Smit blows whistle on bad boy Bryce
11 Oct 2011
Retired Springbok captain John Smit had a pop at New Zealand referee Bryce Lawrence on the team’s arrival back in South Africa.
The 2007 World Cup-winning captain told local media what he told the world media after the Boks’ defeat against Australia, which was that Lawrence took no notice of his complaints about illegal Wallabies play.
”Bryce is not difficult to communicate with, he just doesn’t seem to listen very well,’ said Smit. ‘The one positive (of retirement) is that I won’t ever have to be reffed by him again.’
Smit will play for two years with English club Saracens and retires from the international game having won a World Cup and lost in the quarter-finals in 2003 and 2011 against New Zealand and Australia respectively.
He said he was proud of the effort and acknowledged the warm reception the Boks got on arrival, when thousands greeted their home-coming.
Smit also said the future of South African rugby was bright and added he expected to see the core of the 2011 World Cup squad playing for the Boks in 2012.
210 Comments
11 Oct 2011, 04:43 am
The damage is done …. Rugby is an absolute farce !!! Might as well toss a coin to see who wins … and have the players doing ballerina dances and warm ups for 80 minutes to entertain the fans. Lawrence has completed his mission … Got paid … Sitting back with Paddy and enjoying the rest of the World Cup … ah, and then they will apologize AFTER the world cup (with Paddy giving us some spin) … and before you know it Lawrence will be back in the middle (having learnt from his mistakes) … ALL is forgiven… All Blacks are the World Champions … Lawrence (because he has redeemed himself) …will be blowing the Super 15 2012 final … fairytale ending … is anybody listening to me?
11 Oct 2011, 04:54 am
Wish he’d gone further. Lawrence refereeing was a complete joke.
Thanks John for saying it like it is. You guys won that game everywhere except Lawrence’s refereeing.
He won’t be judged fairly on that performance either, with his daddy being one of the ‘bosses’ with the IRB.
11 Oct 2011, 04:59 am
@hendrikp(hendrikp)-2:
stop whining, if you had a backline you would have won you weren’t good enough
11 Oct 2011, 05:37 am
Ref-whining world cup winners…
(But FdP is the individual champ with his moany face and both his arms raised as if in a ballet-dancing pose…)
11 Oct 2011, 05:39 am
@NZINCHINA(NZINCHINA)-3:
Was I talking to you?
No, so fark off.
11 Oct 2011, 05:40 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-4:
Not in the mood for this.
Be realistic.
11 Oct 2011, 05:44 am
You’ve got to love it when perennial ref-blamers, excuse-finders when they lose (aka New Zealanders and wannabe-Kiiws like Tackles) take a swipe at SA for whinging .
Pot calling the kettle All Black, perhaps???
Bryce was super-shite, no doubt, but if John Smit had not been allowed to script his own exit from the international scene (and SA Rugby only has itself to blame for that!!!), it could have been so different.
Sorry, John, but you hanging around for your self-indulgent reasons was a major factor in the team’s elimination.
Here’s hoping the clowns D ick Muir and Gary Gold follow PdV and JS into the sunset.
11 Oct 2011, 06:05 am
John please explain how you failed to stop Horwill from scoring that try. Both you and Morne bounced off him. Why? Lambie stopped his man, and you did not.
The ref was awful, and probably did enough to swing the outcome against the Boks. But if we allow the ref discussion to deflect criticism of PdV, JS and certain others in the mix then we’re avoiding the responsibility of fixing things.
11 Oct 2011, 06:07 am
@funkyzoo(funkyzoo)-8:
Fixing what? If the referee affected the outcome (which he did) then there was nothing that needs fixing.
11 Oct 2011, 06:27 am
Everyone knew that Lawrence was not going to police rucks as strictly as some refs; he is always like that and several times during the s15 we saw Brussow take advantage of that.
As soon as Heinnie went off I said to my son that the Boks will lose this game now and that is exactly how it panned out; unfortunate that they lost a guy who was crucial but that’s life and they really didn’t do want they should’ve to plug the gap (bring the next best thing to a fetcher on immediately – Bissie De P)
With perfect reffing decisions made all the time the Boks would have gone home a week earlier, as it was only through reffing errors that they beat Wales and Samoa.
11 Oct 2011, 06:29 am
The IRB needs to simplify the rules so refs can’t influence a game so much. The only way that is going to happen is if the stadiums are empty for Internationals. Time to show the IRB who the real owners of international rugby are
11 Oct 2011, 06:36 am
@ricane 10 … “With perfect reffing decisions made all the time the Boks would have gone home a week earlier, as it was only through reffing errors that they beat Wales and Samoa.” …. Rugby for Dummies : Amazon.com $29.99 (excl. Shipping) … read that and then come and comment again !!!
11 Oct 2011, 06:52 am
He is a **** ref – the Aussies hate him even more than we do. But he isn’t the reason we lost the QF.
ABs will win this week in any case I don’t think we would have beaten then.
Aussies no hope at all at Eden Park. I’m gonna put some money of the ABs – they wont be allowed to fail.
11 Oct 2011, 06:55 am
@posts(posts)-11: not sure I agree with this. The rules are simple enough. The IRB needs to sort out refs. There is no accountability. Some of the reffing in the group stages was nothing short of abysmal (SA/Samoa) yet POB (the voice of the IRB) comes out and says he is happy and proceeds to “reward” Nigel Owens with a quarter final. Every year the IRB changes the rules to make the game better, faster and more attractive yet the refs continue to “interpret” these rules as they see fit. Hands off in the ruck is not a new rule nor is entering from the side etc yet BL ignored these rules because he saw fit to do so. And this really is where the BS starts. While I understand every ref may have slight idiosyncrasies these should be things like how long to I let advantage go on for, or how skew is skew on a lineout throw but to blantantly ignore the rules is just ridiculous. Imagine a ref decides he is going to ignore knock-ons or forward passes (yes I know some do). The point here is that the problem does not lie with the rules nor the players nor the coaches or for that matter even the refs. The problem is how the IRB handle these situations and believe me, putting their head in the sand and ignoring them is not going to solve the problem. It is clearly time that they actually started holding refs accountable for their “mistakes” or more correctly their ineptitude. POB has clearly failed at his job because refs are getting away with murder and he sees fit to praise them unless NZ are at the receiving end ie PE Test and TMO referral. This **** started in the 3N last year and it has got progressively worse. The sad truth is Rugby will be the loser and the IRB will be left scratching their heads saying I wonder what went wrong. The writing is on the wall IRB, best you fix it now.
11 Oct 2011, 07:03 am
@PeaceFrog(PeaceFrog)-1: Dont make this a xenophobic anti-NZ rant, these people are incompetent for other reasons, as was Barnes in 2007, and again SA v Wales 3 weeks ago. There have been clear instances of contradictory reffing between Rolland, Owens, Kaplan and Joubert as well – nobody is exempt. Walsh missed haf a dozen forward passes as well.
We could all go on, and worse still, there are bound to be some bigger outrageous fark ups in the next 4 games
11 Oct 2011, 07:06 am
@TheTackler(TheTackler)-4:
and to think some tried to compare FDP to the great Ritchie McCaw, FDP was a 1 or 2 season wonder at best
11 Oct 2011, 07:08 am
@hendrikp(hendrikp)-5:
why couldn’t your team score a try with 99% P & T, was that also Brycies fault?
11 Oct 2011, 07:09 am
2011 there were two style of refereeing, north and south. North ignored the changes of ‘daylight’ and release the tackled player. The 2011 tests were all refereed by ignoring ‘daylight’ and release. 2011 World Cup rolls around and we are surprized?
Hell I even saw rucking in the quarter finals!
Bring back rucking.
11 Oct 2011, 07:10 am
France are going to be hard to roll, look out Australia and New Zealand.
11 Oct 2011, 07:15 am
whinging and whining from top to bottom, from Captain to blogger.
11 Oct 2011, 07:16 am
At least Matfield took it on the chin, owned the situation. Kudos to one of the best rugby players I have ever seen.
11 Oct 2011, 07:21 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-20:
it doesn’t stop, at least we won’t get the Bokke have “BMT” rammed down our throat for another 4 years the myth is dead
11 Oct 2011, 07:25 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-20: It’s like hearing about a forward pass all the time. Imagine that.
11 Oct 2011, 07:27 am
Yes the Boks should have adapted the game plan, gone for a dropped goal, had more luck. Bad back line? – did you not see Jean taking an outside gap that led to the dissallowed try? Come on this is a semi-final unlikely to produce champagne rugby – yes we blew the plot – could have nailed it
BUT – history has taught us that these games are won or lost on a ref’s decision – case in point the forward pass that cost the Kiwis the game against France 2007 and boy did they whine like in 1995 with the Suzie issue. NOW – consider Pocock joining the ruck from an offside position and kicking the ball from that offside position into Samo’s hands and a try being score – LATER Boks are on the try line of the Aussies its a maul – firstlty the Aussies are offside Bryce does not blow it seconds later Pocock does not release Schalk and flicks the ball out of the ruck – Bryce doesnot blow it – Later the touch judge rules a pass forward to Brian that was ot forward. THE POINT is those were all crucial decisions that cost us the game as it did the Kiwis in 2007 – SO nobody can be dismissive about these facts – FACTS not fiction.
11 Oct 2011, 07:40 am
nice one john but while the boks should have done better , bryce was pathetic anyone with eyes could see that.
To the AB fans who are getting their digs in i say go for it …but pray that Australia doesn’t win this weekend because you will never hear the end of it.
Quade and Genia always come to the party against the AB’s
11 Oct 2011, 07:50 am
Lolapalooza.
Knickerless moaned for days about the ref when the Ball Sacks lost at PE.
And he’ll be moaning about the ref again if his boys lose on saturday.
How embraboer can you be?
11 Oct 2011, 07:52 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-20:
It’s music to the ears.
11 Oct 2011, 08:01 am
Clearly there are some people who have other agendas than to blog about rugby and my friend Tackles whom I first encountered in 2000 – still stirring – apparently a SAFFA ex pat if I am not mistaken. Having been absent from this site I see Tackles has gained some support from others not interested in commenting on the game – I will post this once and then I am going to ignore you lot as i suggest the rest of the bloggers who blog about rugby need to do.
