Referee’s and the judicial process have been the main talking abouts following the first two weeks of Tri-Nations rugby, but what exactly can be done, or is done to address these problems behind the scenes and from the team or team management themselves?
We got in touch with Springbok management to find out
The two opening Tri-Nations tests between New Zealand and the Springboks raised a number of question regarding the officiating and also judicial system in rugby.
The first test saw a dubious yellow card dished out against Bakkies Botha which if viewed in isolation, raises serious questions about the merits of the decision.
It was a first ruck infringement for the Boks and Botha in the so-called ‘red-zone’ and some might even argue that Botha actually did nothing wrong. In context however anyone with half a brain will know this was not done in isolation, and a previous, much more serious transgression by Botha when head-butting Jimmy Cowan which went unnoticed by the officials but repeatedly shown on the stadium big screen subsequent to the event played a major role in referee Alan Lewis’ call in the sin-binning.
The second test again saw a dubious yellow card dished out. This time against Botha’s replacement (he was suspended for the rest of the Tri-Nations after being cited following the Eden Park test) Danie Rossouw for apparently kicking out, or trying to strike an opponent with a knee but never even making contact.
This time referee Alain Rolland from Ireland had no hesitation in immediately showing Rossouw a yellow card (without consultation with his assistants).
Both incidents cost the Springbok team 10 points which were scored in both player’s absence.
The judicial officer was also involved in both test matches, firstly citing Botha following the head-butt and in the second test, citing Jean de Villiers for a tip or spear tackle for which he subsequently received 2 weeks suspension.
Comments from readers all over the web are abound where there is concern about the consistency, or lack thereof from these individuals in charge (referee’s and citing commissioners) so I decided to get an official response from Springbok management.
Before we get to the official response it is important to note that comments made subsequent to the second test by coach Peter de Villiers and captain John Smit mainly bemoans the consistency of these calls.
It is relevant to note the following:
- There can be no doubt that Bakkies Botha deserved his punishment following his indiscretion and his head-but on Jimmy Cowan. However, as Peter de Villiers quite rightly pointed out the continued screening of the incident on the stadium big screen quite obviously had an influence in referee Lewis’ decision to card Bakkies for another, completely unrelated incident which viewed in isolation, was a pathetic call.
- It then becomes important to ask the question that if the referee is directly influenced in his on-field decision making by video evidence what is the point of the citing commissioner sitting down afterwards also citing and punishing a player (an on-field card for the specific incident he has been cited for has a bearing on the length of suspension and since Bakkies received a card for a totally unrelated incident it had no bearing in the process) or simply why not implement a system where a referee can be notified by the television match official of incidents of foul play he and his assistants missed in the first place?
- The Danie Rossouw incident clearly showed on television replays (strangely not repeatedly shown on stadium big screens) as being a nothing incident and again one can ask why in these instances where one day video evidence clearly influences decision making by referee’s is not used in assessing the seriousness of the incident by a fourth official.
- Consistency is seriously questioned if in one instance a player (Bakkies Botha) is sent off for a professional foul for a first time ruck infringement but in the second instance (second test) a player gets multiple warning with two ‘official’ warnings for exactly the same offense?
The reason these incidents are important is quite simply because a yellow card issued in rugby no doubt has a massive influence on a game, and could quite easily, as was perhaps the case in both tests with teams so close as these two are, end the game as a contest where one team gets a 10 point cushion directly because of those calls.
Now to deal with referee inconsistencies a process has been setup to address these issues.
Unfortunately, it seems about as useful as the South African judicial system.
According to the Springbok management official response to us referee’s are assessed after each game by an independent match commissioner on a scorecard based system which is forwarded to the IRB. In addition to this the management of the Springboks also have a right to submit a report to the IRB to which we can confirm that a report was prepared for the IRB by Springbok management.
The problem however remains exactly what, if any influence these reports have or how much weight they carry when reviewed by the IRB and unfortunately nobody but the IRB can answer that for us.
As far as the citing of players go post match the appointed commissioner makes those calls both directly, and on submissions from the management of each team.
However, it is up to the citing commissioners sole discretion to review incidents brought to his attention by team management and teams cannot force reviews of decisions onto the citing commissioner.
Also very important to note a citing commissioner has to deem an incident that took place in a match, to be a ‘Red Card’ offence for him to cite a player.
This of course leaves us with the question of whether the Jean de Villiers incident would have resulted in a red card if picked up by the officials on the field as well as the Rene Ranger incident where he tackled Zane Kirchner.
The answer from my side to both those questions will be an emphatic NO, which then begs the question, why was Jean cited and subsequently suspended for two weeks?
It is unknown to us at this stage whether the Springbok management highlighted the Ranger incident to the citing commissioner but given the Springbok coach’s comments last year where they (the Bok team) are more than happy to let the judicial system run its own course, I doubt it.
