The skill and luck of the bokke

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
i note that Sam Cane's disciplinary is yet to be published. Imagine the impact if they were to dismiss the RC
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
I suppose we'll never really know for sure but it's pretty much accepted down here that that video shifted the 2021 Lions tour result.

As your analogy goes, the coin started landing up springbok side up in matches 2 and 3.
i think that's true, but I think the impact had worn off by the RWC.
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,408
Post Likes
1,525
That's true for any nation, I don't think SA is special in pointing out or complaining about referee decisions. They might be more vitriolic in their sentiment but I certainly don't find it unique. Just looking at the Kiwi's, the pity tour and blame the ref brigade are in full force from regular fans to respected journalists and former players. Same happened with France recently, leading to death threats toward a Springbok player and his child. And the Irish have been an absolute joke in thier navel gazing endeavours.

The sports movie narrative said France must win, but reality intervened on that one (un)fortunately!
Did you actually write that with a straight face?
 

shebeen

Avid Rugby Lover
Joined
Jul 29, 2015
Messages
202
Post Likes
61
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Did you actually write that with a straight face?
I'm genuinely interested in the decisions the kiwis want answers on.
There's no pivotal Michelac (sp) forward pass smoking gun.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
i note that Sam Cane's disciplinary is yet to be published. Imagine the impact if they were to dismiss the RC
So Thursday has come and gone. Decision tomorrow?
This is the slowest process of the whole world cup.. is it possible that something big is happening???
I bet NZ have a good lawyer on it ...
 
Last edited:

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,164
Post Likes
1,846
Its no longer a surprise of course, and i appreciate this is a very naïve suggestion, but I recall a time when sport was decided by action on a pitch/court/etc and not a tribunal...

I can see a point of getting a tribunal to overcome a card/ban cos that has a direct effect going forward. But what would be the point of raising issues over a "proven" incorrect decision? Replay the fixture? It just aint gonna happen.

God the elite game gets more up its own 4rse daily

Yes, I know I am in a minority of one.
 

Harry

Avid Rugby Lover
Joined
Oct 26, 2019
Messages
76
Post Likes
59
Its no longer a surprise of course, and i appreciate this is a very naïve suggestion, but I recall a time when sport was decided by action on a pitch/court/etc and not a tribunal...

I can see a point of getting a tribunal to overcome a card/ban cos that has a direct effect going forward. But what would be the point of raising issues over a "proven" incorrect decision? Replay the fixture? It just aint gonna happen.

God the elite game gets more up its own 4rse daily

Yes, I know I am in a minority of one.
I agree with you and I stopped watching F1 racing when they moved the finishing line to the courtroom
 

shebeen

Avid Rugby Lover
Joined
Jul 29, 2015
Messages
202
Post Likes
61
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Its no longer a surprise of course, and i appreciate this is a very naïve suggestion, but I recall a time when sport was decided by action on a pitch/court/etc and not a tribunal...

I can see a point of getting a tribunal to overcome a card/ban cos that has a direct effect going forward. But what would be the point of raising issues over a "proven" incorrect decision? Replay the fixture? It just aint gonna happen.

God the elite game gets more up its own 4rse daily

Yes, I know I am in a minority of one.
Of course the kiwis who are fuming that the TMO pointed out the knock ons for the Smith try to Wayne Barnes are the same ones who wanted a TMO to point out a forward pass to Wayne Barnes in 2007.


The obvious answer is that we will never get all the decisions right. Getting a lot more right is progress.
 

smeagol


Referees in America
Joined
Apr 20, 2012
Messages
767
Post Likes
109
Location
Springfield, IL
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Of course the kiwis who are fuming that the TMO pointed out the knock ons for the Smith try to Wayne Barnes are the same ones who wanted a TMO to point out a forward pass to Wayne Barnes in 2007.
In response, I'd point to the kicks at goal the ABs missed in the final.
 

Volun-selected


Referees in America
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
596
Post Likes
351
Location
United States
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
So Thursday has come and gone. Decision tomorrow?
This is the slowest process of the whole world cup.. is it possible that something big is happening???
I bet NZ have a good lawyer on it ...
Looks like the plate of biscuits was off - only Rich Tea and digestives.
6 matches minimum entry reduced to 3 due to "the player’s exemplary disciplinary record, his early acknowledgment of foul play and his clear remorse" with a get out clause to just 2 with the Intervention Program (and a promise to tell the team to bring Garibaldis and Jaffa Cakes next time...)