11 Oct 2011, 08:05 am
why be surprised at all.
these are after all the same ‘lets get the japies’ oke’s.
11 Oct 2011, 08:08 am
@for once more just take a break on the beach, dear springboks, for once more…(i_love_u_bakkiesbotha)-29:
His son actually…but yes, runs in the family it appears.
11 Oct 2011, 08:09 am
@NagouGrote(NagouGrote)-28:
ag you know, tackles gets a ‘ffuck you’ from me most everyday just for the effort he puts in.
11 Oct 2011, 08:09 am
@NZINCHINA(NZINCHINA)-22:
Here’s a deal…
We’ll can the ‘BMT’ myth, you can the bigger ‘Suzie’ myth.
Deal?
11 Oct 2011, 08:10 am
Come on guys, let’s move on from the poor refereeing from Bryce, we have had our say and our b itch, we are beginning to sound like the AB’s who we belittled for 4 years after their exit in 2007, let us show them that we are better !!!!
I hate saying this, but go Aussies, and I then hope Wales beat the French and then stuff it to the Aussies in the final !!
11 Oct 2011, 08:14 am
ASK SAMOA ABOUT BAD REFS……………… AHH ENOUGH SAID
11 Oct 2011, 08:20 am
This appeared in THE AUSTRALIAN this morning!! This is a national paper in Australia, written by an Australian.
LIMITING THE POWER OF THE WHISTLE
There are no doubt a lot of Australian rugby supporters celebrating our victory over the Springboks yesterday. There are also a number of us that are wondering how on earth we managed to pull it off against a side that dominated possession and territory and lineouts. Now, I don’t want to take anything away from the Australian victory – our boys did perform superbly but on the day the Springboks were, we have to admit, the better side. The boks, as always were magnanimous in defeat with a somewhat pragmatic approach to the result. I wonder what our boys would have said faced with the same situation of blatant incompetence by Mr Bryce Lawrence.
I support Australia and always will but for those of us that believe in fair play this was a hollow victory. This was very much like fighting a worthy opponent with one arm strapped behind his back – it leaves a bad taste. There were rumours about Mr Lawrence’s impartiality before kick-off from a lot of ex pat South Africans now living in Australia but we tend to dismiss these conspiracy theories with a grin. Certainly, Mr Lawrence’s performance on the field did nothing to dispel those theories. His performance was nothing short of abysmal. He did not award the bok try because of a dubious forward pass. I have looked and looked and to me, anyway, it did not look forward. Minutes later when the boks once again breached our defences and were well on the way to scoring another try, he called them back for a forward pass. If the first call was contentious, there certainly was nothing wrong with the second one. Here, I must ask – why not use the “eye in the sky”? An impressive expensive piece of equipment that should be used for such decisions.
He failed to penalise Pocock for slowing the ball down. If we had played like that against the All Blacks, they would not have been so quiet about it. – and rightly so. In the dying minutes of the game he was in full view of at least 2 high tackles by our boys that went unpunished. Any of these transgressions, if properly acted on, would have surely given the game to the Boks with their advantage over territory. To rub salt in the South African wounds, he awarded a high tackle to the Wallabies for a chest high tackle.
We won, but did we really? Our sport has always been regarded as a “hooligans game played by gentlemen” – If we do not want rugby union to degenerate into a farce that soccer can become we need to make sure that our refs are of suitable calibre. They need to be trustworthy gentlemen.
Mr Lawrence, I would advise against any planned holidays to South Africa for a couple of years.
Chris Davis
The Australian
11 Oct 2011, 08:22 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-20: better hope things go your way on Saturday otherwise I can imagine you´ll be joining in the whingeing. Our team definitely didnt lose because of the officiating. They were too poor on attack and protecting their ball on attack and had 2 brain f a rts in the first 20 minutes which cost us.
11 Oct 2011, 08:24 am
@31 Ha ha yes I suppose a bit of humour is in order!
11 Oct 2011, 08:29 am
@justrugby(justrugby)-33:
You just looked silly belittling the All Blacks while you were taking a pounding during the intervening 4 years.
11 Oct 2011, 08:31 am
@justrugby(justrugby)-33: Yes I am aslo tired of this – but I needed to make my one and only comment – done that now move on to watch Wales take the WC. Kiwis look lost without Carter and Aussies were poor against BOKS.
11 Oct 2011, 08:41 am
@justrugby(justrugby)-33:
Yeah Right!
8)
11 Oct 2011, 08:43 am
@kwensie(kwensie)-35:
enough said.
11 Oct 2011, 08:45 am
@kwensie(kwensie)-35:
This seems to me that there is a saffa in this guy. The forward pass is forward…no doubt about it!
He deems that the ref was biased towards the aussies…i noticed many aweful decisions towards the wallabies. This game was going to be the loser would have had plenty to complain about.
Look at that first converted penalty for the boks…the first infringement was from the boks…should have been penalty to wallabies.
I notice the possession and territory stats change as each argument is presented…the possession was 44% to the wallabies….i saw a stat from a blogger saying wallabies had 15%.
The ref was poor for the wallabies to.
Is it boeing or airbus.
11 Oct 2011, 08:45 am
@cane(cane)-40:
11 Oct 2011, 08:53 am
@kwensie(kwensie)-35:
Posting the comments of a blogger made in a newspapers forum is hardly the stuff of serious journalism.
It is simply an opinion, and carries no more value than those expressed on Keo
11 Oct 2011, 08:55 am
@NagouGrote(NagouGrote)-28: 2000?
Keo was still “gaining weight” then and the blog wasn’t on “air” then.
11 Oct 2011, 08:59 am
Lawrence is super kak and incompetent as a ref … but he was like that to both teams.
Plod must take sole blame for that loss … dominated the territory by 73% and possession by close to 60% and still the has-beens who booked their RWC spots way back in 2009 could not score a try.
Fark you Plod for keeping the worlds best no. 2 on the bench while you missed tackles which directly led to 10 points for the convicts.
11 Oct 2011, 09:05 am
Nobody from SARU seems to mention the fact that Bryce Lawrence publicly admitted that he made crucial errors in the Australia v Ireland game that favoured Ireland! Despite this he was appointed to ref the Australia quarter final. Lawrence was in a compromised position and no matter the result he would have been open to accusations of favouring the Aussies in order to balance the scorecard. This was very poor governance by the IRB! The problem has been worsened by appointing a south african to ref the resulting semi-final involving Australia. If Australia get knocked out there will be further accusations. Considering the Irishman Rolland with a French mother has been put in charge of the other semi involving France any reasonable person would have to question who on earth is making these vital decisions. It simply confirms what many of us were already well aware of, the IRB and its associates are run by a bunch idiots who are quite simply out of their depth.
Any business run in this manner would be open to charges of cronyism and corruption. I am amazed that this simple conflict of interest hasn’t been more widely discussed.
The Boks got knocked out because they scored less points than Australia. We Bok fans will do well to take cognisance of that and move on. The result will not change. The only hope I have is that this forces the IRB’s hand and ensures that refs are made accountable and that appropriate referee’s are appointed to appropriate matches.
A good example of this is that Steve Walsh doesn’t get the whistle if the AB’s make the final. Fair enough he is under the Aussie flag now but he is still a kiwi and on the other hand Darren he might hold bitterness toward the NZRU for dismissing him. If he is appointed to an AB final then we know for certain the lunatics have taken over the asylum.
11 Oct 2011, 09:06 am
Matfield was the only fat boy who did his job … he totally destroyed the convict lineout, just like he did to the Pom lineout in RWC 2007 … he can retire a legend, Plod is a doos.
11 Oct 2011, 09:15 am
How come for most saffas…wjen the boks lose it is always the ref.
Betya the ref would not be a problem if the boks won.
11 Oct 2011, 09:15 am
@tommy2pie(tommy2pie)-34: sober up idjut , samoa got away with murder , they the dirtiest ******** in rugby,
11 Oct 2011, 09:17 am
@RL(RL)-48: NO RL is the doos, a lowlife braindead one at that….
11 Oct 2011, 09:19 am
@RL(RL)-48: I´ll second that.
11 Oct 2011, 09:21 am
Listen to a bok supporter before the game…
Who is reffing
What is the weather like
Who is singing the anthem
Long or short studs
Lining up the excuses before the game started.
A superior team wont worry about these.
11 Oct 2011, 09:21 am
@wallabie.(wallabie.)-49:
Did you see the two high tackles in the last 6 min that both went unpunished ?
They were marginal, but technically they were there, and they were both in kicking range. You must have had your heart in your mouth.
11 Oct 2011, 09:23 am
@Staal(Staal)-45: Hey Staal were you blogging then? I think I remember you but old age has set in so i am not sure.
11 Oct 2011, 09:26 am
@wallabie.(wallabie.)-53: You would have been whingeing your little wallabie tush off if Lawrence did the same in this game as he did in the Ireland game. You got the rub of the green. We lost cos we didnt protect our ball on attack and lack attacking penetration. Our own fault but we could easily have won had the 2 high tackle penalties gone our way. The Danie Rossouw thing was also dubious. Go to Rugby heaven and have a look at the pics of the game – especially picc 22 of 24. You tell me what Vickermann is doing there is legal? Did he get penalised? No.
11 Oct 2011, 09:26 am
Did Bryce influence the outcome – Yes. Why? Because you have to ask the question – would the Boks have won if any other ref was on the field?
Leading up to the game Bryce Lawrence was under media pressure for a perceived bias against Australia. Blowing nearly 40 penalties against and less than 20 for them. He also admitted a few errors in their Ireland defeat. English had a field day on him over his handling of the Argie match.
Bryce comes into the match, subconsciously at best, making sure he doesn’t ping the Aussies too much.
So what happens next? Crucial decisions against Australia are simply not made. Numerous penalties are not awarded and the Australia scrum is not pinged for standing up or walking around. McCabe and Pocock are not pinged and yellow-carded for fouls on their tryline in two separate incidents.
