It's unfathomable why a unanimous view has not been reached about the actions of England rugby prop Joe Marler, who last week grabbed Welsh captain Alun Wyn Jones by the genitals.
It was shocking, and shocking things often engender an involuntary laugh in stunned response, and in this case, there was also subsequent poorly-judged innuendo to try to make it seem acceptable.
That people immediately reacted in different ways or in a manner they would perhaps later regret is understandable and forgivable.
What's not, however, is that in the days that followed, when enough time had elapsed to reach a measured and considered view of the incident, there still wasn't universal condemnation of Marler's actions.
Worse was that some have tried to justify them as part of the game and therefore acceptable on the grounds this is supposedly common practice.
Others have said that because Jones and Marler know each other from being Lions together, that it was just banter; a prank between good friends intended to illicit a right good laugh that both men would be chortling about for years to come.
Former England halfback Danny Care even suggested that had Wales won, Jones wouldn't have said anything about it. According to Care, an act that would have seen Marler charged with indecent assault had it occurred in an office can be reduced to sour grapes when it occurs on a rugby field.
And that's where rugby comes across as a sport for the antiquated, delusional and warped.
Former players may think they are protecting rugby's honour by defending Marler, but they are simply condemning the sport to a future where no one wants to play it or be involved because they fear it has some weird code where anything can be justified as part of the game's spirit.
Right at the end! Barrett the hero as Canes stun Chiefs
Warriors in limbo as NRL bans fans from second round matches
The sad thing is rugby does have a unique spirit where players can batter each other within the rules of the game and yet happily sit in each other's company afterwards.
In what other sport can the protagonists review the contest with a mutual respect and admiration for one another and even form firm and lasting friendships with the so-called enemy?
Rugby does have a distinct kinship other codes don't, which is why in the past, we have seen things such as All Blacks prop Kees Meeuws screaming at his pack to stop pushing in a scrum during the World Cup semifinal in 2003 as he sensed his opposite number Ben Darwin was genuinely hurt.
It's why Tana Umaga placed Colin Charvis in the recovery position in 2003 after the Welsh No 8 had been knocked out by Jerry Collins.
It's why Sean Fitzpatrick told the referee to blow the whistle a few minutes before fulltime in 1997 when the All Blacks were hammering Argentina at Athletic Park 93-7. He didn't see the need to humiliate the Pumas by scoring 100 points.
It's why former All Blacks halfback Justin Marshall is best mates with former Wallabies halfback George Gregan.
It's why even when they were emotionally shattered, the All Blacks still headed to England's changing room after last year's World Cup semifinal. Win or lose, the spirit of the game has demanded players see beyond the result and grasp the underlying human aspect.
But not everything can be slipped under the blanket of rugby's unique code and it can't be stretched to justify the unjustifiable or it risks being destroyed.
Nothing puts people off more than former players condoning hideous acts with a smugness that says no one else is qualified to judge what's part of the code and what's not.
What was needed in the wake of the events at Twickenham was a united front. The old boys who reckoned it was okay needed to pause, take a moment to look around and realise that it's 2020 and prisons around the world are filling up with people from all walks of life who also thought it was okay to grab someone's genitals.
Trying to explain the perpetrator's intent only makes things worse. All those connected to rugby, especially in New Zealand, should have learned by now never to open a sentence with ... it was okay because ...
The Chiefs initially tried to do that in 2016 when it came to light that they had invited a stripper to their end-of-season party. Their chief executive back then tried to suggest it was okay because ... the lads were letting off steam. It was okay because ... they needed a good blow out and boys will be boys, after all.
"It was okay because ..." made things so much worse and always does when the actions are indefensible and morally objectionable.
All those with a voice in rugby need to use it more wisely. And they need to use it with greater empathy and support for victims of violent and humiliating acts rather than the perpetrators.
Jones, who has always come across as a decent human with a love of the game and a desire to play it fairly, is entitled to feel aggrieved at the way some have tried to suggest he has been as much at fault as Marler. When Marler was handed a 10-week suspension, the inference from some was Jones had been culpable in pushing the sentence to a point where it far outweighed the crime.
But this is how rugby is — the victim always has to battle against the perception that they have in some way let themselves and their teammates down by being a victim.
The perpetrator, however, tends to instinctively win the compassion, and rugby's empathy naturally sits with those sent off or suspended.
Case in point is the match in Wellington between the Blues and Hurricanes last weekend. Tyrel Lomax drove his shoulder into Stephen Perofeta's head and the impact of that collision saw the Blues fullback ricochet into Xavier Numia.
So Perofeta suffered two high impact head collisions but the incident only generated debate about whether the referee was justified in red carding Lomax.
Yet as Perofeta lay on the turf trying to recover, it was Lomax who trudged to the sideline as the victim, his supporters all keen to defend his reputation as a clean player, worrying on his behalf what sort of sanction he would be facing as opposed to considering what sort of health impact the Blues fullback would face.
Players will always be susceptible to doing stupid things on the field. There's heat in every battle, pressure in every game, and not everyone has the discipline to react within the law. But those who can't should not be defended or portrayed as the characters who make rugby the great game it is.