One year out from the Rugby World Cup the game of union is in our view at a breaking point. Thanks to video technology the public are made aware of these indiscretions much more often than in the past and as these last two tests have shown a game can easily be decided on one wrong, or missed call.
The professional game is heavily dependent on its viewership audience and if the game of union is willing to let its image be tarnished through its inability to deal with the processes or individuals involved in ensuring the right calls that are obvious to all viewers are made, the game will suffer.
For the time being from where I sit, the current processes to address this is fundamentally flawed and whether you agree with the ranting of De Villiers or Smit post match on these issues, expect more of it from not only them, but the next team it will affect which is hopefully not the difference between making a Rugby World Cup semi-final, or final in 2011.
Thanks Morne i referred fender to your post now everyone can read it right here
gr8 article Morne.
I remember the call by none other than FIFA to stop video replays during the SWC especially in the incidents where a goal was scored, a player was off side etc.
Remember the not-allowed England goal? Question is would it change the opinion of the referee during the match? Answered in both these 3N matches to be an emphatic YES. So SANZAR has to get their house in order too with regards to stadium management.
Of course it’s all too late now….
The ref was a gisgrace !!!
Or should I say his desicion making
blouste @ 3
😀 agree boet
as i said earlier today … i tried a few times this weekend to watch the game again … not to look for excuses but really as an excercise to see where we couldve done things differently
unfortunately i’d only been able to about 5 minutes of the game, get frustrated, switch the game off and then go do something else … and after a while try again …. i’m still to finish watching the game!!
#4
btw, i think i owe my wife a dinner cause i’ve been discussing rugby the whole weekend with her … and she’s not even much of a rugby fan 😆
5@ Ashley:
Fark, by this time I think you owe your wife an Astin Martin… for just being Asbak!
Hehehhe
Should we at all have given the referee or citing commisioners cause to card us, cite Jean and ban him for 2 weeks… I don’t think so.
Should we point and say, hey we were robbed blind… I think the All Blacks were better than the Bokke anyway, no matter how I look at the games.
We all know that the judicial system in rugby sucks.. we can limit our own indiscretions and thus avoid all the whoo-haaaaaa associated with this shit.
We can still play hard, hell we can certainly play much harder than over the past 2 weeks, but without the needle and without taking illegal methods on the field.
We need to play intelligent rugby, not thugby, as Morne’s web site coined the phrase so aptly.
@ grootblousmile:
I would assume you read RW and some of my points on the Boks so I cannot argue with the fact of deserving a win or not, because they don’t – there are factors outside of this one issue that contributes to that but I believe these are two separate issues.
The Boks have issues in selections, game plans and attitude which contributed to their recent performances.
This issue however highlights something quite different but no less important.
The fact that calls are inconsistent, and does affect not only calls and issues in the games itself cannot be denied, also issues outside the game such as citings.
Does it have an influence, sure as hell does!
Is it the only influence or reason we lost, not a chance.
8@ Morné:
Agree Morné…. so what does the Bokke do?
For one thing, they clean up their act.
Next thing, sort selections out and play intelligent rugby.
In other words, fix the variables you control….
@ grootblousmile:
Correct, slow down, and let’s start with the basics again.
Morné wrote:
Morne funny enough i never said that the ref caused us to lose. Well it was not my intention. I said he never allowed a fair contest.
Sometimes you win a undeserving game, i would call it a steal. We never had a fair ref so that finished our erosible Houdini act.
@ superBul:
Also very correct, the reffing issue made rugby the loser, not the Boks.
10@ Morné:
I’m beginning, well I have for a while now, to doubt whether John Smit is the man who should take us forward.
He now seems incapable to have a measurable impact on team dicipline, he seems incapable to lead like previous years from the vantage of inspiring the guys to up the ante…
Big words, I know… but has’nt he reached sell-by date?
ANother thing, our game plan… teams are countering our up-and-under strategy brilliantly now, time for a re-work to play according to a different set of our strong points. In this regard I would play a possession game, smother their possession and play with a dicipline which SA is not really known for… I hate dumb and ill-diciplined play and game plans.
Morne i see another posting about the ref on Supersport site
14@ superBul:
Genoeg van die ref… ons almal weet nou jy is hoogs de bliksem in vir die ref….. hehehehe
@ grootblousmile:
GBS clean up what act. really we were the only ones cited and carded. But this whole debate goes about the fact that their transgressions was overlooked. The are allowed to do whatever but our players are criminalized.
@ grootblousmile:
It is such a difficult call to make, on his playing ability alone I believe he is managed incorrectly. If reports are to be believed and he is a hooker now he should have gone on a intensive reconditioning program to regain the weight and fitness for it.
On his leadership, well every leader has to re-invent himself every now and then, otherwise you will not lead anymore.
Question is, and this is difficult to answer as I do not think anyone outside the camp has got the answer, is that whether John has done this following the RWC and 2009 season???
In fact I am busy with a piece on this and will post it in the coming day or two.