Inconsistent application of the law to favour Aussie in the clear change of mind betwen awarded Australia a scrum off a collapsed maul (with FDP’s hands are on the ball, not like was trapped) and then awarding Australia a scrum for their collapsed maul when the ball was clearly off the ground.
Bryce Lawrence, against this background, came into the game to ensure he “balanced the books” with Australia.
Yes, the Boks had all the territory and possession but the stats don’t tell the full story. The ability of the Australians to blatantly slow down ball allowed their lines to reset so their defence was effective.
The Australian try was created by Pocock entering blatantly from the side, diving over and kicking the ball out from the Bok side. Easily a penalty for the Boks, not try Australia.
That is why the Boks struggled to break through the Australian defence, consistently reset as well as often off-side (WTF were the linesmen doing?) negated much Bok attacking play.
Did Bryce Lawrence gift the game to Australia – Yes. Did Austrlia win because of great defence or bad refereeing – great defence needs a chance to set or a second to scramble that bit further – bad refereeing therefore negated nearly all attacking play.
The question then is, would the result have been any different under another ref, even Wayne Barnes or Nigel Ownes. The inescapable conclusion is: Yes. The Boks would have won comfortably under any other ref. Probably about 45 -3
Conclusion – Bryce Lawrence clealry influenced the result in Australia’s favour with bias. If there was any fairness the result should be set aside and Australia sent home – but that’s impossible obviously.
Further, Vickerman has not been cited despite an intentional knee in Brussouw to injure him and take him out of the game. He should have been banned for the rest of the tournament, maybe more because of the intent.
On hopes that next year Pocock and Vickerman are targetted and left in little bloody pulps about the field. It was Australia’s gameplan to injure the Bok open-sider for Pocock’s benefit, they must now pay in return.
Russouw’s penalty: Watched it again last night. He has his arm waiting around Samo’s leg but does not play him. Samo goes down for some other reason, and his supporters left him in the air and did not bring him to ground safely. That is actually a penalty to the Boks, believe it or not! I feel for Danie, he was hard done by.
BTW: on NZ’s QF exit and Wayne Barnes – I missed the live game being on honeymoon with other more pressing matters to attend to. But if a ref doesn’t make a single penalty call in an entire half of rugby, something is amiss. The Kiwi’s have a genuine gripe for 2007 for the entire second half, not just the forward pass. But that was not bias like Bryce Lawrence, more of a loss of nerve by Barnes who failed to make the required calls.
11 Oct 2011, 09:28 am
@JEZ(DEE DAH)-47:
Based on your logic, every mistake should be followed up by a sacking.
PdV would have gone after 5 minutes
Jake White wouldn’t have got out of the starting blocks.
Unless you can PROVE bias, stop whining and take it on the chin. The Ref let aspects of the Laws slide which the Aussies picked up on. SA didn’t.
When you are a one trick pony that relies entirely on scoring points from penalties despite having the lions share of possession and territory. it is surely time to look a little further up than your navel.
The game was “not won” because SA didn’t score points, and in fact turned down the opportunity to score points.
The game was actually lost because Danie Russow is a di ckhead.
He gave up the lead for SA. Aus had nothing left other than desperation at that point. They certainly were never going to breach the Bok defence. All SA had to do was play the game within the Laws.
Grabbing a mans leg while he is 10 feet in the air was outrageous. A more pedantic ref would have pulled out a yellow card, plus given the penalty that sealed SA’s fate.
While Lawrence didn’t do either side any favours, SA were their own worst enemy.
11 Oct 2011, 09:32 am
@President_of_the_Sharks_rugby_experts(sharks_lover)-51:
Ignore trolls with mullets that drive souped up 1980 Golf GTi’s…
11 Oct 2011, 09:34 am
@NZINCHINA(NZINCHINA)-3: Rich coming from you guys after 1995 and 2007
11 Oct 2011, 09:34 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-57:
What an utter load of trash
11 Oct 2011, 09:35 am
I picked out three Bulls players that did unbelievably stupid things at cruciual moments in the game.
I still remember spittle flying out my mouth and saying many horrible things about Pretoria.
11 Oct 2011, 09:37 am
@Slumtown(Slumtown)-56: Yeah, it’s funny if you look at the Aussie websites before the game, whining how Lawrence had robbed them from a victory against Ireland as well
Funny enough even the Aussie press thought he was ****:
http://www.theroar.com.au/2011/10/11/lawrence-blunders-his-way-out-of-a-rwc-semi-final/
So I guess they must be whining as well
11 Oct 2011, 09:37 am
@Brads(Brads)-61:
If you disagree, please expand.
Would a different ref have led to a different result?
11 Oct 2011, 09:39 am
@danuk(danuk)-63:
Exactly Danuk
He came into the game to balance the books.
11 Oct 2011, 09:39 am
I dont recall anybody blaming the ref during this years tri-nations!
We got beat fair and square and took it on the chin.
Last years NH tour didnt result in any ref bashing. We lost games there because of fatigue, poor coaching and poor selection. Or more simply put we were rubbish.
The quarter final last week was destroyed by inept refereeing. Obviously being on the losing side means it rankles more but I believe we got cheated out of a good game to watch by a poor ref whatever the result. To be honest I think getting booted out in the quarters will be beneficial to Bok rugby. If we had progressed or dare I say it won the competition it would have been a huge elastoplast over the problems we have in our rugby that began when we selected a coach for non rugby reasons. This resulted in the players taking over a point I have made on this site since the final game of the tri-nations in 2008. The reason why we have coaches is because the players shouldn’t be making certain decisions and the squad should not have any protected members. We lost this world cup 3 years ago and hopefully somebody in SARU has realised this and will put it right.
I have personally drawn a line under the Lawrence affair and I do sincerely hope that this weekends matches are reffed according to the laws. Initial thoughts that the aussies get blown off the park have vanished but I will definitely be shouting for the AB’s.
11 Oct 2011, 09:41 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-64:
I agree that the Boks fluffed about three clear try scoring opportunities….over and above the the apparent forward passes.
The Boks simply shot themselves in the foot with their inability to score those tries. The loose maul debacle is another matter and will continue to be dabated for years to come.
11 Oct 2011, 09:42 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-64:
Would a different ref have led to a different result. Quite possibly.
But your entire post was based on the premise that Lawrence was biased, and as evidence you gave your Sigmund Freud analysis.
No actual evidence needed, just your profound understanding of the human psyche.
11 Oct 2011, 09:44 am
@Brads(Brads)-58:
“Unless you can PROVE bias, stop whining and take it on the chin. The Ref let aspects of the Laws slide which the Aussies picked up on. SA didn’t. When you are a one trick pony that relies entirely on scoring points from penalties despite having the lions share of possession and territory. it is surely time to look a little further up than your navel.”
What a load of ****. The new LAWS (not recommendations) are there to speed up play, to allow the attacking team an advantage to score more tries because defensive structures are not set
If the Boks had 75% possession but could not get quick ball then how could they get the advantage over the Aussie defensive structures. Conversely, if the Aussies could slow the attacking ball down then they could get their defensive structures set again
The referees interpretation was advantageous for the defending team (which where the Aussies for 75% of the game) and disadvantageous for the attacking team (the boks)
Now please explain to me again how this was a fair contest allowing the boks the space and defensive mismatches to score tries from the pressure they created
11 Oct 2011, 09:45 am
@JEZ(DEE DAH)-66:
There are pills that you can take for memory issues.
Suggest you consult a specialist ASAP.
11 Oct 2011, 09:45 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-57: So you’ve decide not to mention any of the decisions that went our way or that the Aussies should have got but didn’t??
While a lot of what you have said is correct it is hardly a balanced view point. And when you say we should have won by about 40 points your argument goes out the window.
Bryce gave a very similar display to the detriment of Austrlia during the Ireland / Aus game yet you didn’t see them even mention the refereeing – let’s try to be good sports, just congratulate other teams when they beat us and try to get them next time.
11 Oct 2011, 09:46 am
@Great White Shark(Predawn)-62:
lol
of course, it must be pretoria and the bulls fault.
nothing to do with, errm, that other oke.
played for the sharks a few times i think.
11 Oct 2011, 09:47 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-65: Not sure about that, I think the article in News 24 summed if up better. He seems badly prepared for aspects of the game, such as the scrum and breakdown. Also he does not seem to be fit enough.
He is not the only ref who does not look up to standard in the RWC
11 Oct 2011, 09:47 am
@Brads(Brads)-68:
So you have no answer.
11 Oct 2011, 09:48 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-57: “On hopes that next year Pocock and Vickerman are targetted and left in little bloody pulps about the field. It was Australia’s gameplan to injure the Bok open-sider for Pocock’s benefit, they must now pay in return.”
- and while I’m here that statement is something you would usually attribute to a NZ Rugby blog. Seriously that is ridiculous. Does that mean that everyone is going to go out and target Bakkies because he did something once, or Schalk etc etc. That is moronic and is the type of stuff coming from NZ about Quade Cooper.
11 Oct 2011, 09:48 am
the boks had 75% of the ball the ozzies 25%
straight forward logic says that the boks got screwed of 50% more than the other side given that the ref was equally bad.
11 Oct 2011, 09:50 am
@danuk(danuk)-69:
There were plenty of opportunities to score tries, nearly did a few times, but the excitement at doing something new got to the players concerned and they fluffed it.
You can hardly blame the ref for that can you?
Call me old fashioned, but I tend to think that was the coaches area of responsibility.
11 Oct 2011, 09:51 am
@jeest(jeest)-71:
the Australian press had a field day on him. He even admitted his errors, espcially at the scrum. One penalty at the scrum despite the Australians pulling out and walking around??
He came in with too much baggage to be impartial and police the game properly.
Under another ref the Boks would have won – its that simple.
11 Oct 2011, 09:51 am
@jeest(jeest)-71: Lol, did you see the Aussie response to the Ireland game?
Agree, it’s in the past, however to say that the impact of the refereeing affected both side evenly is not from my point of view
11 Oct 2011, 09:51 am
@jeest(jeest)-71:
Yeah, the 40+ points is perhaps a bit far
11 Oct 2011, 09:54 am
@Brigadier Van Zyl(Brigadier Van Zyl)-72:
I was getting mal with Rossouw a few times as he looks suspect with ball in hand when being tackled. He has the uncanny ability to give away the ball and penalties at will.
