Jonathan Kaplan
This weekend saw the finale of The Rugby Championship and we saw two very contrasting games. The All Blacks won the trophy… again. Deservedly.
The Pumas won their first ever fixture in this tournament, a historical moment and one they will never forget… I certainly won’t, but the highlight had to be the bromance in the coaches box after the game where their Latin exuberance, warmth and hot blooded nature got the better of some of them… Put it this way, there was lots of lovin!!
Rate the Ref
The Springboks finally beat the All Blacks after coming quite close over the past couple of years.
From a parochial SA viewpoint it was a great win. Even, I suspect from a neutrals point of view, it was good to see a team challenge the best team, and beat them. There wasn’t much to choose between the teams, and the respect between the players and coaching staff is evident for all to see.
It is a beautiful thing of the sport of rugby union and one which we should cherish, as it doesn’t permeate through all sporting codes!
The Boks dominated the first half, the All Blacks the second. In the end, the game came down to a decision by the TV producer to highlight a misdemeanor by Liam Messam on Schalk Burger, which all the officials missed in real time. After finding the clip, and then replaying it over and over, eventually the Television Match Officials decided it was worthy of review, and correctly awarded a penalty to the Boks, which Pat Lambie (who has oodles of BMT) converted to win the game.
The TMO himself seemed a bit confused by referring to the fact that he thought perhaps arms were used in the tackle which was hardly the point. It was a swinging arm and a dangerous tackle.
If you are a Bok supporter, you will be saying we deserved it, and how many times it happened against us.
The protocol and process will mean nothing. But there is an important point to make here. I doubt (very much) whether that clip would have been brought up on the screen by producers in Australia or New Zealand and replayed over and over.
Is it right that someone outside of the domain of the match officials can affect the outcome of a major test match? And how neutral is he? In the end, it was his alertness that drew the attention of the crowd to the high tackle, they got into it, the officials then decided to take a look, and the resultant penalty determined the outcome.
I thought Wayne Barnes had a decent match. He walks a lot. He talks a lot.
And I wasn’t that impressed when he penalized Jan Serfontein for not rolling away when he could not (unplayable was the right call) or Jannie du Plessis for side entry on the All Black line when his action had no influence on the play at all (he attempted a clean and missed his target) or the resets of scrums when Franks’ feet are so far back on the touch, that he is almost certainly hanging over the cliff (not supporting his own body weight) and the last penalty… A brave call! BUT, he let the game flow with the right amount of empathy and game management. He was even handed in his approach.
He is a superior communicator. And he is smart!
He showed his experience in this toughest of environments when the reffing in this tournament has been quite ordinary, and deserves credit for that (and he was excellent at my braai on Tuesday with his singing of “Bye bye miss American pie”. So much for those people who regularly say the Northern referees are not up to it!
Argentina vs Australia:
Argentina beat Australia 21 – 17 after being down 0 – 14. They worked hard for this win, and worked hard for each other in the fixture. Their carry was excellent and they seemed to get rewards when they were in the Australian half.
Their tries were well constructed and I am really happy for them that they have finally won a game. Hopefully they will become even more competitive in the years to come and win an away game or two.
Australia will bemoan the fact that they let slip a biggish lead, but the real story will perhaps be the 3 Yellow Cards that the Wallabies received on match day.
Last week I was singing Nigel Owens’ praises after the match at Newlands. He has really shot to the fore after the 2011 Rugby World Cup in New Zealand but I thought he was poor on Saturday.
He was strangely hesitant in his decision making, once even asking the Assistant Referee whether there were hands in, after he penalized Australia and had pulled his Cards out already. He then put the cards back in his pocket. What was the point?
Not so lucky was the Australian No 9, Nick Phipps, who received a Yellow Card for a brilliant piece of play where he was the tackler and didn’t infringe at all.
What should have been a turnover to Australia, resulted in a Yellow Card which was a disaster for the Wallabies who then conceded a penalty and a try in his absence. Not great!! They would have been spitting mad as that decision had huge consequences for this test match.
Towards the end of the fixture, with the game still in the balance, the referee stopped the game when Hooper attempted a charge down, was airborne and in the process fell on top of Sanchez, the kicker.
He was also carded (incorrectly, as there was little he could do once he was airborne). Argentina converted the penalty and wound the clock down to record a historical moment for them and the tournament.
My opinion of Nigel hasn’t changed.
To say he was poor would be an understatement, but I know from personal experience that we all have these days (I had my fair share), and he will bounce back. I do feel for the Wallabies though and I thought they deserved better.
The Currie Cup:
On the Currie Cup front, the Blue Bulls dominated the Pumas in Nelspruit, where Peyps (Jaco Peyper) had an excellent game.
