Rassie verdict is in.

Just seen the verdict for Rassie’s misdeeds re his video. Guilty of six charges. Two month ban from all rugby and a 10 month match day ban, starting immediately. Plus a £20000 fine and both SAR and Rassie have been given the waggy finger about future conduct.
Where I’m from, that would be regarded as a full swing in the man veg.

World rugby sending out a message?

Question I still have is why is took so long to have this?

Ouch, that has got to hurt. Sends out the right message to any other would be offenders.

Thats a slap on the wrist

R 400 000 fine is nothing.

End of year, nice two month holiday for him, by the start of next years RC he is back

Isnt that till the end of the RC?

Old Man wrote:Thats a slap on the wrist

R 400 000 fine is nothing.

End of year, nice two month holiday for him, by the start of next years RC he is back

It’s next October before he can be at a game match day. The two month ban includes talking to the media etc. Personally I think that is a very strong message that has been sent.

I would imagine by the time he is allowed to play water boy again , world rugby will have something in place to stop him.

Slight tangent but my stance is that there should be no waterboys allowed on the park at all. If you want a drink go to the side of the pitch and lift a bottle that’s been placed there.

Same with injuries, do like football does, no stopping play unless dangerous/ serious and if you need treatment, off you go.

This along with setting time constraints on setting up set pieces would speed the game up.

It takes forever to get through a match these days with the constant stoppages, TMO calls, blatant time wasting and dare I say it feigning injury.

Have a full bench and only allow five subs. More folk have to go the full 80mins equals smaller fitter players. This should also lessen the huge impacts we are seeing hopefully reducing injury.

Just my two pennies worth.

Heuer27 wrote:

Old Man wrote:Thats a slap on the wrist

R 400 000 fine is nothing.

End of year, nice two month holiday for him, by the start of next years RC he is back

It’s next October before he can be at a game match day.  The two month ban includes talking to the media etc. Personally I think that is a very strong message that has been sent.

I would imagine by the time he is allowed to play water boy again , world rugby will have something in place to stop him.

Slight tangent but my stance is that there should be no waterboys allowed on the park at all. If you want a drink go to the side of the pitch and lift a bottle that’s been placed there.

Same with injuries, do like football does, no stopping play unless dangerous/ serious and if you need treatment, off you go.

This along with setting time constraints on setting up set pieces would speed the game up.

It takes forever to get through a match these days with the constant stoppages, TMO calls, blatant time wasting and dare I say it feigning injury.

Have a full bench and only allow five subs. More folk have to go the full 80mins equals smaller fitter players. This should also lessen the huge impacts we are seeing hopefully reducing injury.

Just my two pennies worth.

Seconded.

Neutral waterboys, neutral physios, neutral medics should all be at pitch side. Players either come off or the staff/ref sends them off instead of all this magic sponge treatment on the pitch.

Only problem is someone has to pay this neutral medical team who know nothing about the players as the medical records are private.  So if a player has a pain in their arm how is the medical team suppose to treat a person they have just met.

I'm torn on the Rassie issue.  Rugby values get talked all the time but professional sport is all about money.

Rassie gets the SA summer off but he still does all his homework like he would have anyway.  He can't be at the match day event but realistically what does that mean.  He gets to give Neinaber space to run the ship.

Doesn't matter either way I am sure everyone is clear on how public videos will be dealt with in the future.  And SA won the Lions Series which is all that matters.

There is some stuff coming out from Nick Berry and the disciplinary committee about how Rassie attempted to blackmail / pressure him into a meeting, threatening to release a video if he refused. The panel accepted his version as the truth. Very distasteful if accurate. It’s been published that Rassie said to Berry that Gatland had used the media to exert influence over the match officials and that he was going to do the same for match 2. Which he did.
If that is in fact what happened then WR have been quite lenient.

Didn't Rassie do some weird stuff to signal plays or decisions to his team when coaching Cheetahs?

COVID nothwithstanding, if a player had breached the norms of the game in the same way as Erasmus, there is no way on earth it would have taken so long to discipline him.

