tom Banks and Henry Speight get through for the Brumbies, and how well they link up together in the same part of the field:

First Banks takes the in-pass from Christian Lealiifano, and the player standing above him at the tackle is Speight.

A couple of phases later, Speight is back on his wing, providing width to the attack and calling for the ball:

Wind the clock on another 40 seconds, and Banks is mini-breaking with good footwork down the middle, and presenting the ball cleanly for his halfback. Henry Speight is again transitioning from the wing to supply a short option for Joe Powell on the next phase:

That is what hard work and the ability to play a diverse variety of roles looks like in the modern game.

Summary
Israel Folau will leave a glittering trail of memorable moments behind him as a rugby player. But his legacy will not compare with that of Carwyn James. James’ influence changed the way the game was played and coached, not just in the UK and Ireland but in New Zealand. If you don’t believe me, ask Sir Graham Henry.

Carwyn James coached the game they played in heaven – not the fiery place – and he empowered the people around him to be pioneers; to take risks, make mistakes and fulfil their potential. No harsh doctrine of reward and punishment for him.

Yet he was rejected by the sport he loved because his identity, and in particular, his sexual and political identity, did not fit the norm. The rugby establishment has always been conservative, masculine and reactive rather than inclusive and progressive, and it (in the form of the WRU) spat out the Carwyn Jameses of this world.

Those conservative attitudes have been restated in another form on social media – in the posts of first Israel Folau, and latterly England number 8 Billy Vunipola. Whether either or both make it to the World Cup will be a Test of rugby’s maturity as a sport, a test of whether it can manage diversity.

(Photo: Mark Metcalfe/Getty Images)

An unrivalled athlete in the back three, Israel Folau never really diversified his role enough to become one of the rugby greats. He never mastered the kicking game and he never mastered the nuances of contact situations.

Tom Banks and Henry Speight may not have Folau’s God-given talent, but their sheer desire to work in all phases of the game will bring them firmly into the Wallaby selection frame in 2019.

If he is looking down on them now, Carwyn James would applaud their efforts at self-improvement, their willingness to become bards and bricklayers of the modern game in equal measure. He would coax and prod them to accept the adventure of becoming a true rugby man, and to embrace the journey as fully as possible.

No hellfire sermons would be needed.

The Crowd Says:

2019-04-20T10:50:54+00:00

LeftRight

Guest


RA have botched this, due in part (or solely because of) the influence of their major sponsor). RA have buggered (sorry) the Waratahs (see tonight's game), and the Wallabies are now disjointed even before the WC commences. Meanwhile breakers of criminal laws are retained in the code, whereas IF, who has merely stated an opinion has already been declared guilty (if what ?) by RA. Regarding IF's post, the legal precedence of Ejusdem Generis will prevail because he included almost everyone in his post (he has not targeted just homosexuals). Additionally, no contract can override a person's individual legal rights, that is in this case, the right of free speech outside of direct employment situations (he did not represent RA in his post). What will happen is that any court will find that the employment relationship between employer and employee has broken down (not a contract breach), IF will be paid out for the remainder of his contract (because he has no breached his contract), the Wallabies will loose a valuable player, the WC campaign is already detailed and IF will play somewhere else. Well done RA, another BIG FAIL on your watch.

2019-04-20T07:50:40+00:00

Fin

Guest


Definitely not. I like visiting Dubai, but I understand that they live by a completely different set of laws to Australia. Disrespect those laws and face the consequences. The Folau case is now shaping as a landmark case in Australia. RA are arguing it’s a simple employee/employer dispute. Folau is arguing that freedom of religious beliefs are being suppressed. He is Also arguing that he shouldn’t be dismissed on the basis of expressing a religious belief, whilst Kurtley Beale was not dismissed for alleged workplace sexual harassment a few years ago, and Karmichael Hunt & Slipper were not dismissed for illegal drug use/possession (on more than one occasion). No one yet knows where this will end up, but if RA loses and they have to pay out his huge contract for him to flee rugby, then the CEO will be in big trouble.

AUTHOR

2019-04-20T06:38:56+00:00

Nicholas Bishop

Expert


Fair enough Fin. That is the inevitable impact of sponsor- and broadcaster-led sport however. It's their money and they want to dictate terms. I'd also add that it's important to respect your obligations in terms of both contracts and customs. Emirates are an important Qantas partner - I would not go to the U.A.E and not respect their laws in regard to sexual behaviour, would you?

AUTHOR

2019-04-20T06:32:39+00:00

Nicholas Bishop

Expert


I don't think there's any problem at all with Samu Kerevi referencing his faith in those terms do you? It represents a positive connection to the Divine, not a negative one.

