Francois Steyn
SANZAR has lodged an appeal against the outcome of a judicial hearing held on Monday 23 March that found Francois Steyn of the Sharks not guilty of contravening Law 10.4 (j).
A SANZAR Appeals Committee, chaired by Terry Willis, with Nigel Hampton QC and Robert Stelzner SC as members, will hear the appeal via videoconference on Friday 27 March 2015 at 08:00 SA Time (17:00 AEDT, 19:00 NZ Time).
Hearing Details: 27 March 2015 – 08:00 SA Time (17:00 AEDT, 19:00 NZ Time) via videoconference
Appeals Committee: Terry Willis (Chairman), Nigel Hampton QC, Robert Stelzner SC
Player: Francois Steyn
Team: Cell C Sharks
Position: Centre
Date of Incident: 21 March 2015
Outcome of original SANZAR judicial hearing: At a SANZAR judicial hearing on 23 March 2015, SANZAR Judicial Officer, Jannie Lubbe SC, found Francois Steyn not guilty of contravening Law 10.4 (j) Lifting a player from the ground and dropping or driving that player into the ground whilst that player’s feet are still off the ground such that the player’s head and / or upper body come into contact with the ground is dangerous play.
I once did a murder case, defending a lady who beat a man over the head with half a broom stick, till the blood came out his ears. He was stone cold dead!
The fact that she did the beating part, was not in dispute… not at all… she did it.
On first sight it sounds astounding, brutal… sounds as if she should have gotton Life or worse…. till you get to know the facts of the matter.
The man had been abusing and victimizing her and her children for years and years, and on the day he had picked up a rock as he walked past, which he had hurled and hit her little one on the head, causing profuse bleeding (a head wound always bleeds badly).
So, after years of abuse and victimization and after he had just injured her child, she chased after him, through the veld, and in the running picked up this half-broomstick and unfortunately for him, she caught him.
Looking at the nature of the abuse, vitimization and surrounding circumstances certainly now colours a different pitcture… does’nt it!!
I had her plead guilty on the murder charge, she was found guilty accordingly… and then we put the full facts of the abuse, victimization and injury in front of court… also undisputed.
I asked for a sentence of only a WARNING, no suspension, no jail time… and we got it!
She was WARNED not to kill again, as her sentence!
… and you know what, it was the correct and fitting sentence!!
What I am trying to say is, all the facts is the only thing which tells the whole story… and that principle must NEVER be neglected….
12 @ grootblousmile:
Agree on the Consistency being what we want but in achieving that there has to be an adherence to precedent even if unofficially for example if one sees a ref coaching one team at the breakdown then he must coach the other team as well.
Talking precedents we were discussing the Steyn case elsewhere and someone came up with an example from Premiership rugby where Toby Flood tackled Andy Goode and drove him into a position where he landed on his neck, but he also had some help from one of his team mates in the tackle as Steyn did with Reinach. Flood was cited but got off free in the same way Frans Steyn did for same reasons, although the difference obviously is now Steyn’s decision is being appealed. This was what was said by the disciplinary panel at the time of the Flood case –
“”‘Whilst we found that the elements of a dangerous tackle were made out, after very careful analysis we could not be satisfied, to that standard required, that the dynamics of the incident had not been caused, or contributed to, significantly by the involvement of other players from both teams.’ ”
Here is the Flood incident:
Suppose I better do some News Articles, Bru Picks, Weekend Teams ect…
Having had 5 hours of Loadshedding today, ripped my day a whole new asshole… so I don’t know when I will eventually get to bed tonight!
@ grootblousmile:
The video clip I put up in comment 32 which shows Flood and another team mate being involved in tip tackling Goode is similar to the Steyn one but to me it looks worse with Flood’s team mate tackling Goode around the shoulders and dragging him down towards the ground more definitely but also the manner in which Flood goes about the tackle seems a lot worse with a more aggressive drive and then of course Goode lands really badly on his neck/head. In spite of all this there was not sanction at the hearing of Flood, as they decided that Flood’s team mate may have contributed to the nastiness of it, as it was by virtue of the above the shoulder grab I think both players should have been suspended.
You were saying that you weren’t sure if the SANZAR process was bound by precedence, I think if it isn’t it should be because ultimately surely all the rugby groups around the world are in some way affiliated to World Rugby and so there must be consistency. Any decent legal eagle representing a player in a hearing would not only represent the case from the point of view of what they want it to look like happened on the day but also if they found a similar case with a favourable outcome for the defendant then they would be able to bring this to the attention of the hearing as well.
In Bismarck’s case and I guess in the sentencing of all players there is some element of precedence as they determine the level of sentence and then reduce it according to how good or bad the person’s reputation is, they even broke it down to what Bismarck did in dates/years in explaining his sentence.
nortie wrote:
Absolutely agree with you with this and I mentioned this elsewhere earlier today, from exactly the same angle.
@ Charo:
@ ryecatcher:
No worries plenty of arrogant supporters for all teams not just the sharks.
