Tom Curry's accusations of racism cannot be hidden — imagine if it were the other way around.

Tom Curry’s statements cannot be simply dismissed. Photo: Getty Images/Michael Steele

Can white people experience racism? It's a daunting philosophical conundrum that World Rugby will have to grapple with if it decides to investigate Tom Curry's claim that Bongi Mbonambi called him a «white twit» during England's gut-wrenching defeat to South Africa. At its face value it deserves to be taken most seriously. Imagine for a second that the same claim was made in reverse. This will not be some antagonistic postscript to the World Cup semi-final, but a major international incident.

The sport's position in cases of racist behavior does not discriminate regarding the color of the skin of the perpetrator or target. “The rugby family condemns discrimination of any kind, including racism, which has no place in our sport or society as a whole,” the global governing body said in 2020, at the height of the Black Lives Matter movement. “We stand united in supporting our players, coaches, match officials and fans to take a positive stand against racism.”

You won't notice here any hint of extenuating circumstances, nor any warning that racism can somehow be considered less reprehensible if it is directed at a white person. Either you condemn the poison of racism in all its forms, or you do not condemn it at all. This is why World Rugby has a responsibility to ensure that the charge against Mbonambi is not simply dismissed. There is as yet no clear audio recording of the South African prostitute saying the words he is accused of saying, but this should not deter the authorities from using all possible means to establish the truth.

England was unable to locate a recording of Mbonambi's alleged remarks. In the absence of any specific incriminating evidence, World Rugby's view should not be that there is no basis for a response. If they do, it could create a frankly bizarre situation in which South Africa are the only side promising to look into the matter, and they are worried about their only specialist hooker being banned from the World Cup final.

< p>South Africa also released a statement saying: “We are aware of the allegation, which we take very seriously and are reviewing the available evidence. We will contact Bongi if anything is found to support this claim.»

Curry was mortified when asked if any comments had been made to him, just as he was mortified when heard plaintively asking referee Ben O'Keefe: «Sir, if their prostitute calls me white idiot, what should I do? If nothing more is done to flesh out the substance of what was allegedly said, you wonder how others in Curry's position in the future, whether at Test level or in community play, might deal with such an issue. Do they decide not to come forward at all, for fear that their testimony will be dismissed as a case of one person's word contradicting another?

These are admittedly choppy waters to navigate. Intense academic debate continues over whether “reverse racism” can truly be taken seriously, given that black-on-white racism does not have the same complex systemic oppression behind it as does the opposite. The few test cases show that the very idea of ​​reverse racism tends to be quickly dismissed. Sarah Jeong, a New York Times writer, once asked on social media: “Are white people genetically predisposed to sunburn more quickly, and therefore logically only capable of living underground like humiliated goblins?” The newspaper decided to support her, even when several more tweets appeared in this spirit.

Against this backdrop, the chances of Curry's claim against Mbonambi being subjected to forensic examination look unlikely. But when the roles are reversed, the story can unfold very differently. When Azeem Rafiq accused Michael Vaughan of telling him and three other players of South Asian origin: “There are too many of you, we need to do something about it,” the questioning knew no bounds. Rafiq claimed the comments were made during a match at Trent Bridge on 22 June 2009. The England and Wales Cricket Board responded so dramatically that Seals was given instructions and, 14 years later, both sides were brought into a frame-by-frame analysis. from available video materials. The hearing took four days before the Cricket Disciplinary Commission concluded that, on the balance of probabilities, Vaughan had not said anything racist.

Thus, precedents do exist for escalating accusations of racism to the highest levels. When footage circulating online led to allegations that John Terry called Anton Ferdinand a «black devil» during a Chelsea v QPR match in 2011, a criminal trial was held the following year. Although Terry acknowledged this choice of words, confirmed by professional lip readers, the chief judge concluded that it could not be proven beyond doubt whether he used the words as an insult to Ferdinand or as a «challenge to what he believed he had been told.» . Yet the Football Association panel later said it was «quite satisfied» that the language was intended to be offensive. Whether Terry's reputation will ever fully recover is debatable.

There are many hurdles to be overcome before the Curry-Mbonambi saga reaches the same level of attention. But World Rugby owes the England flanker a duty of due diligence to his version of events if his rhetoric about racism is to be believed.