2019-04-19T22:36:09+00:00

Fin

Guest


Hi Nick, After the Reds’ historical victory in Durban this morning the normally reserved Samu Kerevi was very animated about his Christianity in the post match interview. I know it’s Easter but it’s still very unusual for him. I can’t help but think that something is going on here. Here’s what he said. Kerevi put a strong religious slant on his post-match Good Friday interview, praising God heavily as well as his teammates. Kerevi and Wallabies teammate Allan Alaalatoa were among the players to ‘like’ Israel Folau’s infamous ‘Hell awaits’ Instagram post last week. “First and foremost I want to thank the heavenly father,” Kerevi said. “It is a significant day today, that he gave his life for us so that we can live. “All glory goes to him and a massive thanks to the boys for putting in that massive effort. “So the credit goes to the boys and all the glory goes back to God.”

2019-04-19T21:41:08+00:00

cookie

Roar Guru


By God Mr Bishop, Don't tell the Hooper haters that.

2019-04-19T21:11:10+00:00

Fin

Guest


Hi Nick, No, just trying to highlight the Qantas influence in all of this, which could also be influenced by their high profile CEO who is very proud, comfortable, and open about his sexuality, and was willing to back up his position with a donation of $1M of his own money to help support the ‘Yes’ campaign in the referendum on the right to have same sex marriage legalised. But I don’t think they should throw their weight around as a sponsor when one of the employees of the organisation with which they sponsor comes out with a different social/political/religious view to theirs. Perhaps RA should consider other sponsors. Twiggy Forrest is cashed up and ready to help. Then again that commercial partnership may open up a whole new can of worms.

AUTHOR

2019-04-19T17:37:32+00:00

Nicholas Bishop

Expert


Are you quoting Spiro's article because you agree with his viewpoint Fin? :D Ofc Folau has the right to express his opinion - although I very much doubt (in contrast to Spiro) that it represents the majority view among other Christians... But employers and sponsors have very specific requirements of the organisations and people in whom they invest, and for better or worse they cannot be avoided. Those requirements are phrased as contractual obligations - which means that players and administrators either have to agree with the investor via the contract, or forego the money and prefer the player's right to speak freely on social media. Which would you prefer if you were in RA's shoes??

2019-04-19T11:32:11+00:00

Fin

Guest


Hi Nick, Spiro talks about the Qantas involvement in this in his article on this site 12 months ago (link below). https://www.theroar.com.au/2018/04/16/spiro-new-article-still-writing-israel-folau-is-an-incredibly-talented-footballer-but-a-very-very-good-person-too/

2019-04-19T09:09:24+00:00

Fin

Guest


Hi Nick, These last couple of weeks have been pretty heavy, so do you think we could have another Roy & HG article next week to lighten the mood a bit if only to serve as a reminder that sport in its purest form is supposed to be fun and enjoyable for everyone and it’s at its best when religion and politics are left outside the stadium gates.

AUTHOR

2019-04-19T06:00:22+00:00

Nicholas Bishop

Expert


That's (more) very helpful background to the debate Fin - appreciated. I understand that Quantas also has an important partnership with Emirates airlines, so that must be a complicating factor as well.... It seems to me that Folau is determined to make his point and that probably, he won't back down until he has achieved a kind of social media martyrdom peculiar to the age we live in... At least, I'd be very surprised to see him in green-and-gold ever again.

AUTHOR

2019-04-19T05:56:19+00:00

Nicholas Bishop

Expert


I hope so KP, I hope so. But it still seems astonishing that such a talented man could have been rejected by his own country (apparently the sticking point with the WRU was that Carwyn actually wanted to select his own players - shock, horror!)

AUTHOR

2019-04-19T05:52:55+00:00

Nicholas Bishop

Expert


Yes I think a WB WC comeback is eminently possible Fin! But if the sport is to flourish in Australia and persuade supporters to move across from say League, it needs consistent international success rather than once in a four year cycle....

AUTHOR

2019-04-19T05:50:51+00:00

Nicholas Bishop

Expert


Okay, I see what you're getting at Cookie... What I would add is that the KPI's for the positions you mention have changed over the last few years, and radically so... So for example, given that there are now 10-12 scrums in a game rather than 20-30, and that reffing protocol is currently to get the ball in play more instead of awarding pens at scrum, a prop who can do scrum well but little else, has a lower value than one who can scrum adequately, but carry and defend better. With the hooker/thrower, you need to be able to quantify which lineout losses are the result of bad throw, or malfunctions in lifting/timing/calling in the lineout itself? In my experience, it's only the hooker's fault @20-25% of the time! Ditto with the number 7 position - the basic KPI's are not the same as they were even before the last WC... They are moving steadily in the direction of what a Michael Hooper, or an Ardie Savea can offer. So my answer is that you need to know what 'the lines' are in order read between them! :)