They are back in the mix! The Free State Cheetahs were very stiff against WP, who somehow managed to hack through a loose ball and fall on it.
To be honest, they shouldn’t have had a prayer at that stage of the game. Sarel Pretorius had a brain fart by taking a quick throw when his team were in the ascendency, instead of slowing everything down and winding the clock down.
That was far too adventurous for that stage of the game and perhaps ended up costing them the game. I still think he is a champion though!
Griquas predictably smashed the EP Kings 45-25, as I thought they might. Quite simply, they are tougher and want it more.
It was a happy and sad night for Jacques Botes, the most capped player in the history of the Currie Cup.
It was perhaps his last home game and he was given a rousing send-off by the crowd and by his fellow team mates. He is a model professional and a genuinely good guy.
He made a huge contribution to the game and earned his respect from teammates and opponents alike. He will be remembered as a workhorse who had an uncanny knack of appearing at the right place at the right time, scoring an inordinate amount of tries for a loose forward!
I thought Pro Legoate had a tough time on the night.
He looked ill at ease and flustered and most of the calls appeared to go the way of the home team.
The decision to card Derick Minnie with about 14 minutes to go was completely inaccurate as he complied totally with law.
Pro could not have seen the incident clearly and the net result was that the Golden Lions were reduced to 14 players for the remainder of the game, barring the last 2 minutes. I feel for Pro as he is one of the genuinely good guys on the circuit, but that effort simply is not enough at this level.
The Rugby Championship referee wrap up:
I have had a good look at the Referees in The Rugby Championship and think they will concede that there is much room for growth, even the best of them had an off day, so I will say the alarm bells are ringing, but not sure if anyone is listening… Yet!
My top 3 performances were :
- Nigel Owens – South Africa vs Australia at Newlands
- Jerome Garces – New Zealand vs South Africa in Wellington
- Craig Joubert – Argentina vs New Zealand in Buenos Aires
- I thought Gauzere (New Zealand vs Argentina), Clancy (Australia vs South Africa) and Owens (Argentina vs Australia) had off days.
Is it not time for a revamp of the system to help these moments where referees are not having good days at the office?
@ Ashley:
I don’t know, are you suggesting the Referee NEVER be allowed to look at the big screen at all, unless he asked for a replay to an event?
Where in the rule book does it state that the referee is not allowed to look?
I don’t argue with the fact the SuperSport helped out a bit and that the cheating scum in the land of the white cloud would have put it under the carpet (We have seen this for year where only opposing teams foul play are shown on tv, but shoulder charges regularly get ignored, this also goes further into foul play and citing of players in opposition countries, how often would an All Black player get cited when playing at home?
This once we had a referee make a good well calculated decision, not the fiasco last year when the referee was 100% influenced by something as simple as the home crowd.
the review system will also help clarify what should happen in a scenario like the one we had this weekend. if its played on the screen and the captain’s got a review in hand, then good on him! he can use it to go upstairs. if he doesn’t have one, then tough luck, the game continue as the refs after missing the incident, cant go upstairs and no amount of booing, spitting, swearing and showing it on the big screen can make them do so. problem solved!!
61…If there is an “argument” for neutral broadcasting, we may as well play NZ in Singapore every year or Moscow where we have neutral crowds.
macro @ 61
see #62
@ Ashley:
We often have player appealing to the ref for foul play and they often get reviewed.
macro @ 65
yes, but the whole issue around this is the fact that the refs missed the incident and was only made aware of it after the crowd reacted to what they saw on the big screen!
The TV and TMO is already setting a dangerous precedent.
How many TMO decisions have seen that they get wrong as well?
The broadcasting in some countries are up to maggots, ie in Argentina when the Aussies went over the tryline only to find not one decent angle.
The WP match there were two incidents where the ref and Touch judges actually went up by themselves to find a reason to bin a WP player, thank goodness sanity prevailed and the TMO at least got them right and the ref was stuffed.
I honestly think the Schalk incident was milked for what it was worth and looked much worse because of the TV slow motion replays from the worst possible angle.
We got away with it and good for us, but IMO it doesn’t make it right.
What is the point of refs if the TV and players and crowd can do the job themselves?
@ nortie:
You are a farking quisling he was lucky to not get a yellow.
The technology is there to make the game fairer but is only as good as the officials involved.
Fortunately they got it right on Saturday.
nortie @ 67
yeah, I think at one instance they showed the slow mo and I thought this guy’s gone (yellowed)
but when they immediately after that showed the incident in real time, it really looked like nothing at all!!
o and cane
before you add my name to the list of the likes of mallet and Kaplan
I’m only saying this because we won nê
im sure I would’ve had a whole different viewpoint had that penalty not been rewarded!!