Morne did an impression of a moffie ragdoll when ‘trying’ to tackle the Aussie that scored the try. Lambie can’t be everywhere unfortunately.
Smit did the business and made no mistakes that I saw personally.
The bionic man Spies was brittle in the tackle. For a huge piece of meat he goes down far too easily in the tackle. He only seems comfortable in broken play.
We missed Bakkies.
11 Oct 2011, 09:54 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-74:
I did – deal with it, like the result on Saturday
11 Oct 2011, 09:55 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-78: Ok then prove the would have won…you don’t know that…it may have been an even bigger margin. Your logic is lacking badly.
And no the aussie press didn’t say much at all. Rugby Union hardly gets a mention in Oz as it’s about their 5th or 6th sport. The only corrrespondance was a letter from the Wallabies to the IRB to “clarify” some decisions around the scrum. The IRB wrote back saying that on 3 occasions they were incorrectly penalised.
The facts are:
1. Bryce is a terrible ref – anyone who has watched or played in the SH over the last 3 years knows this.
2. His decisions nearly exclusively favour Kiwi teams when he refs the Super 15. when he refs other games it’s a lottery but generally the breakdowns are a mess.
3. The Aussies hate him as much as we do, and rightly so.
11 Oct 2011, 09:55 am
@Brads(Brads)-70:
do they have pills for “thick skin”?
or maybe even just general thickness?
11 Oct 2011, 09:56 am
@Brads(Brads)-70:
Fark me you really are enjoying this. Apologies I didnt realise that I was facing a QC.
I never blamed the ref after this tri-nations. Yes there were some plebs who blamed the ref but judging by their posts and lack of rugby nous I choose to ignore them.
In my mind a line has been drawn under the Bryce Lawrence affair. It took a couple of days, a few castles and a stick of biltong but gee whiz if I bumped into him in Randburg I would welcome him to South Africa and buy him a drink. I have had bigger setbacks in life than the boks dumping a world cup.
The only point I am making is that BL screwed himself by publicly apologising to Australia and somebody within the IRB should have seen the sh1tstorm coming when he was appointed to that match after the apology.
11 Oct 2011, 09:56 am
@Brads(Brads)-82:
Really? I hope you’re not a lawyer coz otherwise you’d be sweeping the streets.
11 Oct 2011, 09:57 am
@danuk(danuk)-79: Did actually – they went to town on their own team and coach – but again, there isn’t much union press in OZ.
Seriously, the ref didn’t get much of a mention other than they said he had a few “baffling calls” – he certainly wasn’t blamed for the loss.
11 Oct 2011, 10:00 am
@Brads(Brads)-77: yes, and there would have been more chances and more gaps and overlaps if the ball was not slowed down (and on one occassion pulled back on Aussie tryline by Rocky Elsom’s hand) for most of the match.
Are you implying that we should be good enough to only score tries from (essentially) 1st phase possession? What teams does that? The Aussie try came from Pocock kicking the ball out of the loose ruck, where our defense was not set.
How is that try just good old skills and finishing and our attempts are just poor execution?
Yes, maybe we should have had a better coach and skills, however you cannot say that we did not score any tries just because we did not take our chances
11 Oct 2011, 10:01 am
@jeest(jeest)-87:
here you go:
http://www.theroar.com.au/2011/10/11/lawrence-blunders-his-way-out-of-a-rwc-semi-final/
11 Oct 2011, 10:02 am
@JEZ(DEE DAH)-85:
Bryce Lawrence may be a whole buch of things, but that is not what you said in the post I responded to and where this response is traced from.
So, when you said nobody in your post, your were actually using the Royal “we” definition of nobody.
11 Oct 2011, 10:05 am
@danuk(danuk)-89: That article was written today – not after the Ireland game.
So my comment stands until you find something written then that blames the ref for their loss. And I’m talking about press here – not some amateur Rugby blog written by a fan.
11 Oct 2011, 10:06 am
Like we said in 2007 – couple of bad calls, and it turns to ****. Fact is we got knocked out of the tournament, like you guys, and thats what hurts.
At least we supported you in the final !
Thats shocking that **** about Bryce trying to balance the ledger against his Ire-Aus match episode, fn bad man!
11 Oct 2011, 10:06 am
@danuk(danuk)-88:
No, I am suggesting SA should have marched to the tune of its own dogma. Defence wins RWC, and take the points whend they are offered.
NZ were drilled by the ref in 2007, but the real reason we lost was arrogance. We thought we could do better and score a try. well we came unstuck royally.
Same old same old!
11 Oct 2011, 10:08 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-57:
All correct – very good; what about the neck lock tackle that none of the officials called but it was there for all the world to see. If Bakkies had done that he would be jailed for life, if not hanged.
So as long as Paddy O’Brien is calling the shots it will never change.
11 Oct 2011, 10:09 am
blah blah blah … read this …
“Until 1885, the laws of rugby football were made by England, as the founder nation. However, following a disputed try in an international between Scotland and England, letters were exchanged, in which England claimed that they made the laws, and the try should stand. In 1885, as part of the Home Nations Championship Scotland refused to play England. Following the dispute, the home unions of Scotland, Ireland and Wales decided to form an international union whose membership would agree on the standard rules of rugby football. The three nations met in Dublin in 1886, though no formal regulations were agreed upon. On 5 December 1887, committee members of the IRU, SRU and WFU met in Manchester and wrote up the first four principals of the International Rugby Football Board. England refused to take part in the founding of the IRFB, stating that they should have greater representation, as they had more clubs. The England Union also refused to accept the IRFB as the recognised law maker of the game. This led to the IRFB taking the stance of member countries not playing England until they joined. In 1890, England joined the IRFB. The same year, the IRFB wrote the first international laws of rugby union.”
11 Oct 2011, 10:10 am
@Brads(Brads)-93: Not much to defend when you have 75% of the ball, but take your point and agree we should have taken the 3 points on offer in the 1st half …
11 Oct 2011, 10:10 am
was gonna say … we have been battling with LAWS for 100 + Years ….
11 Oct 2011, 10:12 am
@PeaceFrog(PeaceFrog)-97: I think the laws are probably ok – it’s the 300 interpretations of wha are quite clear rules that kills the game as a spectacle.
11 Oct 2011, 10:12 am
@PeaceFrog(PeaceFrog)-95:
Did you find that info like that, if so well done.
Or did you decide to improve its comprehension by posting it as a solid block.
11 Oct 2011, 10:15 am
@KiaKahaNZ(KiaKahaNZ)-92:
Yes, it is bad, but the worst part is that it is correct
11 Oct 2011, 10:16 am
@Jeest98 : Absolutely … we need systems in place to ensure continuity … what happened to the (White card system( ?
11 Oct 2011, 10:17 am
@jeest(jeest)-91: my misunderstanding, thought you where looking for Aussie criticism of Lawrence.
BTW theroar is not some amateur site and David Lord is a journalist
11 Oct 2011, 10:18 am
@danuk(danuk)-96:
And not concede the Danie penalty. That was the killer.
As the 2nd half ground itself out, no points were being scored, Aus were behind, and the only likely candidates in the house to add to their tally were SA unless through a penalty.
All SA had to do was play to the ref and not do something idiotic.
cue Danie
11 Oct 2011, 10:19 am
Yawn.
Just remind me guys what you all were saying us after Cardiff for all those 4 years.
Thank you and enjoy your own advice.
11 Oct 2011, 10:19 am
@Brads(Brads)-90:
What is the point of my posting anything? It would appear that you already know my thoughts. Oh apologies I shall utilise the royal “we” and say you obviously know our thoughts.
Is this a skill you had from birth, developed through life or did it come about after a severe brain injury?
Fark me John Edwards can you tell me where my grandmother left her jewellery or better yet the combination to the safe inthe house I moved into last year.
If I was you I would use this skill for financial gain rather than trolling websites predicting the collectives thoughts.
11 Oct 2011, 10:22 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2oJlaPyU8o
0:30- 0:40 is classic
11 Oct 2011, 10:27 am
@PeaceFrog(PeaceFrog)-12:
Play the ball not the man – no need to get personal unless you want to prove you’re a sore loser.
Here’s why I said what I said if you are interested:
Boks vs Samoa- Some crucial decisions went against the Samoans – three in particular that were game breakers;
The chip and chase by Tuiailigi (sp) in the first half was knocked out of play by Pat Lambie intentionally; it was an illegal and obvious professional foul and totally ignored by ref and linesman – it possibly saved a try, and certainly should have been a very kickable penalty.
The ref should not have blown half time with Samoa hot on attack was he got in the way (as he often seems to do) – Samoa should have been given a chance to finish the play.
The knock on by Samoa over the try-line should have been a penalty try. The try was only prevented by a player (Fourie?) slapping the arm and ball why he was out of play on the ground.
The red card for Williams slap (milked well by upcoming hollywood star Hennie Brussow) was totally unjustified but was the touch judges call not the refs- I think he realised how bad a call it was and that’s why Smit was sent off a few minutes later (cos his offence wasn’t really that bad either).
As Matfield said at the end of the game the Springboks were lucky – very lucky, as they were just credited with their second undeserved win of the tournament.
Boks vs Wales – disallowed kick was over pure and simple, if there was any doubt they just had to go to the TMO and it would have been obvious.
11 Oct 2011, 10:28 am
@JEZ(DEE DAH)-105:
Get with it.
You extended your personal thoughts in the original post, where this line of converation came from, to encompass the entire mass of Saffadom.
Let it go,
11 Oct 2011, 10:29 am
@Brads(Brads)-103: Actually I thought the game was lost when we could not score a try in that period of domination in the 2nd half.
But yes Danie’s (and Victor’s) penalty was very stupid. I guess it’s hard to judge what went through their heads. Problem is in a game with that much not punished that it is difficult for a team to remain that well disciplined, especially in a knock out game.
I agree with you that we should have taken the 3 points late in the 1st half and that all the small margins makes a difference.
Unfortunately I’ve also seen too many games the last 2 years in tests and S15 where the referee has a significant impact.
So I think being old fashioned is a great approach, but the outcome of games are affected so much these days by referees that it becomes difficult for me to rationalise how I can expect a team to win regardless of the ref anymore
11 Oct 2011, 10:35 am
@ricane(ricane)-107: dude you are trolling
Samoa played the man of the ball so much they should have played with 11 men, so park that ****. A dirty team who tried any underhand thing in the 2nd half to win, good riddance
The Wales game: The TMO could not review that kick UNLESS he had a camera above the posts as well. If you look at the game again you’d see the one ref under the post the balls passes over and one behind the post, inline with the ball flight. So you are reaching …
Wales also go a penalty against us for John Smit no realising when Warburton was the tackler and did not release Smit after tackling, which should have been a penalty for us. Wales had their chances to kick another drop goal and penalty which they missed.
They lost the game, not the referee
11 Oct 2011, 10:38 am
@Brads(Brads)-108:
My accepting the defeat and saying I am not bothered by it is not what you want hear because it won’t feed your irrational desire to rub a defeat in. That is obviously what puts lead in your pencil. Women do it for me but each to their own I suppose.
11 Oct 2011, 10:45 am
@danuk(danuk)-109:
Yes, I am not that obtuse to not recognise the ref has a major influence on the game, as they have always.
I recall an incident back in the late 90′s, don’t remember when exactly but it involved England.
John Hart the AB’s coach went to the ref’s room to clarify his interpretations from the first half. Clive Woodward found out about it afterwards and was apoplectic.
Fair enough too, as he didn’t have the same inside knowledge. I can’t recall what happended as a result of that, but to me, what was wrong with it.!
Yes both sides should get the same access, that is not my issue, why can’t the coaches interogate the ref at half time?
11 Oct 2011, 10:51 am
@JEZ(DEE DAH)-111:
I am not asking you to accept the defeat passively or otherwise.
All I am doing is arguing, “in my opinion” the direction of your angst is ill focused.
Yes, Lawerence was ****, and yes his blowing kept the game close, but SA should have won the game despite of him.
11 Oct 2011, 11:04 am
@Brads(Brads)-112: That might work. I also think there needs to be greater transparency on the preparation and measurement of referees. I think the overall standard of refereeing is not good enough at the moment, possibly because of the interpretations, application, fitness levels and use of assistants and technology.
It’s a balls up currently and every year it seems to be becoming worse, not better
11 Oct 2011, 11:33 am
It’s so funny how the AB’s on this site forget how they b!tched and moaned abouth the Wayne Barnes missing one call that cost them the QF game in 2007 but ripp us off because we complain about Bryse blowing us out of the game for the full 80min!
Wake up hypcrytical kiwi d!cks.
11 Oct 2011, 11:37 am
@ricane(ricane)-107: I don’t think you watched the same game, if th ref had any balls he would have sin binned 3 or 4 Samoa players by the 60min mark, the game was well and truly out of control, reff having no balls.
You’re argument is so one sided it isn’t even funny.
11 Oct 2011, 11:39 am
@HHS(Hop Hop Spinnekop)-23:
what makes you think we have to “imagine” it ?
11 Oct 2011, 11:41 am
@Gunther(gunther)-26:
Cli Che Guevera
how odd for a serial-pisstaker that you dont recognise pisstaking in others. I certainly enjoyed the PE matchday thread, loads of fun.
11 Oct 2011, 11:47 am
It’s funny how the poll says the loss was because the Bok’s failure to take scoring opportunities…and yet the whingers persist with blaming the ref…
11 Oct 2011, 11:50 am
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-115: It’s just called payback!
That was one of the best games of the year…unfortunately someone had to lose.
11 Oct 2011, 11:51 am
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-115: Yes, please, keep going.
11 Oct 2011, 11:59 am
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-116:
Not at all one sided; I didn’t care who won that game, and I noted that Smit sending off was also unjustified.
11 Oct 2011, 12:00 pm
@danuk(danuk)-110:
Interesting how so many Bok players are passionate about smashing the opposition, yet like typical schoolyard bullies run home crying when someone has the audacity to stand up to them.
11 Oct 2011, 12:05 pm
Hey You can all relax now…
just confirmed… Bryce has accepted my invite to him to visit the farm..
Problem solved…it will be settled.
he will meet the Rhino’s
11 Oct 2011, 12:06 pm
The basic truth is this. Bad reffing has again negativly impacted the game of rugby, it did it 2007 with AB’s who lost due to a bad call by Wayne Barnes and it happend again this past Sunday.
The IRB need to address this big time, not good for rugby as a whole when we have such poor performances by the IRB refs.
11 Oct 2011, 12:08 pm
@ricane(ricane)-123: Yes, smashing them in rucks, tackles (legal) and strong ball carries, not off the ball aggresion because you just ain’t good enough (Samoa is not good enough for a QF spot, not 2007 and unfortunatly not in 2011).
11 Oct 2011, 12:09 pm
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-125: The problem is replace Pocock with Brussow and we’ll hear no complaints here at all.
The good boy Heinrich was out and bad boy David stayed for full 80, that’s the sole difference.
11 Oct 2011, 12:23 pm
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-125: I do agree that the reffing standards need to be looked at…
BUT
He was horseshit both ways, not biased. We had all the territory and all the possession and we couldn’t close the game out. The bottom line is we can’t construct tries regularly against top-tier opponents…running in 7 against Namibia doesn’t count, all that did was paper over the cracks.
2 months ago we got roundly thumped by NZ and Oz in the 3N, by what magical fairy-tale did we think we would walk all over them in the world cup? Fact is we were living in hope.
Lawrence didn’t throw a forward pass to Lambie, he didn’t pull Samo’s legs out in the lineout and he didn’t bust up Brussow;s ribs. The aussies were younger, fitter and hungrier. Went Brussow went off I personally thought it was over. Fact is, if Brussow had stayed on and had the game Pocock did, we’d be singing his praises, not lambasting the ref. Our backline had them on the ropes numerous times but couldn’t land the KO punch.
I wish SA’s would get it into their collective conciousness that sometimes, on the day, you are simply not good enough.
11 Oct 2011, 12:26 pm
@Nils(Nils)-127:
exactly, and th
at is why SA didn’t get quick ball, cos Pocock was quick and nobody else was. I fear it may be the same this weekend as Macaw is nowhere near as fast right now as Pocock is to the tackle.
11 Oct 2011, 12:27 pm
@Nils(Nils)-127: Replace a Aus victory with a Bok victory then we will hear all the “Boks were lucky” bile that gets spewed by certain Kiwis and Australians on here.
11 Oct 2011, 12:37 pm
@Nils(Nils)-127: @BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-126:
Name one Samoan that has been involved in more off the ball agression and foul play than Burger – how he wasn’t cited for repeated attempts to remove Pocock head (including returning to have another go from offside) I’ll never know.
11 Oct 2011, 12:40 pm
@heboric(heboric)-130: All I can say, please, seek help of an oculist or learn to read what is written and not what you want to see to be written.
All Kiwis I saw here were saying Boks were better team in that game and unlucky to lose. I said it too, albeit I am neither Kiwi, nor Aussie.
However, despite all that dominance, they could not neither score a single try, not even kick a needed drop and they were awarded enough pens as well.
Unlike 4 years ago, remember? The we were ridiculed in full swing by gleeful mob here. This time we could replay with the same pleasantries but at least I am not going to however I do see some irony in the fact that the same okes who wetted themselves with delight then are squealing and whingeing now.
@ricane(ricane)-129: You have valid point. Time will tell how things go. I just feel, despite injuries, ABs will be good enough but yes I will stay worried until the final whistle.
11 Oct 2011, 12:41 pm
@ricane(ricane)-123: Cleaning someone out in the ruck and tackling hard is not exactly the same as hitting people … Same **** every 4 years …
Anyway a boring conversation, your saying poor little Samoa was hard done by the terrible, racist IRB, the terrible racist, bully boks and the terrible racist, *** Welsh referee.
I say they are a team with loads of talent but with a serious chip on their shoulder
11 Oct 2011, 12:42 pm
@ricane(ricane)-131: The question is how did some Australians stay on the field. For a while I thought the Boks were wearing cloaks made out of Ozzie players…
11 Oct 2011, 12:44 pm
@ricane(ricane)-131: yes, of course Schalk Burger was the dirtiest player on the field Saturday by a MILE, blah blah blah
Strange that there was no dirty play in any of the other SA games, yet the Welsh complained about the same Samoan tactics against them
11 Oct 2011, 12:48 pm
@Nils(Nils)-127: Hey, nobody is saying that Brussow of Flo are angels, but come on, the Aussie try came from the ball being kicked out of the ruck by Pocock. 5 minutes before that Elsom used his hand to “turnover” the ball when we where right on the Aussie tryline.
No complaints if the ref penalised us as well as them, just at least make it possible for the attacking team to get the ball as well!
I’d like to see what you guys say if the game is refereed like that this Saturday
11 Oct 2011, 12:50 pm
@Nils(Nils)-132: I now what you meant. But the same people who were ridiculed in 2007 were blaming the ref, so the same people cant come on here and start commenting about Bok supporters who are upset with Bryce Lawrence.
I also follow cricket and in 2009 Australia lost the Ashes to the Poms in England, poor Rudi Koertzen was crucified by Australia fans and media because of what they believed was poor umpiring by Rudi.
11 Oct 2011, 12:50 pm
Yes NZINCHINA, it is Bryce’s fault. You can’t score tries if you ball is constantly allowed to be stolen illegally.
Refs have to implement the rules of the game not each ref have his own rules and players adapt.
Some of your comments are idiotic
11 Oct 2011, 12:51 pm
@danuk(danuk)-136: “I’d like to see what you guys say if the game is refereed like that this Saturday”
Cardiff was no different. Barnes allowed Frogs do whatever they please. And reaction here? Cmon, you know that very well.
11 Oct 2011, 12:54 pm
@Nils(Nils)-139: Exactly, so allow us our rant, it helps
11 Oct 2011, 12:55 pm
@heboric(heboric)-137: Hey, a week ago the Aussies where still blaming Bryce for them loosing to Ireland! Suddenly this week he was equally bad and the boks should have played the ref better …
Go figure!
