SANZAR says sorry...

Poor old Oz just not getting any luck this year. How all 3 could miss this at the same time is obviously a 'fluke' but doesnt get much worse...

http://www.superxv.com/news/super15_rugby_news.asp?id=34905

Sure it was a huge miss,however in fairness to Jonker he isnt the only Super xv referee this year that has missed blatant knockons immediately prior to a try being scored.

I was going to put a post up on this, how can SANZAR not think that any problems with refs would come back to home refs.

How did they let refs from a country ref teams from the same country, it would either favour the Home team or the ref would be focused on not being bias and so favour the away team.

It was a mistake but their were a couple going both ways.

What do ye think of having home refs, in the NH its bad enough having a half french man who played for ireland ref a french team.
If any team loss to an English team with an English ref there would only be one reason

Surely this also goes against the ref is right policy that most competions have.

Will they be expected to come out more when mistakes are made.

I don't think the error was because of home refs, I'm sure we're all over that sort of thing surely. I just find it amazing none of them saw it as anyone who did would have pulled it up immediately, if for any reason to save looking like the inept officiators that they do now.

I try not to criticise referees for missing a knock on,as I think its only human,and we all know we could make the same mistake.however I have a bit of trouble understanding how the touchie's miss so many when they have an uninterupted view of an incident that about 5 metres in front of them.

Steve walsh missed a Shocker a couple of weeks ago,at Aucklands expense,and he's an ex Aucklander.

The only trouble with neutral referees is,can you imagine what would happen to Bryce Lawrence if he refereed a game in south Africa involving a Australian side and the Australian side won via an unnoticed knock on,they would fillet and eat him.

The Irony is that a South African Coach is bringing complaints about South African officials.For me it is not a case of the Competence of the officials concerned.But that all the Officials were South African,I fully accept that the try
was a genuine mistake .The Officials call it as they see it,is the TMO now able to
legislate on such incidents.For me NEUTRAL REFEREES in all such matches is the way to go,a panel including NH Officials should be available.That way there is no question of possible accusations of bias in matches.

Actually talking about South African officials,every Friday morning I go through the teams and match officials over on the Super xv site,every time i see Gerrie Coetzee (the TMO) I think of the South African boxer.

I Think that the touch judges don't do as much as they should.

Why can't they all talk on the headset off air.

So TJ says I think I saw a knock on and the ref either sayes no it was backwards or I wasn't sure or I couldn't see. The other TJ either gives his opinion or says I was blocked. Takes 3 seconds and the game can be called back if needs be ie. no advatage.

Scrums might do better if the TJ and ref talked more about what they see.

It seems TJs only seem to give their opinion when asked. Talking to the ref more as the ref would feel more confident that things are being seen.

Why can't TJs also police the offside "ref white player is offside, oh he just tackled the player give a pen"

When not only the opposition but also the players on attack stop and have that did you not see what just happened look on their faces it's usually a pretty good indication of some mistake. It was a surreal moment but the call from the ref that it went backwards was the most.

The Bulls were clearly going to win that game anyway so honestly who cares.

Also the players should play to the whistle and they did not. That is *their* mistake and nobody else's.

I don't know how you think that KickandChase. The final score was 36 34 and the 7 points proved to be a crucial difference.

There were a few errors this weekend such as Habana's try but I don't think it is anything to do biased refereeing just mistakes.

It's when those mistakes change the course or outcome of the game that we have a problem.

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I don't know how you think that KickandChase. The final score was 36 34 and the 7 points proved to be a crucial difference.

Disagree. Had the Bulls not scored that try they would have possibly defended better in the subsequent Brumbies fightback, no?

KickAndChase wrote:

kiakahaaotearoa wrote:I don't know how you think that KickandChase. The final score was 36 34 and the 7 points proved to be a crucial difference.

Disagree. Had the Bulls not scored that try they would have possibly defended better in the subsequent Brumbies fightback, no?

Disagree. If the Bulls hadn't got that try they may have defended no better against the Brumbies, but tried to score another one. The Brumbies did score, the Bulls didn't.

The Brumbies fought back regardless of whether they were down 7 more points or not. When a team comes back so strongly and the other sits on its lead, momentum can often swing the way of the attacking team. The Bulls were already so far out in front much like the Cheetahs against the Highlanders this week. But the Highlanders showed that you're never out of the game and showed the perils of sitting on your lead and not trying to find the killer blow. It also almost happened to the Crusaders against the Waratahs so whilst I understand your point, I disagree.

When the knock on came there was enough time for the Bulls or the Brumbies to still play hard rugby.

I am sure the bulls will have played a different game, if they didn't score that try.

However it is amazing how SANZAR will apologise for this, and yet there are numerous other things that they could just as well have apologised for.

I am getting the impression there have been some incidents during this Super XV, all related to South African teams which may indicate it should hint to them perhaps starting to consider moving away from the tournamnet.

biltongbek wrote:When the knock on came there was enough time for the Bulls or the Brumbies to still play hard rugby.

I am sure the bulls will have played a different game, if they didn't score that try.

However it is amazing how SANZAR will apologise for this, and yet there are numerous other things that they could just as well have apologised for.

I am getting the impression there have been some incidents during this Super XV, all related to South African teams which may indicate it should hint to them perhaps starting to consider moving away from the tournamnet.

Bil you can go back to the currie and then the top teams can compete against the Irish in the HC.

I still think that they shouldn't of said sorry.