24 @ ryecatcher:
I have to agree with this… This whole situation is quite fishy.
Could there have been extra pressure on saNZAR?
Surely if there was objectivity the Messam rulling would also have been appealed?
32 @ Bullscot:
Never mention reinach had an influence, it was all fransie. 😉
@ MacroBull:
36
Of course there are.
And many arrogant unions as well.
Just think of the powerhouse unions from the amateur days.
Any president more arrogant than Louis Luyt?
guys, this is not a perfect world by any means. I think what is indisputable, the same two players(Fransie and Biz) seem to be serial transgressors and play a particular style of rugby which borders on the dangerous and/or ultra-aggressive. For example; recall how Biz responded to Matfield’s baiting in the Bulls game. Biz is an aggressive SOB and the opposition know it. He WILL get punished by the match officials because its their job to stamp out illegal ‘aggression’. Fransie is not too far behind and is being watched. Just my take. Before someone points this out; I don’t like either players because of this attitude. Its not a Sharks thing at all. They are a good, even great brand.
@ Charo: none that I can think of.
belabouring the point; I don’t think Biz should be considered for Springbok duty again. Certainly not until he mends his ways.
MacroBull wrote:
SNAP 😆 This is what I wrote elsewhere today : What on earth is going on, while I think it is correct for SANZAR to appeal the decision they made against Steyn I wonder why they are not also appealing the Messam decision.
MacroBull wrote:
Thank you Macro Bull for your fair mindedness,and
ultimately for your courtesy.Charo.Good evening
to you,the one third of the band of brothers.
Tassies wrote:
Who could not like a guy with the nic”Tassies”?Regards.Rye
Things went wrong for the Sharks when Plum first tried out Frans as (interim) captain, to be followed by Jake appointing Bismarck as captain. Neither is captaincy material, & that’s putting it mildly (imo). This reflects badly on the judgment of both Plum & Jake, & whoever else (if any) is entrusted with the approval of club captaincy appointments, whether that is the CEO or the Chairman or the Board or some ad hoc committee.
Then came 2015 & both Frans & Bismarck were again confirmed as part of the Sharks’ influential leadership core of 4 or 5 players. Gary Gold was not yet in the DoR job, so who knows who in the Sharks’ rather elaborate hierarchy is responsible for that decision, but (imo) it was a poor one.
Captaincy seemingly rests heavily on Bismarck’s shoulders & he has not been the same player since & has been acting erratically & aggressively on field, which is a pity because he is a great player. As for Frans, I can’t remember when last he performed at the lofty levels he is capable of (2009 perhaps?).
There is something wrong with both players: They have a bad attitude & seem unhappy/angry. Perhaps it is this combination of added responsibility, heightened (3rd party) expectation, & personal disappointment at no longer being automatic 1st choice Bok selections that is the catalyst for their attitude & poor discipline? Be that as it may, they set a very poor example for their team mates. My concern is that the proverbial fish rots from the head down. The dynamic of these 2 talented, but wayward leaders within the team is potentially destructive for the franchise. I have high hopes (for both the Sharks & the Bokke’s sake) that Bismarck’s red card, 4 match suspension & internal punishment will lead to sincere introspection & contrition on his part & cause him to regain his focus, self-control & position as the world’s leading #2.
As for Frans Steyn, I’m not so sure – his issues have had a long, festering gestation & he may be beyond redemption. And the rescission of his red card at the initial hearing, followed by the Zanzar appeal against the findings have not been helpful for the player’s rehabilitation – this is imo simply going to lead to reinforcing his perceived self-absorbed victim mentality. Adv Lubbe’s purpose may have been different, but imo he has not done the Sharks, the Bokke and Frans Steyn any lasting favour. Like Bismarck, Frans needed to be punished (that was an obvious spear tackle) & to receive the opportunity for introspection, remorse & rehabilitation.
Frans Steyn’s reintroduction into Sharks & Bok rugby post his France & Japan sojourns may yet prove to be expensive mistakes. I do not wish this to be part of his legacy & I hope I’m wrong.
PS: Jean Deysel was red carded last year for kicking a player in circumstances somewhat similar to Bismarck’s offence. It was an isolated, provoked incident & he did not have a bad attitude leading into it. He is a hard but disciplined player. He took his punishment & came back stronger, & on Saturday he is captaining the Sharks in the absence of Bismarck & Pat. That is manner one takes one’s punishment & mends one’s ways …
11 @ Charo:
I think that the Sharks (Natal RFU) took a mediocre team and Union after SARB gave them a lifeline back into the Currie Cup premier division (SARB declared at the time that all of the “test unions” should be in the top rung of competition), and marketed themselves to such a brilliant degree that they now have legions of “fans” who know little or nothing about the game. the union they “support” or the players that play for the team.
Their marketing success has naturally had VERY positive spin offs that have allowed the Sharks to build up a brilliant infrastructre that supports their proffessional team(s) and have turned them into a world class Rugby team.