11 Oct 2011, 12:57 pm
@ricane(ricane)-131: WTF are you talking about? Oh, Stowers, Williams and five others who I don’t have the patience to look up spell their names.
11 Oct 2011, 12:58 pm
@Nils(Nils)-139: Whatever dude, the only call that went against the AB’s in Cardiff was the missed foward pass.
11 Oct 2011, 12:58 pm
@Nils(Nils)-132: I’m a saffa and I agree with you 100%
11 Oct 2011, 13:01 pm
@heboric(heboric)-137: “But the same people who were ridiculed in 2007 were blaming the ref, so the same people cant come on here and start commenting about Bok supporters who are upset with Bryce Lawrence.”
I am not sure I follow your logic. We complained and were ridiculed by Saffas, therefore we cannot comment on Saffas comlaining about the very same now?
Of course, we were blaming the ref. One small remark – not about a fwd pass (despite how many times Saffa okes here trump that fact as the our sole complaint), it was about letting Frogs do what they please and in the meantime penalizing the Blacks, who had even more territorial dominance then than Boks now. By the way Barnes was helped by Kaplan who, too, missed a very lot.
And now Boks got exactly the same treatment. And hey, the even got a penalties, so they could kick them. And – to be honest – it”s not refs fault Heinrich got off. Had he stayed, breakdown battle might have been slightly different, don’t you think?
11 Oct 2011, 13:02 pm
I can live with the fact that we lost, that the ref was **** and that the Aussies won.
I getting freakin irritated by the statements on here and in the (mostly) Aussie press that this someone did not have an affect on the game and potentially the outcome of the game.
Enough said on that.
I hope the semi final between the Aussie and the ABs are better refereed and that ABs klap the Aussies, with the “wonderful defensive effort” …
Plus I’d love to see Kaino or McCaw nail QC when he tries a backline move and somehow doubt many AB support would disagree
11 Oct 2011, 13:02 pm
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-143: sure, sure. Bryce officiated well, too.
11 Oct 2011, 13:03 pm
Still blaming the ref…fair dinkum…he was shite for both sides (for your own sake, stop living in denial and open the other eye)…how much possession and territory do you need to score a farkin try???
keep up the whinging, bitching, moaning and whining, it says a lot….about you!!!
11 Oct 2011, 13:06 pm
@Nils(Nils)-145: I don’t. Flo played well.
I think that 1st hand in by Elsom when we where on the Aussie line was key. I think the kick through which caused the try for Australia was also key.
We should have kicked the penalty in the latter part of the 1st half as well, and Danie/Victors penalty was stupid beyond believe.
The scrums where also interesting to see and I’d want to understand why the front rows stood up all the time. Maybe I’m mistaken but I thought we applied good pressure there.
11 Oct 2011, 13:08 pm
on Sunday we got “New Zelanded 07′d”, no two ways about it. funny enough looks like New Zealand might get Springbok 07′d, as they could very well face the team they thrased in the pool stages in the final. although admittedly they do have to get through Aus which is tougher than what we had to do in 07.
11 Oct 2011, 13:10 pm
@gregars(gregars)-148: possession and territory means sweet blue fark all. It’s about line breaks and meters gained, so defense or the lack there of.
Hence why we have these wonderful new laws since the beginning of 2010. Otherwise we might as well play with the laws of 2009.
11 Oct 2011, 13:13 pm
@gregars(gregars)-148: Bulsh1t. Bryce took out the Boks as he knew we are the only team in the comp that could match the ABs. It’s effectively fraud and he should be put behind bars.
11 Oct 2011, 13:28 pm
@garth(garth)-152:
Watched the Bok vs Wallas match in a crowded tent near Eden Park, over-flow from the cramped pub.
95% of patrons were supporting the Bokke. Not so much out of NZs historical rivalry with Aus – on every level possible – but more so out of a deep and shared understanding that the ABs ‘had the wood’ on the Bokke and their limited gameplan. The Bokke are roadkill in NZ, especially at Eden Park. The Aussies, on the other hand, can turn the ABs over on Any Given Sunday with an attacking gameplan that rewards attacking rugby. No doubt about it, AB fans were desperate for SA to win. Even less doubt, that we went the dangerous Wallabies OUT. But not even with 1000% possession and 10,000% territory, the Bokke failed to score ONE Try.
Boks “the only team in the comp that could match the ABs” ?
In your dreams, cowboy.
11 Oct 2011, 13:35 pm
“Lawrence is of course, the son of New Zealander Keith Lawrence, who is the former boss of referees in the country and now heads the IRB’s refereeing development office. ”
Apparently he should not have refereed the Sharks/Crusaders game either………………but somehow he was selected…
11 Oct 2011, 13:39 pm
@Nils(Nils)-145: No, I am talking about Kiwi supporters who blamed the ref in 2007 are now telling Bok supporters to stop even talking about the ref.
This whole thing that Boks are the only ones who complain about the ref is lying plain and simple.
11 Oct 2011, 13:42 pm
@heboric(heboric)-155: Well i am still waiting for a beating from the hubby cos we lost and for a couple of Boks to jump on cars and such.
11 Oct 2011, 13:48 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-153: you and 95% of those new zealanders are mistaken….even the all blacks are glad the boks are out because we are the one team that can rival the all blacks.
11 Oct 2011, 13:50 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-153: It won’t make the Springboks feel any better, in fact it might well make them feel worse, but had they got through their World Cup quarterfinal against Australia they would have stood a great chance of getting through to the deciding match.
The eagerly awaited showdown between world rugby’s fiercest long-standing rivals in the semifinal won’t happen now, and for the South African players it will be senseless to speculate on what might have been.
But had they bothered to sit through the All Black/Argentina match that was played immediately after their 11-9 defeat to Australia, they would have noted that the All Blacks are doing exactly what they had hoped they would be doing at this stage of the competition.
They are back to playing high-risk rugby, and with Dan Carter no longer there, that is leaving them looking decidedly vulnerable and could have played into South African hands.
11 Oct 2011, 13:50 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-153: Yes how dare a Saffer think positively about there team shock and horror.
Wow how arrogant can one be.
11 Oct 2011, 13:50 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-153:
Fortunately for your boys the Tri-nations champions managed to survive that mauling, because pappie….if the Boks had the right coach (White, Meyer, Venter) they should have crossed the chalk about four times….and the Kiwis would have been in for a bit of a tough day at the office.
You escaped a definite choke….for now.
11 Oct 2011, 13:52 pm
57.zoo cleaner said: “Further, Vickerman has not been cited despite an intentional knee in Brussow to injure him and take him out of the game. He should have been banned for the rest of the tournament, maybe more because of the intent.”
This is totally deluded. Do you think for one millisecond that any Bok player on that field would let Vickerman get away with an intentional knee on Brussow, already sore as he was from the Samoan game? Are you calling the whole Bok scrum fools and cowards? Did Broussow in any way remonstrate with Vickerman? Did Burger or Spies confront Vickerman? Absolutely not. The video is quite clear. Brussow is already on the bottom of the ruck his teammates having fallen on him. Vickerman rushes around, looking at Spies and attempts to clean him out, falling over the ruck. He never looked in Brussow’s direction. If he made any contact with Brussow it would have been accidental. Everyone in that ruck knew Brussow was injured because he was at the bottom of the ruck.
The only intentional knee is in your fantasy.
Moreover Brussow was having no impact on the game. He may be courageous but should he have been sent on the field with that injury from the Samoan game? In the twenty minutes he was on he attempted two tackles and missed both of them (on Pocock and Elsom). He made no turnovers and no runs. He was supposed to be backing up Burger for that mad rush of his from the tryline which led to the ball being turned over, and all the hapless Brussow could do was, while he was on the ground in an offside position, grab vainly and illegally at Ioane’s leg.
11 Oct 2011, 14:17 pm
This is all hyperbole, the AB supporters are going on like they’ve won it all ready.
Go Wales, go fuckk up the French, Kiwi’s/ Woblies and make this WC interesting again.
Again, I was supporting AB’s to win it, but @ssTakler and NZChina made me change my mind.
11 Oct 2011, 14:38 pm
Dear All,
This letter, published in The Australian, a national newspaper, is probably the most balanced article that I have read about Saturday’s game and accords with the sense of embarrassment abounding within my Australian rugby-following colleagues following the result on Saturday. A real shame as a NZ/RSA semi this week would have been a true match between champions, (and the “real” RWC final).
LIMITING THE POWER OF THE WHISTLE
There are no doubt a lot of Australian rugby supporters celebrating our victory over the Springboks yesterday. There are also a number of us that are wondering how on earth we managed to pull it off against a side that dominated possession and territory and lineouts. Now, I don’t want to take anything away from the Australian victory – our boys did perform superbly but on the day the Springboks were, we have to admit, the better side. The Boks, as always were magnanimous in defeat with a somewhat pragmatic approach to the result. I wonder what our boys would have said faced with the same situation of blatant incompetence by Mr Bryce Lawrence.
I support Australia and always will but for those of us that believe in fair play this was a hollow victory. This was very much like fighting a worthy opponent with one arm strapped behind his back – it leaves a bad taste. There were rumours about Mr Lawrence’s impartiality before kick-off from a lot of expat South Africans now living in Australia but we tend to dismiss these conspiracy theories with a grin. Certainly, Mr Lawrence’s performance on the field did nothing to dispel those theories. His performance was nothing short of abysmal. He did not award the Bok try because of a dubious forward pass. I have looked and looked and to me, anyway, it did not look forward. Minutes later when the Boks once again breached our defences and were well on the way to scoring another try, he called them back for a forward pass. If the first call was contentious, there certainly was nothing wrong with the second one. Here, I must ask – why not use the “eye in the sky”? An impressive expensive piece of equipment that should be used for such decisions.
He failed to penalise Pocock for slowing the ball down. If we had played like that against the All Blacks, they would not have been so quiet about it. – and rightly so. In the dying minutes of the game he was in full view of at least 2 high tackles by our boys that went unpunished. Any of these transgressions, if properly acted on, would have surely given the game to the Boks with their advantage over territory. To rub salt in the South African wounds, he awarded a high tackle to the Wallabies for a chest high tackle.
