As a general rule I watch the rugby not the referee.
This of course doesn’t mean that I don’t shout at the referee (even in front of the TV knowing pretty well that he can’t hear me) when he makes mistakes. I can see when the referee has a bad game and of course I get upset but I am, as a spectator, more interested in how we play; what do we do with the ball; our structures and systems at the tackle ball; our game tactics; what is the script we are following; our defensive patterns; are we showing improvement on previous games in areas we didn’t do well; how is our scrum going; are we using starter moves; running angles of the backline; how well is No10 dictating the match and where does he take up position behind the scrums, at rucks and line-outs and so forth.
A consequence of all that is that I tend to reflect more on why didn’t we get things right or what went wrong and what can we improve on, independent of whether we lose or win after the match.
I don’t do referee bashing.
My life philosophy is NO BLAMING is allowed. Take full responsibility for everything in your life.
As an athlete or a coach I believe that is the only way you can move forward. Focus on things you can control and don’t get emotional about things which are out of your control. As a team you can control how you go into contact, how well you protect the ball, whether you go to ground or stay upright as you go into contact, whether you actually go into contact or avoid it by reverting to off-loads or attacking space. You also have the choice how you go about your business on the field. If the referee starts penalizing you (or does’nt penalize the opposition) you have a choice whether you persist with a strategy which kept the referee’s decision making -in that particular facet of the game- in play or not.
Australia made 147 tackles against South Africa on the weekend, relying on defence to soak up everything the Springboks could throw at them.
The general rule is more tackles equals more penalties and before the quarter-final Australia’s tackle / penalty ratio stood at 8.3 tackles per penalty.
In the build-up to the match, Australia was well aware that the Wallabies had to tighten up in this area against the Springboks. “Morné Steyn’s a fantastic kicker,” said the captain. “You’ve got to be aware that their goal-kicking ability is pretty strong across the board. You can’t give away silly penalties to allow them three points at goal.”
True to Horwill’s word and despite being under immense pressure from the Springboks in their own half for the majority of the match (South Africa claimed 76 per cent of territory) Australia conceded just six penalties at a ratio of 24.5 tackles per penalty, almost three times better than their tournament average.
Astonishingly, with South Africa desperately chasing a result, Australia’s ratio was 42.5 tackles per penalty in the second half, a statistic that illustrated just how well the Wallabies dealt with the pressure yet still managed to starve the Springboks of opportunities.
Most importantly, when Australia conceded penalties they did so in relatively safe areas. Of the six penalties they gave to South Africa, one was kicked for touch from well inside their own half, one was kicked to touch for a lineout on Australia’s five-metre line, two were successfully kicked and two were just outside Steyn’s range on halfway.
Australia’s discipline was so strong and their tactics so successful that even with 84 per cent of first half territory South Africa did not get their first points on the board, a Steyn penalty, until the 39th minute. The Springboks had never had to wait longer for points in an RWC match.
Despite the penalty risks involved, the Wallabies still went after the breakdown, with Pocock – whose performance Robbie Deans later described as “immense” and “bigger than he got credit for” – the key man in contesting possession at the tackle area.
He was a constant thorn in South Africa’s side, combining precise timing and strong body positioning to spoil plenty of Springboks’ ball. Most notably, Australia could boast a handful of turnovers from inside their own 22, and Pocock was responsible for at least three of them.
Now you can use those statistics to argue how poor the referee actually was on the day. That sort of turnaround in tackle/penalty ratio is astounding and one cannot but wonder about the referee’s influence on it.
One has to ask how much credit can the Wallabies really take for that turnaround and how much of the credit need to go to the referee. Considering the amount of criticism dished out to Bryce Lawrence form all possible corners of the rugby world it is clear that the Wallabies can’t take all the credit for that remarkable turnaround.
However, it is interesting to note that as part of this strategy to reduce the amount of penalties at the tackle they also made sure that Lawrence got severely criticized in the media for the way he refereed the Australia / Ireland game.
They attacked the problem from two angles, their own play on the park; but also by putting pressure on the referee.
Now listen to John Smit after the match: “We decided to be brave and keep the ball and you’d normally be rewarded as an attacking team, but it wasn’t quite that way tonight. It’s the first time I have lost a game on the scoreboard and won it every other way from a stats point of view.”
They knew they were playing the best ball pilfering flanker in the tournament yet they decided to run the ball at them. Not only that… they persisted with it. Even worse they kept on utilizing their possession in a way that played into the hands of the Pocock and the Australian team and which kept the referee’s inability to adjudicate the tackle ball in play.
The Springboks were reluctant to try anything different in attack. They opted for physical and direct ball-carrying, in narrow channels, even when Australia was clearly tiring.
The lack of invention was costly. Well into the second half, from turnovers in Australia’s 22, Jannie du Plessis, Danie Rossouw and Schalk Burger were guilty of carrying attacking ball into heavy contact when there were better and quicker options wide, outside them.
There is an old truism that states that attack is the best form of defence. So I have no problem with the decision to run with the ball. What I do find disturbing is the inability to change tactics when they saw the referee is allowing Pocock to get away with murder. Also there was ample opportunity to dropkick, so why didn’t they opt for that option when they saw they couldn’t breach the defensive line and / or found they could not force penalties?
So, we find ourselves after the game with a side who decided to take responsibility for certain things and went about doing that even to the extent that the got into the referee’s head and a side who decided to be ‘brave’ and do something they haven’t done for 8 years (since Jake White started working with them) and something they knew is not conducive to finals rugby.
Who took responsibility to produce a certain outcome and who did not? I am not sure I have the answer. All I know is that the tackle / penalty ratio stats quoted here leave me more than uncomfortable with the referee as does the Springboks decision to be ‘brave’.
Good article McLook, I can see you don’t want to say it. So I’ll say it for you. The Australians F….d with Bryce Lawrences mind and thus he went onto the field with the preconcieved notion that he had to attone for his blunder against Ireland.
The problem was that because of the fact that SA dominated so much it is clear that the stats as you show do not add up.
Problem now is he can’t go to the public to admit he f…d up again.
Admittedly we stuffed up as well, the problem is everyone is now saying we should have adapted, on closer scrutiny we did, but only after his blunder cost us a try.
Good article yes. Just curious you said, My life philosophy is NO BLAMING is allowed. Take full responsibility for everything in your life. Blaming the game plan now but blaming the ref is not allowed? Just a short comment SA played with the ball this time and the much maligned kicking game was effectively used by most of the winning teams last weekend, do you agree that we changed our game plan? Did we play more with the ball , kept it more in hand , like so many here asked for?
McLook i read that article you quoted from on the IRB site, about the 42.5 tackles per penalty yesterday and thought bliksem the Aussies were so disciplined, eish were they Saints.
Rugby World Cup: Campo points finger at referees
“It’s a highly different game. The referees have a big influence on how you play.”
Teams had been forced to “play the referee”, he said.
New Zealander Bryce Lawrence, who officiated at Australia’s quarter-final win against South Africa, had been a disappointment, but so were others, he said.
A key match-up in the upcoming semifinals, between flankers Richie McCaw and David Pocock, would also be dictated by the officiating.
“It depends on who’s the referee and who gets away with what,” he said.
“The whole World Cup, it’s been interesting. There were so many forward passes that were let go and all the time no crackdowns – tackling with no shoulders, no arms, and it’s all let go. You’ve just got to play the referee.”
“That shouldn’t be the case. The referees are there to ref, not for the world to watch the ref.
“If two countries play, then someone in the middle has got to control it, but the best referee is the one you don’t know who’s reffing.”
The laws of the game were behind the decline of play, Campese said.
“The rules are more complex – the breakdown is a mess, where you have to have a look inside and you don’t know what’s going to happen.”
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=10758656
Almost 60,000 rugby fans have joined an online petition calling on a New Zealand referee never to officiate again, after his “incompetence” allegedly robbed the Springboks of a semifinal place.
Bryce Lawrence presided over the weekend’s Australia v South Africa quarter-final, in which the Wallabies pipped the Springboks 11-9.
The Springboks controlled most of the possession and territory but were unable to score.
The key for Australia was David Pocock’s dominance at the breakdown. Many commentators have said that was possible only because Lawrence failed to penalise infringements.
The petition’s creator claims Lawrence “made 29 wrong calls in the match” between South Africa and Australia. “He should never be allowed to ref a rugby at that level again …”
The petition has grabbed widespread attention, and the number of rugby fans joining the chorus of derision approached 60,000 last night.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=10758658
It is now past 70 000
Lions coach John Mitchell says he won’t apply for the position of new Springbok coach if Peter de Villiers gets axed.
Peter could not get any help, looks like no one wants this job.
At the end the choice will be between Muir, Gold and Coetzee. I shiver
superBul@2 wrote:
No the gameplan is something we had control over. So identifying it as a reason why we didn’t succeed is an act of taking responsibility.
@ superBul@4:
Moer dis baie. Is hulle almal Suid Afrikaners? Wonder hoeveel is Aussies?
@ McLook:
Daar kan seker so 1000 Aussies wees :LOL:
Ek het op hul eie web sites ook gesien dat hulle nie veel van BL dink nie.
