The Springboks are taking their complaints to an official level with the South African union asking SANZAR to look into what they clearly feel is a bias against Peter de Villiers’ side by the judicial system.
The two match ban on Jean de Villiers for a dangerous tackle on top of Bakkies Botha’s nine-week ban for head-butting has raised the anger of the South Africans after a tough two weeks in New Zealand where they lost both Tri-Nations Tests to the All Blacks.
South African Rugby Union boss Oregan Hoskins has instructed the Springboks’ representative on the SANZAR legal committee, Judge Lex Mpati, to look into the matter.
“On the judicial side, I have asked Judge Mpati to take it up,” Hoskins told the Cape Times newspaper.
“A number of stakeholders have complained to me about the lack of consistency in the rulings of the judicial officials in rugby.
Jean de Villiers wasn’t penalised for the tackle on Rene Ranger during the Wellington Test by referee Alain Rolland, but was cited afterwards by the Australian citing commissioner Scott Nowland.
“I have stressed to Judge Mpati the seriousness of the matter, and he has promised that he will come back to me in writing hopefully by next week.
“I don’t want to say too much further, as previously I have spoken about the issue in the media and nothing has been done about it.”
The Boks are angry that nothing was done against Ranger for an earlier “no-arms” tackle against their fullback Zane Kirchner.
The world champions were also vocal in their assumption that All Blacks captain Richie McCaw was getting away with too much at the breakdowns, believing he should have been yellow-carded at the Cake Tin.
Coach de Villiers vented his frustration after the match by suggesting he was considering coaching his team to “cheat” on the field after struggling with refereeing inconsistencies over the first six Tests of their latest campaign.
“As a coach, you don’t want to coach your team to cheat, but maybe that is something we are going to have to consider,” he said.
South African Rugby’s manager of referees, Andre Watson, did not want to comment on Rolland’s performance in Wellington,
“I looked at the ref, and he made some brilliant decisions and some not-so-good decisions,” Watson said.
“I can’t say if the Boks got a raw deal from the referee because if I do say that that is the case, then South Africa will love me and the rest of the world will hate me, and if I don’t feel that way, it will be the other way around.”
The Springboks play the Wallabies in Brisbane on Saturday.
Coutesy of spotrt24
It’s about time something gets done…
This can only bite us in the arse.
Rugby matches are officiated my humans, and thus human error cannot be taken out of the game. Then you get personal bias, which is part and parcel of every referee, you can say what you want but it exists. To say it must be removed from referees is an impossibility, it is like giving someone a lobotomy and expecting them to write a test.
The only way we can ovecome this bias is by acting appropriately on the field. SA rugby is know going to make a media circus out of this, and all that will happen is the decisions hat went our way in the second test will be viewed as well.
Wynand Olivier took Dan Carter out, when Carter put a kick through down the touchline, and on replay it showed he shouldered him, nothing came of it. There was also some other incidents where we got away. This can easily be explained as human error, and most likely will.
This does not mean I disagree that as far as yellow cards and citings we are getting the short end of the stick. But as much as we get upset over it, it is not going to change until our players realise they need to stop acting like upset little kids.
What Bakkies Botha and Danie Rossouw did was childish and stupid and the whole team pays for that. Jean de Villiers is just part of that “momentum” against us.
PDV is showing that he is weak as a coach, by blaming the referee, rather than to admit he is out of his depth and is not capable of selecting combinations and players and he has no plan B.
These are the reasons that despite having great player and depth, if we don’t select the best and have a plan B in our arsenal, we may just see SA rugby coming down with a crash.
The players can perform and win test matches, but this might well be despite PDV.
@ biltongbek:
In the long run I still believe it will have more of a positive effect than a negative one…
Just lets the guys focus a bit more in officiating the game, because they know it’s being watched with close interest.
The same scenario as a player like Bakkies will be watched a bit more careful…
Sure the refs have been poor against us.
Here is the real problem which no amount of good reffing can fix:
Bad management decisions:
Not building a front row.
Smit as tight head.
Pienaar not playing scrum half.
De Villiers not playing centre.
Losing Frans Steyn.
Taking players to the NH last year who should never get near a Bok jersey.
Not building a team by consistent selection.
How to fix the above?
Throw political correctness out the window and hire the best coach in the world no matter what nationality he is.
When will this happen?
Probably never.
And by the way, even if we win all our remaining tri nations games, the problem is still there.
We just don’t want to face it.
tighthead, you are correct, but I think there are a lot of fans that do face it. The unfortunate thing is what can we do about it?
Swak!