We won, but did we really? Our sport has always been regarded as a “hooligans game played by gentlemen” – If we do not want rugby union to degenerate into a farce that soccer can become we need to make sure that our refs are of suitable calibre. They need to be trustworthy gentlemen.
Mr Lawrence, I would advise against any planned holidays to South Africa for a couple of years.
Chris Davis
The Australian
11 Oct 2011, 14:45 pm
@fantasticbarnsmell(fantasticbarnsmell)-150: The ultimate irony would have been Barnes reffing NZ-Fra final.
11 Oct 2011, 14:48 pm
@heboric(heboric)-155: “No, I am talking about Kiwi supporters who blamed the ref in 2007 are now telling Bok supporters to stop even talking about the ref.”
I’d put it slightly different. 4 years ago Saffas told complaining Kiwis to shutthefookup, take it like man, grow a pair, stop crying like little girls, etc. etc.
I think it’s time for Saffas to do exactly the same now when they themselves are in exact situation. That’s all I am saying.
11 Oct 2011, 14:49 pm
Ironic that this article is written by an Australian:
During their 2011 RWC campaign in the pool rounds, the Wallabies have been on the wrong end of the penalty count three times out of four matches. Two of those matches were refereed by the New Zealander Bryce Lawrence.
There were mutterings of discontent in the Australian camp, therefore, when Lawrence was announced as the match referee for the quarter-final between the Wallabies and the Springboks.
The assistant referees for the match are Dave Pearson from England (a nit-picker) and Roman Poite, a French referee who is inclined to give strange rulings from time to time.
The feeling is that there is, shall we say, a certain lack of sympathy from Lawrence for the way the Wallabies play and, crucially, the way they scrum.
This feeling is intensified by a belief that Lawrence, as a New Zealander, should not be refereeing a match that has some significance for the All Blacks.
For if all goes well for them against the Pumas, the All Blacks are scheduled to play the winner of the Wallaby – South Africa contest in the semi-final.
In the New Zealand camp, too, there is dissatisfaction with the appointment of the referee (Welshman, Nigel Owens) and, especially, with the assistant referees (the South African Jonathan Kaplan and Irishman George Clancy) for their quarter-final against Argentina.
Kaplan was the assistant referee who missed a blatant forward pass, quite close to his sideline, during a French attack which culminated in a decisive try in the quarter-final between France – New Zealand in RWC 2007.
Moreover, he is a South African. This makes him an inappropriate choose for this match as the Springboks could (if they defeat the Wallabies) play the winner of the All Blacks – Pumas match.
The case of Clancy is different, but he is similarly an inappropriate choice for he was the referee who made the most serious error in recent history by consulting the TMO about a forward pass after asking a ruling on whether the All Blacks had scored a try or not in the last South Africa-New Zealand Test.
This was a most serious violation of the rules relating to the use of the TMO.
I have never seen or heard of a similar violation of the TMO protocols. Clancy never apologised for his mistake, which greatly assisted the Springboks to their victory.
Then, as the assistant referee when the All Blacks played France in a RWC 2011 pool round, he made another howler. While Richie McCaw was talking to Alain Rolland about the All Blacks infringement that led to a penalty, the French took a quick tap and scored a try.
Neither Rolland or Clancy had the gumption to call France back and insist they start their attack when McCaw had finished his chat.
The chairman of the IRB referees selection panel is David Pickering of the Welsh Rugby Union. In my opinion, he and the other members of the panel have done a poor job in the appointment of the referees and assistant referees.
Too many of the appointments are inappropriate.
Why is Wayne Barnes, an Englishman, an assistant referee for the Ireland – Wales match when the winner could play England in the semi-final?
Why are Irishman Alain Rolland and Irishman George Clancy assistant referees in the England – France match when the winner of this match could play Ireland in the semi-final?
The referee of the Australia – South Africa match, New Zealander Bryce Lawrence, as I have argued, is an inappropriate selection given that the winner could play New Zealand in a semi-final match.
Why is the TMO for Argentina – New Zealand the South African Shaun Vedsmamn when South Africa could play one of these teams in the semi-final?
All this discussion about referees and assistant referees is very difficult because the claim should never be made that they are biased in favour of a particular team.
But this is not to say they are not biased in favour of a particular way of playing rugby.
This is entirely different matter. But it is a valid matter to discuss.
There are referees who are literalists when it comes to interpreting the laws. They see rugby as a game of set piece and penalties, essentially (rather like basketball). The literalists tend to be from the northern hemisphere (but not exclusively) where rugby tends to be played that way.
There is another school of referees who see their role as managing the game to allow the players to develop running plays and expansive rugby.
These referees are interested in play flowing rather than handing out penalties.
They will tell players to get back on side if they put a boot in front of the ball. They will tell defenders when the ball is out of a ruck. They will allow a scrum to be cleared, even when it goes down, if this is done quickly.
Supporters of literalist referees, in the main British rugby writers, are forever criticising what they deem as unnecessary chatter from referees managing their games.
After the boring final of RWC 2007, the IRB promised it would not allow its showcase event to be undermined by literalist refereeing and laws ever again. Many of this did not believe the IRB when they said this.
And, in my opinion, these fears have been justified in this RWC tournament.
Some of the refereeing, even from referees the IRB has given the thumbs to by keeping them in the finals, has been poor. I would include Lawrence and Owens in this poor grouping.
So we have, in my opinion, a couple of poor referees running the quarter-finals.
This has shades of the debacle of George Clancy being allocated the opening match of RWC 2011, New Zealand – Tonga, and allowing the second half to meander for 55 minutes while Tongans kept on feigning injuries.
Then there is the matter of inappropriate appointments.
The Guardian’s Paul Rees in his excellent Breakdown column has recently criticised the appointment of Owens as the referee for the South Africa – Samoa game.
Owens is Welsh and clearly the outcome of the match was ‘very important’ for Wales, Rees said. He went on to argue that Owens had ‘had a good tournament’ (I would dispute this) but ‘did not have his best match’ during the South Africa – Samoa contest.’
In my opinion, this is an under-statement. He had a very poor match. Several times early on in the match, for instance, Owens gave rulings that favoured South Africa when it was the Springboks who had made the mistake. These ruling, fortunately, were changed when the assistant referee Wayne Barnes intervened.
Rees also criticised the appointment of Clancy as the referee in the Italy – USA as it was “a match of significance for his homeland.”
Rees also made the point about Owens, and it applies obviously to all the other referees and assistant referees, that their living is compromised if there is an evidence of ‘subjectivity’ in their refereeing.
“It would not be worth it,” he concludes.
But only some referees suffer in their careers because of perceived mistakes in their on-field rulings.
According to the grapevine, the recently retired Australian referee Stu Dickinson, Australia’s most experienced referee and a better referee than most of those at this RWC tournament, was left out the tournament because the NZRU objected to his scrum rulings in a New Zealand – Italy Test.
Australian objections to Owens have been ignored, however.
And the IRB has not punished Clancy’s illegal and unacceptable use of the TMO in the Springboks – All Blacks Test in any way. Instead of being relegated, Clancy was given the honour of refereeing the first match of RWC 2011.
The draw for the finals of RWC 2011 is split precisely with northern hemisphere teams on one side of the draw and southern hemisphere teams on the other side. The obvious thing to do was to run southern hemisphere officials for the northern hemisphere match, and northern hemisphere officials for the southern hemisphere matches.
It is a legitimate question to ask why this wasn’t done.
11 Oct 2011, 15:11 pm
Hey, here’s what Hitler had to say about the loss:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2oJlaPyU8o
11 Oct 2011, 15:31 pm
@Brigadier Van Zyl(Brigadier Van Zyl)-76:
Fuzzy logic!
That’s the reason you’re not a General.
11 Oct 2011, 15:37 pm
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-78:
The Wallabies played what was in front of them.
A different ref would have resulted in a different game and the Wallabies could have shredded the Boks if the game was allowed to open up.
11 Oct 2011, 15:38 pm
The one positive is that I will never again have to watch Smit disgrace the Springbok jersey.
11 Oct 2011, 16:10 pm
@Inevitable(Inevitable)-169:
BS.
The Wallaby pack was blown off the park by the Bok pack. The territory and possession stats would have remained the same, only difference would have been the scoreline.
Its was a very sad day for rugby trying to bring in new viewership all the time to have the potential game of the weekend reduced to an embarrassing one-man show of incompetence.
The IRB needs 2 refs on the field, or else the linesmen must be full refs who also blow the calls. On Sunday they just picked their noses for most of the game.
American Football has refs all over the place to ensure the rigth decisions are made. League has two refs apparently.
Union is still too amateur, especailly the refs. The IRB board should be fired and professionals installed instead of the useless blazer brigade.
The forward pass to Lambie was not forward, Lambie was behind JDV and it is physically impossible for him to catch a forward pass from that position.
I would love to be sitting here congratulating the Australians on a great victory because they beat us fair and square. Pity they did not, and they know it too.
11 Oct 2011, 17:42 pm
Face it haters, SA was robbed, to many articles coming out in support of this fact and not by SA journalists, and this was not just by one forward pass.
11 Oct 2011, 17:57 pm
@Nils(Nils)-164: I thought it will be either Joubert or Rolland now
11 Oct 2011, 18:21 pm
Sour Grapes from a battering ram has been…..The End
11 Oct 2011, 18:21 pm
@Treehugger(Treehugger)-172: “and this was not just by one forward pass”
Puhleese, not this BS again.
11 Oct 2011, 18:37 pm
What awaits Bryce Lawrence should he ever tarnish our shores again
http://www.news24.com/Multimedia/South-Africa/Cyclist-hit-by-antelope-20111011
Go Bokke
11 Oct 2011, 19:04 pm
@posts(posts)-176: No doubt, there are plenty Piet van Zyls around.
11 Oct 2011, 19:20 pm
Having watched the game again I believe this is a case of match fixing. I might be wrong and the Ozzies gor really lucky but it should at least be investigated. I am 44 and watched rugby my whole life I have never seen one team play so well, dominate so comprehensively and loose. If I am wrong I apologise to Bryce but I believe he and his assistants were paid big bucks.