2019-04-18T21:57:00+00:00

cookie

Roar Guru


NickoM Yes mate no doubt I've applied it a little differently to how it is applied to baseball, after all they are two entirely some what incomparable games. Hate to say it but you've entirely missed the point of what I was trying to say. Nowhere am I implying to pick 'journeyman' or 'value' players. Quite the opposite. All I am saying is that in money ball as you point out yourself.. it's maths and statistical analysis... which can be used in rugby. Those stats can be translated to a lack of core skills.. and I'm all but certain Nicholas Bishop would be able to better analyse and apply those but to use the first two examples... - All Hookers will have a stat reflecting their line out throwing success. Some better than others but some are so woeful that inspire of the players otherwise superior general play their poor line out throwing costs games. If you want stats...would you pick a player with a 5/10 vs 9/10 line out success? - Likewise would you pick a prop that consistently gets dominated or penalised in the scrum ? Read between the lines and have an open mind .. What i was implying is that the statistics can help select players to build a more cohesive successful team rather than picking a team based on perception. More to the point the statistics can point out the shortcomings of certain players that apply to that position and identity the negative effects on the teams performance.

2019-04-18T10:53:46+00:00

Fin

Guest


Hi Nick, It won’t be doom and gloom for the WC. Wallaby teams more often than not rise to the occasion, and particularly so when their backs are up against the wall (2003 WC semi, 2011 WC quarters, last 5 minutes of 91 WC quarters, last 5 minutes of 2015 WC quarters). The players got their in the last WC without Izzy being a factor. He was injured early in the tournament and never really recovered.

2019-04-18T10:23:43+00:00

Kashmir Pete

Roar Guru


Hello Nic Great and interesting read as always, many thanks. The uproar surrounding the social media posts of Israel Folau should be seen in the context of Carwyn James’ experience. I appreciate your point, but thankfully society has come a very long way in the past half century. Very sadly too late for Carwyn James and of course many others. However, for reason of that very progress over the past half century, I am slow to place Folau's (wrong) posts in context of 1970s. Have not heard of Carwyn James before, his sadness and loneliness in that era is extremely tragic. Sincerely KP

2019-04-18T08:57:45+00:00

Harty

Roar Rookie


Really good comment Paulo. Like you, I'm not sure the lack of support amongst team mates can be entirely relied as a barometer for support. One would be foolish to express support for an opinion/belief that resulted in a teammate being (likely) fired. The stat being thrown around is 47% of professional rugby players in Australia are of Polynesian descent. It's not unreasonable to expect a significant proportion agree in principle with IF. I've read widely of roarer thoughts on the issue (it's been pretty hard to avoid!) and I'm very conflicted on the issue. I can understand and agree with the "he broke the social media policy" argument but I also think at its root origin is the blunt statement of a legal and historical religious belief that the current of social discourse no longer believes to be true. Disagree (as most of us do) and state that rugby is for everyone irrespective of race, creed or sexuality. Say that IF's opinion is his own and we don't agree, but to fire him for it? That says rugby is a game for everyone (except for fundamentalist Christians who state their beliefs on social media). Is it only certain opinions and beliefs that are not allowed or are all political/religious thoughts verboten? Who decides? I'll paraphrase a Vietnam War era quote and say "in order to be inclusive, we have to exclude you".

2019-04-18T08:45:29+00:00

Fin

Guest


Hi Nick, You touched on the politics here and I do feel that you should be made aware that there is a large political element to this whole mess. 18 months ago the country held a referendum on the right to have same sex marriage, and in their ‘wisdom’ Rugby Australia decided to enter the political hotbed and pick a side, and made it known to the public which side they were on. As it turned out 40% of the voting public were on the opposing side to Rugby Australia (including members of the rugby community, and leading players). Israel Folau, being the devout Christian that he is, was never going to fall in line with the establishment position and publicly voiced his opposing position to the question of same sex marriage the following day. Unfortunately he was set upon by all and sundry in the court of public opinion for his view, even though 40% of the voting public agreed with his position. Unsuccessful attempts were made to gag him as it was rather embarrassing for the establishment’s star player to be opposing their political position. Nick, it is important to note that up until this point in time Izzy Folau was not a controversial figure, kept his religious beliefs to himself, and was not only the poster boy for Australian rugby but also gay rugby. We are now dealing with the fallout of what was once a mutually beneficial and happy marriage between star recruit and governing body. Why Izzy decided to persist with blowing up his career on this issue (maybe there are people working behind the scenes) I and just about everyone else don’t know, but what I do know is that this can of worms was opened up by Rugby Australia when they decided to become political and take a position on a highly divisive social issue that they are not really qualified to talk about and traditionally would have left alone. In my opinion they would have been better off staying well away from it, even if there was pressure from their major sponsor to pick a side. There can only be downside for them when so many people oppose the stance taken.

2019-04-18T08:40:32+00:00

Harty

Roar Rookie


Wax that's an ostrich-like statement. At it's core, he is being fired for expressing an opinion that many of us now disagree with. Pretending otherwise does not hold up under investigation. I expect this will go to court precisely because of the issues you believe to be irrelevant.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar