The passing of Queen Elizabeth II has seen a massive outpouring of admiration and sentimentality all around the globe. Given our place in the Commonwealth, Australia has been no exception.

But no one is universally loved, and with her position as the figurehead of an empire that symbolises so much to so many different people, there were bound to be those who expressed the opposite kind of emotion after hearing the news.

Following recent developments weโ€™re suddenly facing the question - should an athleteโ€™s reaction to someoneโ€™s death be determined by the sportโ€™s governing body?

Newcastle Knights NRLW star, former Jillaroo and Indigenous All-Star Caitlin Moran is to be investigated by the NRLโ€™s Integrity Unit for an expletive-laden post celebrating the passing of the 96-year-old monarch.

Though the post was shared on her personal platform and didnโ€™t contain an iota of rugby league relevance, itโ€™s now been brought to the attention of the Integrity Unit.

2025 NRL Season Guide

DOWNLOAD NOW FOR FREE!

Why?

Yes, the post was both strongly and poorly worded and yes, there are bound to be plenty of people who find it objectionable. Thereโ€™s even a good chance that Moran already regrets it. Whether she was asked to take it down or not, itโ€™s gone.

Did it bring the game into disrepute? Hardly. In fact, itโ€™s likely thereโ€™d be barely any attention paid to it at all if the matter hadnโ€™t been publicised by the self-interested in the hopes of elevating their own status, not because they actually care about the royals.

Women's Rugby League World Cup
SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA - NOVEMBER 19: Caitlin Moran of Australia runs the ball during the 2017 Women's Rugby League World Cup match between Australia and England at Southern Cross Group Stadium on November 19, 2017 in Sydney, Australia. (Photo by Jason McCawley/Getty Images)

Weโ€™re not here to debate the long-lasting impacts of British colonialism on Indigenous peoples around the globe, whether the Queen should be held accountable for maintaining those policies or even if she was just the nice person so many have come out and claimed her to be.

But by the same token, we shouldnโ€™t just assume that people are willing to overlook the negative aspects of someoneโ€™s legacy just because theyโ€™re dead.

While weโ€™re not debating the impacts, first nations people all over the world have been subjected to terror and death at the hands of imperial forces, even after the colonial era. Thatโ€™s a fact. The Queen might not have done it, but it was regularly done in her name.

Before you go too far the other way thinking itโ€™s a wild goose chase, the Integrity Unit is technically just in their investigation of the matter. The Unit can conduct investigations into any possible breach of the NRL rules, which includes the Code of Conduct.

And in that Code of Conduct, there is a requirement that players โ€œcelebrate the good news stories and understand that cyber-bullying, which includes negative or demeaning comments, status posts, personal messages or email, is deemed a serious form of harassment.โ€

This is likely the passage being cited to justify investigating the matter, but whom is Moran harassing?

She didnโ€™t go out of her way to voice her opinion to anyone who hadnโ€™t tacitly expressed an interest in it by following her social media accounts in the first place. Sheโ€™s not harassing anyone, and under questioning, I have no doubt she could justify the circumstances and experiences that have led to her forming a passionate opinion.

And who has she really upset? Iโ€™ve yet to read anything from the royals about their anger at the online response to the Queenโ€™s death โ€“ and there are millions of posts expressing similar and stronger sentiments than Moran ever did.

The only people itโ€™s really upset are conservatives, men with microphones and older generations who were raised to respect and venerate the role without actually examining if it serves any function in our everyday lives.

And I can guarantee that none of them were following Moran on social media at the time she made the post.

Radioโ€™s Ray Hadley is the perfect example of the archetypal critic. He claimed that Moranโ€™s comment was โ€˜the most reprehensible thing Iโ€™ve ever seen connected to rugby leagueโ€™.

What a terrible take, in the same year that Brett Finch pleaded guilty to and was convicted of sharing child abuse material.

You heard it here folks, Ray Hadley apparently thinks paedophilia is a better look for the game than badmouthing a deceased monarch... now thatโ€™s a wildly stupid and outrageous claim to make, and it's almost definitely untrue.

But thatโ€™s what happens โ€“ and quickly โ€“ in the hyperbolic media cycle regularly created by these very people.

Itโ€™s a bit rich for Hadley to call out Moran given he reportedly settled out of court with a former employee who accused him of excessive bullying, using language far worse than Moranโ€™s to denigrate his co-worker to his face. Yes, letโ€™s take lessons in moralising from this guy.

Whatโ€™s worse is that many of the people online nodding along with Hadley, chastising Moran and her comments, are the exact same people who laugh and adore the larrikinism of other players who regularly say stupid things and get away with it, branding them โ€˜passionateโ€™ or โ€˜mischievousโ€™.

The same people who cheer every time it looks like a brawl might break out in the middle of the field while simultaneously calling the game soft suddenly can't handle someone saying something mean about someone they never met.

That's the line, apparently - and I'm sure it has nothing to do with Moran's gender, heritage or age.

If the Integrity Unit does hand down a punishment, I hope itโ€™s nothing more than an asked apology for causing offence, which Iโ€™d expect will be given. Thereโ€™s no way Moran would have intended for this reaction. A lesson has undoubtedly already been learned.

Any fine or suspension instantly creates another grey area and unhealthy precedent moving forward โ€“ and the NRL are on a roll with that already following the Taylan May suspension debacle.

Are players going to have to check how the administration feels about the news and the world before making any comment of their own now?

Freedom of speech might not be enshrined in our constitution, but itโ€™s still worth fighting for. Yet for some reason, thereโ€™s a refusal to apply the term to expressions like Moranโ€™s, while simultaneously employing it to defend every nameless critic with nothing more at stake than a desire to agitate and whip up some outrage.

With the seemingly toothless threat of judiciary โ€˜deterrentsโ€™ for repeat offenders and the farce of Taylan Mayโ€™s delayed suspension in recent weeks, who knows what will happen next?

A hard stance is going to be taken on something soon, but I hope it isnโ€™t this.

4 COMMENTS

  1. Good points, David. I don’t think we need to be too precious about stopping ordinary people criticising people in positions of power.

  2. ” celebrate the good news stories and understand that … negative or demeaning comments, status posts, personal messages or email, is deemed a serious form of harassment.โ€

    Sounds quite like something that might have been issued by the Ministry of Truth, doesn’t it?

    The underlying problem is that the NRL (like many other organisations) has taken the view that it has a right to sanction anyone employed by it – directly or indirectly – for expressing a view, or taking any action, of which it disapproves. Whether that view or action has any connection to the NRL or to Rugby League is considered irrelevant.

    The NRL would be horrified by Voltaire’s attitude: โ€˜I MAY DISAPPROVE OF WHAT YOU SAY, BUT I WILL DEFEND TO THE DEATH YOUR RIGHT TO SAY ITโ€™

  3. There are some glaring double standards hereโ€ฆ..Iโ€™m sure thousands who writhed in anguish at Israel Folaus comments a while back werenโ€™t following him on twitter? It didnโ€™t stop the wave of generated, amplified offense as the PC powerbrokers decided what was right and how severe the outrage and punishment need be. In this case, the level of disgust at these comments isnโ€™t from a minorityโ€ฆโ€ฆdoes that make a difference?Voltaire seems to be a bit selective about when he pops up.

  4. This comment from Moran was disgusting & vulgar…..she needs to understand the difference between having an opinion & being downright vitriolic. Folau’s comment was generic; hers is specific. She has been sanctioned & rightly so!

Comments are closed.