The closest case is probably when Eliota Fuimaono-Sapolu caused a social media storm during the 2011 World Cup. He was banned from all rugby for six months within about a week. (That was later toned down to a shorter ban, with the rest suspended, after he made public apologies).

The new aspects of the case seem to be the threat to Berry, and the testimony from the official himself about the negative impact he has suffered from the fallout of the affair. That's all the more damning for Erasmus. Whatever, the gripes mentioned in the video, most rugby supporters would say Berry didn't have an especially bad game.

Certainly nothing of the order of the Wayne Barnes' missed forward pass for Kiwis; Bryce Lawrence going AWOL in the Springbok quarterfinal against Australia; or Craig Joubert's last-minute penalty award against Scotland. All those World Cup decisions turned the officials into hate figures for losing fans.

For Erasmus to create so much misery for an individual official who just had an average game is unacceptable. It's easy to take action against players, because you can just stop them playing. Harder to think of equivalent sanctions against coaches. Reports say he has been banned from all rugby activity for two months. For that to have any real teeth, it ought to mean he can't attend any professional rugby match as a spectator, sit in the stands watching any club training sessions, or work as a rugby media commentator. Those are all regular activities for professional coaches. It's unclear how much scope the game has to impose and enforce such a penalty.

I know twitter is a weird and wonderful place but bloody hell the SA fans that are posting on this topic....

Don't follow him but Stephen Jones has commented and then ots just a stream of people proving his point.

Rugby Fan, I keep coming back to refs will make mistakes in every game, they'll make fewer than the players though.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I know twitter is a weird and wonderful place but bloody hell the SA fans that are posting on this topic....

Don't follow him but Stephen Jones has commented and then ots just a stream of people proving his point.

Unfortunately there are always a minority of people in any culture (SA in this case) that goes off the boil, the majority have voted in a poll that they did not condone Rassie's actions. But it creates an unfair perception that it is South Africans in general that show no class or reason.

No 7&1/2 wrote:I know twitter is a weird and wonderful place but bloody hell the SA fans that are posting on this topic....

Don't follow him but Stephen Jones has commented and then ots just a stream of people proving his point.

I think theres quite a number of non rugby following idiots jumping on the back of the SA success at the moment and just posting antagonizing rubbish all over social media at the moment...

I have no doubt that it's not representative of all all fans but if there were any doubt that WR had to deal with this it lays it bare. Erasmus has nurtured it through his actions.

The Lions tour was painfully crap. Up there with the 2005 shambles to NZ as the most forgettable tour ever.

No 7&1/2 wrote:
Don't follow him but Stephen Jones has commented and then ots just a stream of people proving his point.

Stephen Jones

https://www.reddit.com/r/rugbyunion/comments/ovga6y/after_the_lions_2nd_test_loss_stephen_jones/

Still no apology from SA rugby about this either. Surely they will be doing so or have I missed it?

What coaches haven't spent loads of time in the media leading up to big games telling the ref all the stuff the opposition do and putting pressure on the ref to take action.

Look at the Jordi Barret incident where the ref followed the rules but all you heard from NZ fans and NZRU officials was it was wrong and the ref should never have done it.  Two days late we find out kicking a player in the head when the player is upright and about 1-2 meters away from you is ok and the ref was wrong.  Not a peep about pressure etc applied by the NZRU, media etc that affected the outcome.  Unsurprising now in the NH more yellows for the TT teams now a headshot is a headshot.

Was Jones with the Italy offside right or wrong.  He complained about everything including the ref and got the rule interpretation changed.

Did Rassie break new ground, of course he did, he put his face in the video.  Plenty coaches, tell everyone the issues and the media then bring out all the clips to show all the things the coach is on about.  During the game the host TV company show the clips to highlight all the issues previous raised by the coach.  Just cause Jones, Gathland, Hansen etc weren't in the video doesnt mean they weren't involved in hit pieces on the ref, they just knew to have no link to them or their staff.  If Rassie had said it was sent to a wrong e-mail address by accident and then it showed up on-line would that have been ok.