..
but it doesn’t make my suggestions nul and void though
I think for once I’m actually quite clever, lol
for anyone debating this issue, especially the orcs from mordor, claiming that they should have won this game illegitimately knowingly it was a penalty is nothing short of cheating. For a split second we have a fair result. Finally. There is absolutely no debate.
bakkies would absolutely shit himself
macro
you’re not in a good mood today, are you?
@ nortie:
they final decision was with the ref wasnt it?
@ Ashley:
I am a bit tired 😛 and I know cane is just stirring, no person can be this stupid for real
@ gunther:
The issue for me is not about who won or whether there was an incident or not, it’s about the manner in which an incident was highlighted.
That’s suppose to be the job of the citing commissioner after a match. The fact that Messam wasn’t cited surely shows that there was nothing serious in the tackle?
Or do they no longer have to work for their money because the respective crowds in conjunction with Sky, Fox or SuperSport will in future do their work for them while the match is in play?
MacroBlouBul wrote:
Was it really?
macro @ 75
nothing a little whiskey cant cure
have a nice evening everything
see you guys tomorrow again!!
cheers!
76 @ nortie:
It was high, do all high tackles get cited?
The whole irony of this situation is that, here we have one of the ATG sides, a side that arguably gets the rub of the green the majority of the time, when they lose we have people actually blaming the ref fir making the right call?
JRR Tolkien could not even make this up.
@ Ashley:
Nag Ash 😀
79 @ MacroBlouBul:
The game is over, we won, fair and square.
That’s not debatable.
What is debatable is whether the precedent that was set is going to be good for the game in future or not.
I’m not referring to incidents where the ref asks the opinion of the TMO and the TV producer gets involved on request.
I’m merely stating that once the TV producer decides he or she didn’t like an incident then they, with the help of the home crowd can manipulate a ref into making a call.
Again, it’s simply my opinion, others will disagree and hail it as progress
@ MacroBlouBul:
One final (hopefully) point on this type of incident.
Would you, or Gunther who also agrees with the way the call was made, have felt the same joy and agreement if the game was in NZ and the footage from Sky Sports showed Schalk make a similar tackle on a Kiwi and the Boks lost because of it?
If the answer is yes, then you truly agree that the TV can show these incidents, even to the detriment of your team.
If you would have been unhappy and felt we were robbed, different story.
@ nortie:
I understand, but whats to say this has not been happening since whenever the TMO got installed in rugby?
What ever happened in the PW game and Arg game was NOT influenced by what happened at Ellis Park.
This is also the case for cricket games where players often get accused of ball tampering in other countries, the FAF or Philander incidents would never have been in footage had it not been for the opposing broadcasters, just like Siddle who tampered with the ball in SA would never have been broadcast in Australia.
This sets no president at all, why cant the TMO get more involved in live footage while keeping open communication with the referee?
The crowds reaction to incidents on the field have a much larger influence on the referee than anything else, just think about the Bismarck incident last year.
nortie wrote:
That’s a moral question, would you want to win knowing that the result should have been in another direction?
83 @ MacroBlouBul:
In the Ellis Park case the TMO didn’t get involved, neither did the ref or two assistants in the first place.
It was the TV producer who got involved, setting off a chain reaction of calls from the ref only after the fact.
If that’s the way forward, fine, but then all countries will start doing it and we will also be on the receiving end.
Next year the WC is in Eng and most supporters will be neutral, so who’s blood will they bay for the most?
If they don’t want SA to progress because we might beat England, the producer and crowd can cheer for Samoa and influence that we fall out?
We set this precedent and we will have to live with it, so then it must be the same for every televised match in future
85 @ nortie:
It is pretty simple, just like anything that happens on the rugby field, from forward passes to the ref or his assistants having a look at the big screen, If the ref makes the wrong decision, he should be blasted, if makes a fair decision to what happened on the field he should be praised.
There are constant replays on the screen for 80 minutes, they choose to look at this one deeper, fantastic!
84 @ MacroBlouBul:
Every single game there are debatable calls, especially at the ruck and mauls that could go either way.
We seem to have accepted to live with it, what makes this different?
Richie’s cleaning out of Marcel a case in point, they scored what was essentially the winning try after that.
We lived with it and got on with things
nortie wrote:
I am 100% fine with that as long as the ref makes the right call using his own judgement.
nortie wrote:
Because there is nothing to do about it when we only get to see replays a day or two after the game.
86 @ MacroBlouBul:
Yes, they did look at it deeper, but IMO they didn’t choose to, they were coerced into it, therein lies the difference.
But it’s all good, the right call was made and the right team won, so I’m not complaining about the result, I’m just slightly concerned. The game is already in such a nanny state, it’s just going to get worse
Users Online
Total 334 users including 0 member, 334 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,342,033 Page Impressions
_