@ McLook:
Hier by ons het die local Spar staf elke vrydag Springbok kleure aan, die wedstryd dae ook. Gister toe ek by Tops draai se die swart vrou vir my sy dink nie daai ref moet SA toe kom nie, hy sal nie welkom wees nie. Hulle is almal by Spar baie betrokke en ingelig oor die WB. Gee ook baie van self hul mening. En ja hulle moan ook. Gisteraand werk ek agter in my tuin en die bure , jong mense so 30 jaar oud, praat net rugby en obvious oor die ref.
Hulle het my natuurlik nie agter die muur kon sien nie en ek het ook nie met hul gepraat nie, so nee ek het nie hul mening probeer vra of swaai nie.
Ek het nog nie individuele situasies van die wedstryd bespreek nie, ek het nog net oor Bryce se overall vertonning gekla, maar een wat my woes omkrap is daai een 3 meter van Aussie lyn af, ons het alles gedoen wat gedoen moes word(fases was reg) en daai bal wat daar uitgerip was moes nie net op n drie uitgeloop het nie maar was n professional foul, geel kaart , binne die 5 meter lyn. Bakkies sou VIRSEKKER 10 minute gerus het daar.
Oor die forward passes het ek niks gekla nie, daai gebeur mos maar altyd.
Wel kwaai op die ref geskree hier voor die TV, oor die hoogvatte maar selfs daar het ek nie gekla nie, sulke hoogvatte gebeur ook met ons, soms dink ek hulle is ook oor sensitief daaroor.
@ superBul@9:
Altyd interresant om the sien hoe die swart mense se belangstelling toegeneem het sedert 95. Hier by die werk is al die kiwi’s met my eens dat die ref ons die wedstryd gekos het.
Eeen van my kollegas ook ‘n Suid Afrikaner was by die wedstryd. Maandagoggend kon hy nie praat nie. Hy was so die moer vir die ref en het so op hom geskree dat hy in ‘n onderonsie met vroulief oor sy gedrag beland het hy het nog steeds aansienlike werk oor om vroulief te paai.
Ja daai Vickermann uitkrap het spoeg strepe op my TV skerm gelos. Wat my pla oor daardie insident is dat maak nie saak waar die ref hom bevind het nie dit was duidelik dat die bal nie wettig op daardie manier uit die losgemaal kon kom nie. Ook waar was die lynregter want dit was baie duidelik van die kant af. Dit was in my opinie ‘n geelkaart en ‘n strafdrie oortreding.
@ McLook:
Weet jy ek het tot in die laaste 10 minute gedink ons sal die een deurtrek, ondanks alles. Wat my stomslaan is ons sogenaamde leierskap. Vir my was die mees “composed ” speler ook toevalig die jongste, Patrick Lambie.
Daar was te veel klem op ondervinding en te min “exuberant youth” in daai laaste span.
Maar dit is mos nou al minstens 8 jaar so.
Het jy iewers dalk stats gesien oor hoeveel keer AUS geskop het en hoeveel keer ONS?
@ superBu@11l:
Ons het 16 keer geskop hulle 19 keer. Ons skakelpaar (9 en 10) het 66 keer die bal aangestuur en hulle 26 keer.
Howsit people.
Ok, I would first of like to say that, all my Kiwi mates here in Korea were also with me that SA SHOULD have won.
But then my one particular mate said something that got me thinking: “I know how you feel mate, last time we lost to the Frogs last time cause the ref missed a forward pass.”
I remember that. No, you did not. You lost because the French came out in the second half, adopted the game plan and cleaned you out.
I have always, much as McLook would say, believed that if you don’t win a game, you didn’t deserve it.
Defense systems, discipline etc. never gets credited, because its not as noticible.
We can harp on forever on the 147 tackles Aus made.
But how many tackles did we (the Boks) make against the Samoans? 156 I believe. And no one said that THEY deserved to win…
The reasons we lost are as follow:
*Pierre Spies, John Smit, Fourie du Preez, Steyn.
– When you are under pressure at the ruck, you need players to get in there and DEFEND the ball. How effective, if at all, were Spies and Smit in this regard? How effetcively could they clean the ball? Not at all.
And Du Preez, not even a shadow of his old self. I can think of a few times in the game were he was NOT there to distribute the ball. Giving opposition ENOUGH TIME TO SET UP DEFENSE.
Lastly, Steyn, with all the go forward phase ball we had from break downs, lineouts and scrums, could do NOTHING! No switch passes, no line breaks, no attacking the gain line, NOTHING.
* DICK MUIR (said with HATE and poison on my breath).
What! has that guy done since he arrived at the Boks? Niks, nul, nokol, nada, sweet-blue-boggerol!
And the proof was in the pudding. On Sunday, with all that ball possesion, the Boks backline looked as creative, innovative, threatening and dynamic as the team I am coaching.
To put into perspective, I am teaching english in Korea. My team is a group of high school boys who has NEVER seen a rugby game before August this year.