If coaches are suppose to be able to talk to refs about their decisions and the ref refuses what action are you meant to do, it's not like SA had things they needed to fix and practice on and needed answers in a timely manner.  There needs to be clear path for refs and coaches to air their problems, currently everything is in the ref's favour.  If an after match interview criticizes the ref they get in trouble.  Where is the balance, can't have the ref protected from consequence/criticism but not held accountable.

All that will happen in the future is that these videos will start to be fed through the media to give better distance.  What media with links to it's relative union wouldn't want all the coverage it got.

Reffing systems needs to be corrected across WR, this just highlights one of the many issues.  The citing commission should go to WR not local bodies with vested interests. Complaints about a ref performance. Surely the issue is that coaches have to go to the ref instead of a reffing board.  All complaints should go to the reffing Board and complaint and response should be made public to all refs and coaches.

In what other sport is there such difference in applying rules as there is in rugby between 6N and SANZAAR refs.  SA seem to have no issues with 6N refs.  With the TT unions in a bubble for SR expect that gap to grow.

Brendan wrote:What coaches haven't spent loads of time in the media leading up to big games telling the ref all the stuff the opposition do and putting pressure on the ref to take action.

Look at the Jordi Barret incident where the ref followed the rules but all you heard from NZ fans and NZRU officials was it was wrong and the ref should never have done it.  Two days late we find out kicking a player in the head when the player is upright and about 1-2 meters away from you is ok and the ref was wrong.  Not a peep about pressure etc applied by the NZRU, media etc that affected the outcome.  Unsurprising now in the NH more yellows for the TT teams now a headshot is a headshot.

Was Jones with the Italy offside right or wrong.  He complained about everything including the ref and got the rule interpretation changed.

Did Rassie break new ground, of course he did, he put his face in the video.  Plenty coaches, tell everyone the issues and the media then bring out all the clips to show all the things the coach is on about.  During the game the host TV company show the clips to highlight all the issues previous raised by the coach.  Just cause Jones, Gathland, Hansen etc weren't in the video doesnt mean they weren't involved in hit pieces on the ref, they just knew to have no link to them or their staff.  If Rassie had said it was sent to a wrong e-mail address by accident and then it showed up on-line would that have been ok.

If coaches are suppose to be able to talk to refs about their decisions and the ref refuses what action are you meant to do, it's not like SA had things they needed to fix and practice on and needed answers in a timely manner.  There needs to be clear path for refs and coaches to air their problems, currently everything is in the ref's favour.  If an after match interview criticizes the ref they get in trouble.  Where is the balance, can't have the ref protected from consequence/criticism but not held accountable.

All that will happen in the future is that these videos will start to be fed through the media to give better distance.  What media with links to it's relative union wouldn't want all the coverage it got.

Reffing systems needs to be corrected across WR, this just highlights one of the many issues.  The citing commission should go to WR not local bodies with vested interests. Complaints about a ref performance. Surely the issue is that coaches have to go to the ref instead of a reffing board.  All complaints should go to the reffing Board and complaint and response should be made public to all refs and coaches.

In what other sport is there such difference in applying rules as there is in rugby between 6N and SANZAAR refs.  SA seem to have no issues with 6N refs.  With the TT unions in a bubble for SR expect that gap to grow.

What would count as accountability for refs?

No 7&1/2 wrote:I have no doubt that it's not representative of all all fans but if there were any doubt that WR had to deal with this it lays it bare. Erasmus has nurtured it through his actions.

Rassie not the first coach to send the fans after the ref.  How was he nurtured it.  Foundations laid when Rassie was a player or young coach.  It's not like NZ claimed they lost a WC due to a correct call by a ref who had only been a professional ref for 2 years.

NZ fans even created Bebo pages for the ref for abuse to be aimed at including death threats.

Not sure if any ref prior to Barnes faced so much hate, sure there was.  Once one nation does it then everyone else thinks it's fair game.