Looking for problems in the past and in full sight of the media is the absolute worst these clowns can come up with. And i call them clowns because that’s the way they are acting, giving everybody outside SA a good laugh….
Boy oh boy and if we loose Saturday the Aussie media will be all over us….
Net een vir ‘n smile op die gesig:
Om deesdae toetsrugby te kyk is dieselfde soos om wildtuin toe te gaan……
Jy eet lekker biltong, drink lekker bier, en kyk hoe k@k die bokke!!
SA rugby is soos n’ alkoholis.
Die politiese korrekte bestuur het nou gevorder na “denial” maar dit lyk of hulle sommer twee vliee met een klap gaan vang, want “anger” is ook daar.
Dink julle hulle sal by “acceptance” uitkom?
@ spyker:
halloooo spyker!
@ biltongbek
lol….. nope SAffers will never get to the “acceptance” part, they might “deny” their losses and blame it on the ref (I fully agree) and get “angry” about it, but accepting it, no ways!! The Boks won’t just accept, they might just all surprise us.
@ spyker:
more babes
@ps in CT
hahaha sorry bedoel v jou!
@ spyker:
hehe is die naam bedoel vir my??
@ps in CT
Hey I thought you were a male chauvinist……lmfao
yesssssss
PDV is creating a smoke screen…from his poor tour results!!
Just like Jake ranted and raved…to create distraction!!
@ Wallabie.:
Don’t you agree the referee decisions was a disgrace ?
fender wrote:
Ek stem, die ref was swak !!!
i was thinking about the Jean de Villiers tackle last night (like bloody 2 am, when I woke up for no reason, mayvbe a fox in the garden or something)
Lets look at the spirit and intention of the rule and the letter of the law.
The idea was to stop guys lifting players up in the tackle and driving them into the ground head first which is patently dangerous (used to be one of Burger Geldenhuy’s more used tackles in the past)and I dont have a problem with trying to take this out of the game.
However one then has to apply perameters when you write the rule, so the rule was written “when you go beyond the horizontal, you should attempt to lower the player to the ground”. de Villiers tackle was borderline of falling foul of the rule, but the tackled player probably went less than 5 degrees beyond the horizontal, there was an attempt made to lower the tackled player albeit it could have been a half hearted attempt. Worst punishment should have been the penalty and maybe at the absolute outside…a yellow card. But the citing commisioner applied the letter of the law and a Springbok picked up a two week ban. There are potentially four things wrong here.
1 The punishment did not fit a borderline crime.
2 The citing commisioner has abused his lawkeeping position though ego or bias.
3 The “spirit or intention” of the law in the first place, is ignored.(this is the worst transgression)
4 Legislation of a contact sport should have as few rules as possible, as this leads to players trying to find ways to circumvent the rules instead of playing the game like gentlemen, who have the correct ethics and morals.
15@ spyker:
Spykertjie, as jy nickname wil verander, laat weet my net op webmaster@rugby-talk.com.
Ek het amper gedog ons het ‘n indringer hier….. toe gaan ek in jou besonderhede in en sien dis weber….
Ons is maar effe streng hieroor om die gemors bloggers weg te hou, nie dat ons ‘n probleem het met nicknameveranderings nie.
Well done Saru! Lets hope something positive comes from this.
Rugbybal, you don’t really think anything is going to come of this do you?
Iamgine being a fly on the wall in that meeting.
“The referee and citing commissioners are biased, cause we say so”
Ja, right.
@ biltongbek:
Dit kan net help dat dit beter gaan, miskien nie.
But its worth the try…dit kan beswaarlik :poop: -ker gaan
@ biltongbek:
Yes biltongbek I do think so. If we make enough noise refs will make more of an effort to be consistent. It’s not the ideal means but maybe the most effective. If the media is focused on the ref’s performance then, like I said before, more of an effort will be made.
20@GBS
Sorry sal nie weer nie, hou maar by die een!
25@ J.M.E.:
No problem…. enigste ding is, van nou af sal jou informele aanspreekvorm hier wees “Gespyker”… want jy WAS mos “spyker” GEwees!
Hehehe
hehehe!! lmalieaf!!!! mmmmmmmm ……”wonder” dis seker maar my verdiende loon om van nou af “Gespyker” te wees
:-))
27@ J.M.E.:
Hahaha, ja, jy wil mos…. nou’s jy Gespyker OP Rugby-Talk….. hel, dit klink woes!
J.M.E
Ek veronderstel “gespyker” is beter as “gevlok”
hehehehe biltongbek! peractly! 😉
Users Online
Total 37 users including 0 member, 37 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,598,208 Page Impressions
_