Folau incident exposes rugby’s racial divide

condemned — accordingly.

But if the belief expressed is a religious one — or cloaked in verse from the Bible — then it is judged by a different standard. Sure, it might still be offensive, but it’s so and so’s religious belief and therefore slightly more palatable.

Never mind that some people regard the idea of heaven and hell, et cetera, as laughable.

To go back to Folau’s condemnation of various ‘‘sinners’’, it is telling that fellow internationals such as Samu Kerevi, Allan Alaalatoa and Billy Vunipola were among those to ‘‘like’’ the Instagram post declaring hell awaited homosexuals, among others.

Vunipola went a step further by posting that ‘‘Man was made for woman to pro create that was the goal no?’’

Folau, like Vunipola, is of Tongan heritage, while Alaalatoa is Samoan and Kerevi Fijian. Vunipola plays for England, and the other three all represent Australia.

You think of rugby in those two countries — and let’s throw New Zealand in while we’re at it — and you think white, middleclass, conservative.

From the people running the games in those countries to those working for the unions, coaching the teams and reporting on the matches there’s probably quite a different demographic from those actually playing.

Teams are increasingly populated by players of Samoan and Tongan descent, yet rather than rugby evolving to fully incorporate their culture and background, those athletes are invariably asked to adapt to the established norms.

Let’s go back a couple of generations to Michael Jones. Of Samoan heritage, and deeply religious, Jones didn’t drink in an era where ‘‘work hard, play hard’’ was the still the mantra. Nor did he play rugby on Sundays, because of his beliefs.

It was the sporting equivalent of being a conscientious objector and refusing to fight for king and country.

That Jones was able to sit those Sunday fixtures out speaks volumes for his playing ability and how eager teams were to have him, no matter what.

Even so, think of some of the things he must have seen over the years. Imagine the other ways in which he was required to conform.

Jones was unique to the era in so many ways that his modern day successors are not.

We can’t walk in Folau’s shoes. We don’t know what encouraged Alaalatoa to like Folau’s post. But it suggests that perhaps Polynesian players feel separate to the culture that persists within their teams.

New Zealand Rugby, for instance, is doing fine work in the area of gender diversity. It is are also very aware of recognising Maori.

But its professional teams tend to be coached by middleaged white men.

We have seen men such as Pat Lam and Tana Umaga coach at Super Rugby level, while Earl Va’a, Alama Ieremia and Filo Tiatia have done good things with provincial sides, but it feels like we have a way to go before a Pasifika person takes charge of the All Blacks.

New Zealand is not unique in this. Think of American sports, where the majority of basketball and football players are black, but those who coach, run and own teams are not.

Israel Folau has made a fool of himself. He has made deeply offensive comments about a great swathe of people in the name of religion.

But in doing so, he has presented a very rare instance in which a Pacific Island player has offered a view contrary to the prevailing one.

What’s more, that view has been endorsed by players from a similar background.

As professional rugby becomes increasingly dominated by Pasifika players, it will be intriguing to see how many more speak up.