He's nurtured the response that some SA fans are giving now. And yes on the final point, which is why WR needed to go hard on Erasmus.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Brendan wrote:What coaches haven't spent loads of time in the media leading up to big games telling the ref all the stuff the opposition do and putting pressure on the ref to take action.

Look at the Jordi Barret incident where the ref followed the rules but all you heard from NZ fans and NZRU officials was it was wrong and the ref should never have done it.  Two days late we find out kicking a player in the head when the player is upright and about 1-2 meters away from you is ok and the ref was wrong.  Not a peep about pressure etc applied by the NZRU, media etc that affected the outcome.  Unsurprising now in the NH more yellows for the TT teams now a headshot is a headshot.

Was Jones with the Italy offside right or wrong.  He complained about everything including the ref and got the rule interpretation changed.

Did Rassie break new ground, of course he did, he put his face in the video.  Plenty coaches, tell everyone the issues and the media then bring out all the clips to show all the things the coach is on about.  During the game the host TV company show the clips to highlight all the issues previous raised by the coach.  Just cause Jones, Gathland, Hansen etc weren't in the video doesnt mean they weren't involved in hit pieces on the ref, they just knew to have no link to them or their staff.  If Rassie had said it was sent to a wrong e-mail address by accident and then it showed up on-line would that have been ok.

If coaches are suppose to be able to talk to refs about their decisions and the ref refuses what action are you meant to do, it's not like SA had things they needed to fix and practice on and needed answers in a timely manner.  There needs to be clear path for refs and coaches to air their problems, currently everything is in the ref's favour.  If an after match interview criticizes the ref they get in trouble.  Where is the balance, can't have the ref protected from consequence/criticism but not held accountable.

All that will happen in the future is that these videos will start to be fed through the media to give better distance.  What media with links to it's relative union wouldn't want all the coverage it got.

Reffing systems needs to be corrected across WR, this just highlights one of the many issues.  The citing commission should go to WR not local bodies with vested interests. Complaints about a ref performance. Surely the issue is that coaches have to go to the ref instead of a reffing board.  All complaints should go to the reffing Board and complaint and response should be made public to all refs and coaches.

In what other sport is there such difference in applying rules as there is in rugby between 6N and SANZAAR refs.  SA seem to have no issues with 6N refs.  With the TT unions in a bubble for SR expect that gap to grow.

What would count as accountability for refs?

If I were running things (which I clearly am not) I would have each coach be able to refer 3 things from a game, either incident or process such as side entry of ruck.

Panel would review all questions across all games and send it out to all the refs teams involved and participating teams so everyone is clear on what is correct going forward.

Right now coach asks question, gets answer sometime and no other teams knows the outcome.  Each match and ref is dealt with individually rather than sharing the right information across all relevant parties.

All international matches should go through a WR panel.

There should also be a time limit by which time questiins must be sent in and responded to (24-48 hrs)

On the first point the teams are allowed to ask for feedback after the games on any issues they have and have access to understand new rulings etc beforehand (not immediately before the game however, understandably). If you remember as far back as 2013 England were strongly criticised for answering a question directed to Wig regarding reffing of scrums that they had asked WR for feedback on interpretation.

Refs do get together and are brought together on training days (or whatever they deem to call them) already.

True enough in terms of time frame, there is none set for feedback. As before the teams do get walked through changes etc already.

Not sure what you mean by all international matches going through a panel?

Ok.

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's nurtured the response that some SA fans are giving now. And yes on the final point, which is why WR needed to go hard on Erasmus.

Why only Rassies.

Gatland singled out Jonker who was appointed TMO for Lions test 1.  The same person who was TMO for the SA A game which was the only game the Lions had lost up to that point. He said he was seeking clarification on the decision of no contact with the head.  He had thus made it public he was questioning Jonker's decision and then questioned why he was TMO again.  Looking at what happened on Test 1 did Gatland use the media to intimidate the TMO and did he benefit from it.  What did WR say to Gatland leading up to Test 1 to make sure that both coaches know singling out refs will not be accepted.