HOWEVER, their arrogance as shown by the likes of Jannie (ref chirper of note) , Bismark, (don’t need to elaborate) and Frans both on and off the field, leaves much to be desired to “traditional” Rugby supporters who, perhaps wrongly, think back all too often to the priciples of the “good old” amateur days.
When one compares the attitude of Bismak, as a provincial captain, to the attitude of young Mr Lambie as a provincial captain, then one can clearly see that something is amiss. Why can the management not take the senior players to task regarding their on-field actions? Maybe they have tried, and failed. We would never know. Maybe they are too close to Mr Smit with whom most of them played. In any company, there needs to be a clear distinction between the “workers” and senior management, and I cannot see how that can be with Mr Smit at the helm.
The Sharks supporters that blog here on RT are generally very knowledgeable about the game and always add to the quality of debate, even if with their black and white shades firmly in front of their eyes.
Good luck to all Sharks supporters and your team this weekend.
Hopefully we an talk about the great Rugby after the game, and not the discipline.
@ ryecatcher:
Let’s rather ask why there are so few Sharks’ supporters here on RT.
The non-arrogant ones are still here.
The rest (mostly) have run away in a huff because they fail to see when they and their team are in the wrong, and are unable to accept even constructive criticism, which incidentally, I try never to give regarding any team except the one which I support.
I have just had a very long look on the World Rugby website, and can find no reference to it being a “red card” offence, despite what the media (print and tv) continually state.
The only sanction listed is a penalty.
@ Scrumdown:
47
In my opinion, it is the very fact that the NRU grasped their opportunity to return to the premier Currie Cup as well as the advent of professionalism that niggles other supporters.
Why?
Well, as you say, with clever business principles, they built up strong coffers and could go out and buy skillful players that were in shortage in Natal.
Much like the old WP and NTvl attracted players through promises of glory and national honours.
So, from being a team that played attractive rugby but inevitably lost to the big teams, they started to prosper.
This burned the arses of the traditionalists who could not bear to see these upstarts from the “last outpost” regularly beating their former powerhouses.
How dare they?
How arrogant of them?
Don’t they know their rightful place in the pecking order that is SA Rugby?
And so the prejudice against the “new” Natal/Sharks continues.
Charo wrote:
Kak man, no-one discriminates against the Sharks
Gary Teichmann was one of our best captains and my favourite with Jean, Barney wasn’t bad either up to 2007, JPP is still very good and Lambie is wise beyond his years
But Bissie isn’t enjoying his rugby, he hasn’t been for a while, and maybe a month off will clear his head
Vetgat is just an arrogant prick, like Doc Craven said no-one is bigger than the game and talented as he is, we can do without him.
We could rather give an opportunity to a player who wants to play
” If you aren’t fired with enthusiasm, you will be fired with enthusiasm.” Vince Lombardi
@ Victoriabok:
51
You know little of what you talk boet.
By far the vast majority of “traditional” SA rugby supporters cannot stand the fact that the Sharks are now one of the top teams in SA and probably have the highest brand value in world rugby of all SA teams.
It burns a lot of arses.
But it is true.
52 @ Charo:
I would say you are partly right Charo….supporters don’t like losing to the Sharks….but neither do they enjoy seeing their team lose to the Bulls, Lions, Cheetahs or Stormers, depending on who they support.
The part I would disagree with you is regarding the brand value.
I’m not arguing or disputing the merit of your assessment, it might very well be so, but I doubt that the average supporter of any of the franchises really care about who has the best international brand value.
If this value of the Sharks equate to having more money than the other franchises, then I guess it’s worth something.
It means they can buy teams who are successful, but buying the best players doesn’t win you the Super Rugby trophy that the Sharks and their supporters so covet.
Where the Sharks, with all their money, is seriously lacking, is developing their own players. If, as you say, they have become one of the top teams and biggest International brand of the SA provinces since receiving a leg up in the 80’s, then surely during all those years they could have plough end some money back into their own structures to at least compete at Craven Week level, or even get a University into the Varsity Cup?
Yes, rugby is professional and yes, all teams buy and poach players, but most unions today do have a fairly decent core of players that actually came through their junior systems, and don’t just sit around waiting for other province’s players to show potential either at school or at provincial level before buying them up.
@ nortie:
I think the sharks will always struggle to develop players. We have talked about this before. Its slim pickings compared ti especially the western cape and the eastern cape while the union supports extremely expensive schools when they select craven week teams as well.
@ Victoriabok:
I like giving the sharks as amhard time as anyone. But there is a clear bias directed at the sharks sometimes. To say the union, players and fans is arrogant is a bit extreme when you can find those things at other unions as well.
All the unions that have had some success could be accused of “arrogance”. We had a few guys run away from here but there were probably only 5 of them anyway. Because they couldnt admit they were weong about jake.
MacroBull wrote:
I was referring to Frans not the fans
I like many others have a problem with his attitude
Charo wrote:
And you do?
Charo wrote:
How sure are you about it, and more important can you prove it?
I would think the Stormers and the Bulls might have similar brand values
Users Online
Total 203 users including 0 member, 203 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,334,487 Page Impressions
_