The Boks backline, as in the last three years, were FLAT.
*Breakdown and turnover ineptitutdes.
For a while now, the Boks have had trouble at the breakdown. Even as late as the pool stages of the World Cup. And more, the Boks were not good at defending turnover ball at all. Again, for a while now. With or without Pocock, we should have adressed this problem EARLIER and DEFENDED the ball. Not have forards charge up the field like lone gun slingers, only to be isolated. (Also something that has become a problem in the Bok game of late).
So basically the coaching staff for not fixing this problem before hand.
However, I will not say that the ref was right in any sense.
I will not say that he made the right calls.
Lawrence was SHOCKING in his officiating, to say the least.
He should be reviewed, cited, punished, banned, fined and maybe even forced to make ANOTHER publc apalogy (which would mean the end of his carreer).
The lost was down to a poor Bok management, that much I will take on the chin. Or in the ball-sac.
But it was NOT helped by a pathetic ref in a high profile game.
Greenpoint-Gunner@14 wrote:
Nice one. On the dot. Love that “with hate and poison in my breath”.
Greenpoint-Gunner@15 wrote:
Well said and exactly what my previous post (13 reasons why we lost)was about.
Greenpoint-Gunner@14 wrote:
Good point.
Greenpoint-Gunner wrote:
Yes where was he? Somewhere in the Tabazimbi vlaktes hunting Zebra imagining it’s WP rugby players he’s shooting down?
Greenpoint-Gunner wrote:
If you had to pick the worst No8 in the entire tournament what is change that Speis will be one of the nominee’s? What is the change that he will actually win this dubious honour?
Check-ou this article by Mike Kilpatrick: http://nz.sports.yahoo.com/rugby/world-cup/opinions/show/2581997/blaming-bryce-lawrence-is-pure-madness/
Massive Article this for me…
McLook, you managed to put into words exactly how I feel. I am not even going to expand on it, it’s how I feel… it’s how I take responsibility!
Basically one can be re-active or pro-active in one’s approach, I see both of us choosing the pro-active path and approach.
My dad had a saying in life… “As jy sukkel word jy ‘n sukkelaar, so moenie sukkel nie!”, meaning that destiny is in your own hands, that it requires being positive and doing something about the situation, ripping your finger from your butt and working towards the solution.
A Loser will find EXCUSES, a Winner will find SOLUTIONS !
21 @ McLook:
Very good Article by Mike Kilpatrick, very bloody good!
14 & 20: wat van Habana se swak spel en Burger wat die bal op ons doellyn aanslaan en so ‘n drie afstaan …. o wag, hulle is van Province, moet mos die Bulle en Sharks se skuld wees … haal bietjie daardie streepbrilletjies af dan sal julle dalk meer sense kan praat.
We have a Census going on in South Africa at the moment… are you all co-operating fully?
***********************
gbs @ 25
well, i can tell them who’s not f*ckin living at my home
…
BRYCE f*ckin Lawrence
Great article Mclook and well said Greenpoint-gunner. Nobody disputes that the ref was shyte, happens all the time. Nobody disputes that Oz played to the ref, that’s what teams are supposed to do. We are dismissing the conspiracy theory that it was all planned in advance because NZ supposedly wanted to face Oz in the final. It of course falls flat there already because most of NZ were cheering for the Boks and not for the Aussies!
26 @ Ashley:
Bryce would be deemed an Illegal Alien in SA in the Census…
Fark, there we are, back to the story of Aliens again…. hehehe
Talking about the Census, how does a Nigerian without a valid passport entry answer the questions of the Census Agents here in SA?
Something like “Get out of MY house in YOUR Country, except if you want to buy some drugs!”
I received one of these “Scheme Nigerian-type Scam Letters” a while ago.
It Purported to come from the FBI Headquarters in the States, saying they had underspent their secret budget and wanted to refund money to anybody interested…
I took a chance and sent an E-Mail reply, asking “How stupid the writer thought I was?”
I got a reply… “Very!”
I sent him an E-Mail virus….
young turk @ 27
exactly. half of nz were shouting for us, the other half were pulling strings!!
ok, joking apart …. i never said nzlanders in general wanted the boks to lose, or that they wanted an “easier” semi-final or that the fear the boks or anything like that.
i asked the question whether some individuals no longer believed that their team could win it on their own, and if its the case, whether they just decided to lend a hand in ensuring the monkey get off their back
and
yes, i did in most refer to paddy “i love nz” o’brien, but didnt want to say so. thing is, this will be most propably the last time nz will host a wc on their own … the train of thought may just be: ‘if we dont do it now …..”
see my point?
Users Online
Total 49 users including 0 member, 49 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 39,496,014 Page Impressions
_