 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
Looks like the plate of biscuits was off - only Rich Tea and digestives.
6 matches minimum entry reduced to 3 due to "the player’s exemplary disciplinary record, his early acknowledgment of foul play and his clear remorse" with a get out clause to just 2 with the Intervention Program (and a promise to tell the team to bring Garibaldis and Jaffa Cakes next time...)

what struck me is that he contended that his actions did not amount to a RC - so they must have thought they had a chance of arguing that.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
what struck me is that he contended that his actions did not amount to a RC - so they must have thought they had a chance of arguing that.
"I didn't do it, but if it turns out that I did do it, then I'm really sorry for doing it"
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
"I didn't do it, but if it turns out that I did do it, then I'm really sorry for doing it"
He admitted foul play and was sorry, but argued that mitigatioj should have been given and it didn't merit a RC
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,136
Post Likes
2,409
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
He admitted foul play and was sorry, but argued that mitigatioj should have been given and it didn't merit a RC

I wonder what mitigation he thought should apply for someone who is always upright, clear line of sight, no attempt to lower his height, dynamic and with force, direct contact to the head.

For me that's always illegal and no mitigation should be allowed. I was surprised when Barnsey used the TMO's words of (something like) "always illegal, no mitigation found to apply", when if its always illegal you can't apply mitigation.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
For me that's always illegal and no mitigation should be allowed.
Unless I'm misunderstanding things, I don't think that what always illegal means
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,136
Post Likes
2,409
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Unless I'm misunderstanding things, I don't think that what always illegal means

You are correct and I used the wrong wording.

The Head contact process states "Mitigation will not apply for intentional or highly reckless acts of foul play".

For me "someone who is always upright, clear line of sight, no attempt to lower his height, dynamic and with force, direct contact to the head", falls under the 'highly reckless' part.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,824
Post Likes
3,161
I am happy that a RC was the decision

But given all the bunker incidents we saw in the RWC I can't understand how anyone can see these things as definitively one type of card or another .

I would not have been unduly surprised had it been a YC.

Don't forget the bunker issued no RC at all after 28 Sept .. until that one.
I just don't think that was the worst tackle in the whole second half of the RWC
 

shebeen

Avid Rugby Lover
Joined
Jul 29, 2015
Messages
202
Post Likes
61
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
I wonder what mitigation he thought should apply for someone who is always upright, clear line of sight, no attempt to lower his height, dynamic and with force, direct contact to the head.

For me that's always illegal and no mitigation should be allowed. I was surprised when Barnsey used the TMO's words of (something like) "always illegal, no mitigation found to apply", when if its always illegal you can't apply mitigation.
The argument was probably change of direction by ball carrier, and low speed of impact.
A real pity that this final has come down to a discussion of cards and refereeing. Even more bizarre that Wayne Barnes has been blamed for the sending off by the kiwi public/media. As he didn't give the RC, was he supposed to call it a YC and no bunker?

Another weird one is how the french crowd were so anti springbok, presumably because of the QF loss where Antoine duPont blamed BO'K. Absolutely no sanction for that one, so I guess all captains can now use the post match press conference to vent at the ref? From a SA perspective this one is a little bit weird, since the french hosting of the tournament was gifted to the French after RSA cam etop in the selection process

It would have been very easy to gloat how SA have now won both French hosted tournaments, and especially sweet since Bernard Laporte(french rugby chief) was found guilty of corruption in another matter and suspended. Very glad the bok management chose to leave that one alone, and who knows if the 2035 tournament would even go to RSA, it would be 40 years since the last staging there but maybe europe would want it again after australia and USA would leave quite a gap for them.

Back to the topic title..., "luck". risking having only one recognised hooker in the squad, and losing him after 90 seconds had a huge impact on the game. Deon Fourie stepped up, but the lineouts and scrums were badly affected and could well have helped keeping the game so close. but hey, let's talk about cards more.
 

shebeen

Avid Rugby Lover
Joined
Jul 29, 2015
Messages
202
Post Likes
61
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
I am happy that a RC was the decision

But given all the bunker incidents we saw in the RWC I can't understand how anyone can see these things as definitively one type of card or another .

I would not have been unduly surprised had it been a YC.

Don't forget the bunker issued no RC at all after 28 Sept .. until that one.
I just don't think that was the worst tackle in the whole second half of the RWC
if someone could actually use the footage, then we could see a chronological analysis of bunker decisions.
i think you're right about there being "a directive" to the men at Roland Garros to ease up after week3 would be nice to see it lined up and compared in one go.

NZ did of course win the card count at the RWC with 7 (5 Y and 2 R), but obviously played the most games.
 
Last edited:
Top