@ superBul:
Brenden Nel?
Read it, very good.
16@ superBul:
‘n Steeks donkie is makliker as jy….
Natuurlik moet ons ons act verbeter en skoonmaak… Bakkies se kopstamp was fokken dom…. Danie se skoppie ook al was dit nie veel nie… ons kry ‘n strafskop en sy optrede maak daai strafskop ongedaan!
Jean ook, hel hulle weet mos die refs kyk streng daarna.
Sny daai kak uit jou spel, dit voeg GEEN waarde tot die Bokke se spel nie…. boggerol.
@ grootblousmile:
hi gbs ja john lyk of hy sy inpak verloor het dis asof hy geen invloed meer het nie.probleem is wie want vic het hom nog nooit regtig as bok kaptein onderskei nie
Nou wil ek ook nog olie op die water gooi en se het ons nie dalk te lank met vic bakkies john danie en ander spelers aan die verkeerde kant van dertig volgehou van die jonger ouens kon nou die jaar hul vuurdoop gehad het en reeds volgende jaar in die wereld beker met 20 plus toetse op hul kerfstok gesit het
@ Morné:
Yes it is a good article, and i agree. I had my rights and i used it to moan. What will happen next, no one knows.
Like i said early yesterday already they give us a lollipop and by Wednesday we shut-up and the whole thing repeats.
20@ smallies72:
Paar van die wat jy noem was 6 of 8 weke terug hero’s en uitblinkers in die Super 14, menende Danie en Vic.
Ek het al paar keer genoem dat ek dink Bakkies is verbygevat… en ek dink regtig John nou al ook.
Kapteinskap, ja wel… Vic het darem verlede jaar die Bokke in John se afwesigheid gelei tot ‘n wen binnne-in NZ….
Kyk, ek is nie ‘n ou wat panick en sê maak wholesale veranderinge aan die span nie, maar daar’s maar ‘n paar vales nou tussen die lot…. Jean, Butch, John, Bakkies… en vir meeste is daar reeds logiese plaasvervangers, jammer Gary Botha of tiaan Liebenberg is nie nadergeroep nie man… demmit!
@ grootblousmile:
hel ou jy sien nie my punt nie , ek beweer nie ons is engeltjies nie. Maar wat dink jy van hulle foute is hulle te slim vir ons, lyk hul oortredings altyd meer profesioneel?
23@ superBul:
Hulle speel die ref soos ‘n viool man…. slim blikslaers… tyd dat ons ook so slim speel.
@ grootblousmile:
Ja jy se nou so, maar more speel die ref weer n ander deuntjie. Daar is reels, die IRB het baie workshops gehou die jaar om die reel te verduidelik, selfs Peter was daar. Nou dit.
Kyk wat se hulle-
At their pre-test briefing with the Irishman, the Springboks were given certain assurances as to how Rolland would handle the test, with specific reference to the scrum engagement and breakdowns. To their astonishment, Rolland’s actual performance was very different to what he had promised beforehand.
Coach Peter de Villiers’s main gripe was that Rolland, and fellow Irishman Alan Lewis in Auckland, seemingly brought their own northern hemisphere interpretations to the tests, which were very different to what the South African players experienced in the Super 14. He used some telling statistics from that competition, involving Richie McCaw’s Crusaders team, to back up his view.
“We were caught between the devil and the deep blue sea, between the Super 14’s new laws and what’s being played in the northern hemisphere.
The Springbok coach left New Zealand broadcasting his intent to play nearer to the line between legal and illegal and he repeated the threat on Monday.
“Maybe we should not have stepped away from the old laws as much as we have, we need to become more street-smart. We’ve been playing too much to the new laws because we want to make the game a spectacle,” De Villiers said.
@ grootblousmile:
ek praat hoeka van tiaan flippie dewald cois hougaard vermeulen de jong ens .ek gooi nie die ou manne weg nie maar van nou tot met die w\c is nog lank en ek dink dat die ouens dalk net net te stadig of net net te min veerkrag of net een besering te veel gaan he en dan moet ons met ouens speel wat nog te groen is.as ons dan met hulle na die w\c gaan moet hulle genoeg rus en dan sou ek se gee hulle sommer n seisoen af en begin dan volgende jaar weer met hulle jy gaan sien hoe kook ouens soos fdp juan smith ens wat nou baie gerus het
@ superBul:This is the major shortcoming our coach has. He treats the players properly and they respect him…but hell man, when you play poker, you dont show your cards!!!
The Aussies are a different proposition anyway…we simply have to get the point of breakdown to go in our favour…and we have to do something about their very slick backline. Rolling mauls will work for us and set pieces will work for us.
If we start fringing at the point of breakdown, the ref is going to be all over us and now he will be watching because of what Hydrogen has said…regardless of reassurances to the contrary. Who is the ref anyway?
Users Online
Total 181 users including 0 member, 181 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,816,332 Page Impressions
_