11 Oct 2011, 19:46 pm
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-158:
sorry, but I stopped reading after:-
“but had they”
I prefer non-fiction to fantasy any day of the week, thanks all the same.
11 Oct 2011, 19:50 pm
@Great White Shark(Predawn)-160:
“160.Great White Shark:
11 Oct 2011, 13:50 pm @Black Panther(Black Panther)-153: Fortunately for your boys the Tri-nations champions managed to survive that mauling, because pappie….IF the Boks had the right coach (White, Meyer, Venter) they SHOULD have crossed the chalk ABOUT four times….and the Kiwis WOULD have been in for a bit of a tough day at the office. You escaped a definite choke….for now.”
I think this is what Boy George refers to as ‘bravery in defeat’ ?
~guffaw~
11 Oct 2011, 19:56 pm
@Airwell(Airwell)-178:
so its “match fixing” now ?
nothing to do with Boks complete inability to turn vast advantages in possession AND territory in to ONE measely Try then ?
The Boks are QuarterFinal Chump steak, again. In between their consecutive QuarterFinal Chump steaks (2003 & 2011), the Boks won the Lotto Cup where they failed to meet ONE team ranked above them.
Must be the BMT.
11 Oct 2011, 20:10 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-181: There are 2 possibilities 1 the Ozzies got very lucky or 2 the ref and his 2 blind mice were paid big bucks to get the correct outcome. To paraphrase a movie show me the money and I will show you the motive. The Ozzies on all the betting sites had the shortest odds because all the big money was bet on them.
11 Oct 2011, 20:24 pm
Helllllooooo! I have mentioned in a few posts the incident where a note was intercepted from Paddy O’ Brien to his linesmen before a tri-nations game (Wayne Erickson was one I think) – round about 1999-2000?, which read ”let’s get those yarpies”!!!
Was I dreaming? I don’t think so – so why has this not been taken into consideration with all this latest bull-****??
The extrapolation of that scenario should be obvious!!!
11 Oct 2011, 20:41 pm
Never forget the lesson of Shaun Pollock…quit while you are at the top of your game, soak up the applause from the home stadiums and move on
11 Oct 2011, 21:34 pm
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-162: I say France to win….hehe…. against Australia…chuckles….. in the final…bellywobbling….of RWC 2011….guffaw…..in New Zealand…. BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
11 Oct 2011, 21:37 pm
@Nils(Nils)-104: Maybe a couple of us said “4 more years”…. like a certain Aussie Rugby Captain once said…. And we might have to say it again after this weekend is over….
…..bellywobbling chuckle….
11 Oct 2011, 21:38 pm
Cruden to the rescue…..
Cruden……………………………………………………………………………………………..
GU-GU-GU
GUFFAW
11 Oct 2011, 21:52 pm
@Heavens Game(Heavens Game)-187:
“Honour and Bravery in Defeat”
swinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng lowwwwwwwwwwwwww
sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet chariotttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
coming for to carry YOU ‘Home’
~ ~ ~ ~ belly wobble ~~~~~~
11 Oct 2011, 22:46 pm
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-181:
Patrick Lambie scored a perfectly legitimate try. Go watch two video’s on youtube and see what a forward pass really is and what it is not. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=box08lq9ylg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgMlDy2jP9s
11 Oct 2011, 23:01 pm
@BreakdownBoy(goodstuff)-115:
What AB is on this site??
You have just shown your complete and utter lack of knowledge about the game.
In 2007, NZ was knocked out not cos of one forward pass, although that didnt help but we didnt go for the 3 pointers and drop kicks like we should have.
Barnes didnt give the ABs one penalty at all in the 2nd half and there were so many infringing from the French that day. We has them, on there line in that 2nd half for minutes but they kept cheating and getting away with it.
What lost us that game was our lack of us going for points when we were in good positions. Obvious that Barnes wasnt calling the penalties so we should have changed plan.
Boks were in good positions so many times but didnt take them.
we were given cr@p cos of not going for 3 points on this very site and was told not to blame the ref but ourselves for going for those points.
Fact is SA lost that game, they could have won but didnt ake what was on offer. Boks fault,all over,.
11 Oct 2011, 23:07 pm
@Airwell(Airwell)-178:
lol match fixing and your 44 years old.
Well only thing that would hold up in court is your age. The rest is poo.
11 Oct 2011, 23:33 pm
@Heavens Game(Heavens Game)-186: “Maybe a couple of us”
Nax, it was pure gruppensex, not a couple.
Anyway, it remains to be seen, as regards to the ABs. As for your team, it’s thanks for coming already.
11 Oct 2011, 23:37 pm
@Airwell(Airwell)-178: nice one, please keep on entertainment.
12 Oct 2011, 00:54 am
@AndreE(AndreE)-189:
it was a fwd-pass. Every post-match analysis CLEARLY shows it was a fwd-pass. Those graphics-assisted thingamebobs they use, prove it was a fwd-pass. You know the ones, the same ones they used to show that Hooks kick “glanced the outside of the post”.
correct decision by Bryce. Another one.
12 Oct 2011, 01:00 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-153: I can’t believe I’m agreeing with any statements made by you but there is an element of truth to this one.
While you have gone over the top with your response, it is entirely feasible that the ABs would be happier playing the Boks than the Wallabies. It’s unlikely they would be dominated up front like the Wallabies were on Sunday and they wouldn’t have to worry about that back line doing something ridiculous out of nothing and running in 4 or 5 tries.
Also, While the ABs first team have not had any trouble with the Boks over the last 2 years, the Wobblies have beaten them twice. So it is feasible that they would rather face the Boks. That said – our game plan suits WC footy so you may have been in for a surprise. Our pack would have given the ABs a much harder day in the office.
12 Oct 2011, 01:02 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-194: The pass was forward….but Bryce’s “correct” decisions are few and far between.
12 Oct 2011, 01:03 am
@Hurricane(Hurricane)-191: One of my Australian friends reckons if it was match fixing Hansie Cronje must have come out of hiding.
12 Oct 2011, 01:08 am
@Airwell(Airwell)-182: If all the big money was on the Aussies and their odds were the shortest, does it not stand to reason that the bookies would make more from a Wallaby loss??
Surely the bookies are the ones that fix the games?
12 Oct 2011, 01:14 am
@jeest(jeest)-195:
back to your trailer park, Chump steak.
12 Oct 2011, 01:23 am
@Black Panther(Black Panther)-199: You are obviously confused…I don’t live in New Zealand.
12 Oct 2011, 01:41 am
@jeest(jeest)-200:
I was merely referring to your permanent state of mind.
12 Oct 2011, 02:25 am
@JEZ(DEE DAH)-85: Absolutely correct, well said.
Surely if a ref apologises – and is then appointed to ref a game featuring the side he apologised too, straight away, you know its not going to be a fair contest.
Aus have run out of lucky cards, played em all, and will get whumped on Sunday
12 Oct 2011, 02:26 am
@Airwell(Airwell)-178: Didn’t you watch the 2007 1/4 finals?
12 Oct 2011, 02:37 am
@Sasuke(Sasuke)-157: NO, no, no, the SA game plan is one we know how to counter, we do. Aus are far more unpredictable, and therefore a greater threat with Genia, Cooper, Ione and possibly Qade. With Oconnor taking the kicks, and nailing them, they are a bigger threat. Pocock is also a genuine threat, and targets the capture of the ball at ruck time as opposed to even tackling, he lets others tackle, then goes for the swoop, its very calculated.
This is not about who’s got the biggest ****, its about who we genuinely know presents a bigger threat. Most NZers would prefer to have faced SA in the semi, not Australia.
Having said that, we back ourselves 1000% to knock Aus over on Sunday, we have waited along time for this payback. Expect to see a brutal effort by the All Blacks.
Expect alot.
12 Oct 2011, 06:07 am
@zoo cleaner(zoo cleaner)-171:
If there were 2 refs at the 2007 WC, the AB’s would have gone through and then blown you guys off the park.
Would have, should have, could have – words in the wind.
When the Boks learn to score tries they will be a force again.
12 Oct 2011, 08:34 am
@Inevitable(Inevitable)-205:
Agreed.
I have always felt the Boks got an easy ride to the 2007 title. NZ, Australia and France would have beaten the Boks. All we had to do was beat England and Argentina. 2007 did not feel like 1995 when we beat Aus, France and NZ – that was a “real” world title.
There certainly is no doubt NZ would have smacked the Boks in 2007. JW was a very limited coach whose sides could not live with NZ or even Aus.
I think the time has come for 2 refs – maybe even 4 linesmen in RWC so that nothing is missed. We all want the correct decision and IRB has to ensure that the correct decision is made.
NFL, League make high-paced decisions with teams of refs.
Why the heck is Union not waking the hell up?
PS: Behind the ABs all the way from now on.
12 Oct 2011, 08:49 am
Hmmmm Smitty, not a good look for a man retiring. At least the Samoans had the balls to do it while they were still playing…and I dont believe we heard you crying about that ref either. Sour grapes from a man once he has left the building is a bit weak eh…possibly why so many Saffas were calling for your change. You were the Captain mate so front up and be responsible for your ship hitting the reef.
12 Oct 2011, 08:51 am
On the reffing:
The two assistant refs become full refs. 2 other people on each side, no qualification required, can just watch for where the ball goes out and mark it.
The 3 refs already have comms so no change needed there. They just have to keep talking to each other. If a ref on the side calls: ” blue tackler not releasing” the ref in the middle parrots the call to the players and plays advantage if necessary.
Easy. But just don’t expect the dinosaurs of the IRB, who are happily ruining the game at the current rate, to pick up on such advanced thoughts.
And don’t expect any journalist to ask the IRB the tough questions. Seems the journalists are just way too scared of the IRB.
12 Oct 2011, 09:02 am
I did watch the 2007 1/4 the French won the first half and the ABs won the 2nd half. In this game the bokke dominated the whole game different story. If the fix is on lots of money flows to the team that is going to win therefore the odds shorten
12 Oct 2011, 21:26 pm
@Airwell(Airwell)-209:
Strange.
NZ owned them in the first half. Reasons as to why France were behind 13-3.
You really didnt watch the game did you?
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.