Brendan wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:He's nurtured the response that some SA fans are giving now. And yes on the final point, which is why WR needed to go hard on Erasmus.

Why only Rassies.

Gatland singled out Jonker who was appointed TMO for Lions test 1.  The same person who was TMO for the SA A game which was the only game the Lions had lost up to that point. He said he was seeking clarification on the decision of no contact with the head.  He had thus made it public he was questioning Jonker's decision and then questioned why he was TMO again.  Looking at what happened on Test 1 did Gatland use the media to intimidate the TMO and did he benefit from it.  What did WR say to Gatland leading up to Test 1 to make sure that both coaches know singling out refs will not be accepted.

Because I'm talking directly about the crazy going on with SA now.

Too long winded.
This weekend there are 7 men’s Internationals.

14 teams allowed 3 referrals each, so we could have 42 referrals from one weekend.
A review body drowned in paperwork

No 7&1/2 wrote:On the first point the teams are allowed to ask for feedback after the games on any issues they have and have access to understand new rulings etc beforehand (not immediately before the game however, understandably). If you remember as far back as 2013 England were strongly criticised for answering a question directed to Wig regarding reffing of scrums that they had asked WR for feedback on interpretation.

Refs do get together and are brought together on training days (or whatever they deem to call them) already.

True enough in terms of time frame, there is none set for feedback. As before the teams do get walked through changes etc already.

Not sure what you mean by all international matches going through a panel?

Ok.

I think all club competitions should go through their own body e.g. Prem by Prem/RFU Not WR or European Rugby.

For internationals regardless of RC, 6N or tours it should all be WR because over the coming years the gap between the SR nation refs and the 6N & SA refs.  That will result in issues come WC in 2 years.

geoff999rugby wrote:Too long winded.
This weekend there are 7 men’s Internationals.

14 teams allowed 3 referrals each, so we could have 42 referrals from one weekend.
A review body drowned in paperwork

It would take a good ex ref a few minutes to give an answer.  The ref like Owens retires because he can run as much rather than he doesn't know the rules any more.  It also so happens Owens was doing a ref watch video anyway so not like they aren't doing the work.

Easy to do at €1000 per referral and get their money back if they win.  It's simillar to how soccer does it.

I would like to see more transparency in regards to referee reviews in their match performances.

But WR won't do that because it will end up where people will question results influenced by poor refereeing performances.

They hvae to protect the credibility of the game.

Brendan wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Too long winded.
This weekend there are 7 men’s Internationals.

14 teams allowed 3 referrals each, so we could have 42 referrals from one weekend.
A review body drowned in paperwork

It would take a good ex ref a few minutes to give an answer.  The ref like Owens retires because he can run as much rather than he doesn't know the rules any more.  It also so happens Owens was doing a ref watch video anyway so not like they aren't doing the work.

Easy to do at €1000 per referral and get their money back if they win.  It's simillar to how soccer does it.

If they win? I mean what do you get from that really? Say we referred a couple of rucks from last weekend. The ref reviewing says yeah, probably did come in from the side, possibly could have gone the other way on that and given a pen to the attacking team. Great. What have we learnt; that it's fine margins sometimes? It's fun to discuss decisions (for me anyway) as no ref is going to get them all right and even ones which are definitely correct someone will complain. But what sense of doing that for a grand a pop?

No 7&1/2 wrote:Still no apology from SA rugby about this either. Surely they will be doing so or have I missed it?

The report noted that Rassie and SARU (both) intend to take up their right to appeal. Unlikely that apologies will be issued prior to that process.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Brendan wrote:

geoff999rugby wrote:Too long winded.
This weekend there are 7 men’s Internationals.

14 teams allowed 3 referrals each, so we could have 42 referrals from one weekend.
A review body drowned in paperwork

It would take a good ex ref a few minutes to give an answer.  The ref like Owens retires because he can run as much rather than he doesn't know the rules any more.  It also so happens Owens was doing a ref watch video anyway so not like they aren't doing the work.