If they want to correct mistakes each week the ref panel can come out with a state like this

"we are sorry for any mistakes made by our reffing teams, which can not see everything like a slow motion ariel camera. As a result we feel that the best team won and that the defeated teams will have to do better next week. Any preceived bias is only in your head and has no supstance in the real world which everyone else lives in"

I think that would be fine. Some weeks you win some you lose

biltongbek wrote:When the knock on came there was enough time for the Bulls or the Brumbies to still play hard rugby.

I am sure the bulls will have played a different game, if they didn't score that try.

However it is amazing how SANZAR will apologise for this, and yet there are numerous other things that they could just as well have apologised for.

I am getting the impression there have been some incidents during this Super XV, all related to South African teams which may indicate it should hint to them perhaps starting to consider moving away from the tournamnet.

I suspect the Southern Kings issue is the most likely dividing issue to be fair - and given Greg Peters' comments there must be tensions http://www.superxv.com/news/super15_rugby_news.asp?id=34959

Though given the Force's woes maybe the SRU could come to an arrangment with the ARU and put a team into the Aussie conference


I note there wasn't an apology to the Crusaders when their "winning" try vs the Bulls a few weeks back was ruled out because Dan Carter was "obstructing" by running in support of (and behind) the ball carrier. Though of course the Crusaders scored off a forward pass vs the 'Canes.

Yes, kiwi, there seems to be some tension in my view.

First it was the Alleged gouges by the Bulls which caused dissatisfaction, then there was Bobby Skinstad, then This knock on by the Bulls, then there is the Southern Kings issues.

There has been some dissatisfaction in the past as well, looking at it from that point of view and then a few personla ones I have noted over the years where we were nailed by some refereeing decisions and the fact that SARU has been railroaded into sharing all television revenue it all seems not to sit so comfortably anymore.

Perhaps it is time to look at this whole lot, and make a change, we can stand on our own feet financially, we may lose on the speed side of the game by not playing the other Super XV teams, but then they lose out on the physicality they have become accustomed to over the past years.

Looking north may not be the best thing, but there are bigger audiences, more money and similar time zones.

Biltong
Do you really think that playing in NH comps will reduce these tensions. Will calls of SA thuggery drop away, will the reffing get better, will the Southern Kings become a better team, will accusations of racism or cheating not happen anymore.
Do you really think SA will get better treatment from NH officials, administrators and fans?

Ngan, I can't give you those answers you know that. what I can tell you is that south african fans for a long time has felt they are getting the raw end of the deal.

Travel wise we travel the longest, the reality is ARU and NZRU has stronger bonds, there are that under lying feeling of what Keith Lawrence said all those years back "we'll teach these jarpies a lesson, SARU admittedly with being fairly incompetent and being able to stand against a 2-1 split in votes will always come off second best.

Perhaps having Argentina in there might even up the votes.

I don't know.

Ngan, as for the apology. It stinks. SA team benefiting from a SA referee and all of a sudden SANZAR sees the need to apologise. Never seen that happen before and I am sure if I look hard enough there will be plenty of those happening in previous seasons.

By the time CJ Stander scored the try in the 57 th minute the bulls were controlling the match already and if that try wasn't given, they wouldn't have sat on their laurels with only a 12 point lead instead of a 17 point lead.

The apology did seem odd given that barely a week passes without a reffing c**k-up of some sort. This sets a bit of a precedent that whenever you get the rough end of the pineapple you can expect an official I'm sorry.

Biltong, as far as the travel goes you guys travel the furthest for tests but as far as the super rugby season goes I think that title goes to the Force. You guys travel out here once, we travel over to you once. The poor old Force have to fly 5 hours to play a local derby.

FC, when I say travel the longest I mean as far as We have to go there for a month, the trip to Sa can be handled in but 8-12 days, depending what teams prefer as acclimatisation.

As soon as I posted that I thought that might have been what you meant.

"That was between the assistant referee and the referee and that cost seven points," Bray added. "And that probably colours the overall view of the performance because of that mistake."

They were so keen to apologise, they couldn't even get that right.

It cost 5 points, the conversion was missed.

Sounds like what would've happened if that try had been given against Wales in the England match.

And yet when the Brumbies won in the last minute due to a penalty for a scrum wheel vs the Cheetahs, which Linden Bray admitted was wrong, there was no apology then.

Talk about being hypocrates

Is the number of Saffa's growing that wish to go it alone, My father in law hates SANZAR as he feels it is two v one all the time and that fthey put in alot more then they get out. On the other hand he rarely wishes to leave them and go alone or join Europe or form a new group

Look I don't want to leave the SANZAR thing.

But I do get that same perception as well. Two against one.

We need our administrators to be tougher, but we also need to revisit the whole scenario.

The Super XV in my view isn't working.

When the tournamnet originally started it was supposed to be Super.

Now looking at the current season it is clear that there are 3 teams too many.

Reduce it to 12 teams whether you make it a tier one comp and put another 12 from all over in there, then that is fine, but there shouldn't be more than 12 teams playing in the tier one Super competition.

I wouldn't like us to koin Europe, as their seasonal structures are a collection of different competitions mixing and matching all over the place.

But there are a few issues about the SA vs OZ and NZ that is just a little too coincidental in my eyes.

I might be totally paranoid. But I doubt it.

From Keith Lawrence, to Bryce Lawrence, to criticisms of what we say, do and how we act, the double standards about SANZAR will apologise for this but not for that, to the money issues, it is all just not sitting right with me.