Easy to do at €1000 per referral and get their money back if they win.  It's simillar to how soccer does it.

If they win? I mean what do you get from that really? Say we referred a couple of rucks from last weekend. The ref reviewing says yeah, probably did come in from the side, possibly could have gone the other way on that and given a pen to the attacking team. Great. What have we learnt; that it's fine margins sometimes? It's fun to discuss decisions (for me anyway) as no ref is going to get them all right and even ones which are definitely correct someone will complain. But what sense of doing that for a grand a pop?

They trialled a 'captains challenge' for this very reason and it was ridiculed.

Old Man wrote:I would like to see more transparency in regards to referee reviews in their match performances.

But WR won't do that because it will end up where people will question results influenced by poor refereeing performances.

They hvae to protect the credibility of the game.

And also because people get hung up on small details. An example of the previous Lions tour to NZ a couple of Kiwi posters questioning the offside, accidental vs deliberate. The conversation pretty much went the ref has cost NZ the series there. Now for me on that part of the decision, I disagreed with the ref and thought you can't catch the ball and it be accidental. Of course what was ignored by those posters was that Read was offside at kickoff. The wider point though is that there are hundreds, maybe thousands (exaggeration possibly!) of decisions by everyone on the pitch and the person sat in the TMO studio. They all of course influence the game over the entirety that they are there playing and officiating. 1 decision that is incorrect such as that Scotladn Aus game in the WC does not mean that the game has been lost because of that moment (and that moment in real time I thought the ref was correct, until the detailed replays which at the time couldn't be looked at). Focusing on one moment ignores every other decision made by officials and players. A butterfly flaps its wings in minute 1 making the ref miss a knock on means that Faf can score in the 60th minute.

thebandwagonsociety wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:Still no apology from SA rugby about this either. Surely they will be doing so or have I missed it?

The report noted that Rassie and SARU (both) intend to take up their right to appeal. Unlikely that apologies will be issued prior to that process.

Fair enough. I hope they have the decency to do it when the appeals fail.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Old Man wrote:I would like to see more transparency in regards to referee reviews in their match performances.

But WR won't do that because it will end up where people will question results influenced by poor refereeing performances.

They hvae to protect the credibility of the game.

And also because people get hung up on small details. An example of the previous Lions tour to NZ a couple of Kiwi posters questioning the offside, accidental vs deliberate. The conversation pretty much went the ref has cost NZ the series there. Now for me on that part of the decision, I disagreed with the ref and thought you can't catch the ball and it be accidental. Of course what was ignored by those posters was that Read was offside at kickoff. The wider point though is that there are hundreds, maybe thousands (exaggeration possibly!) of decisions by everyone on the pitch and the person sat in the TMO studio. They all of course influence the game over the entirety that they are there playing and officiating. 1 decision that is incorrect such as that Scotladn Aus game in the WC does not mean that the game has been lost because of that moment (and that moment in real time I thought the ref was correct, until the detailed replays which at the time couldn't be looked at). Focusing on one moment ignores every other decision made by officials and players. A butterfly flaps its wings in minute 1 making the ref miss a knock on means that Faf can score in the 60th minute.

No game would ever finish.  It's not black and white. There is judgement and interpretation. There are multiple infringements at a every breakdown, the player on the ground hasn't released the ball, the tackler hasn't instantly vanished (east or west, whatever that's meant to mean), the jackle isn't supporting their own weight / or their hands have touched the ground, the clearout is in from the side / hasn't bound correctly, the scrumhalf isn't bringing the ball back with their boot, the ball is out, the pillars / midfield defense are offside....... that's one breakdown (and I'm probably missing plenty too)!

The SAs are RWC Champions! They are Lions Series winners! They are the current No.1 ranked side in world rugby. And their director of rugby is putting out hour long videos apparently chastising a referee.  If SA fans were correct with the theme of 'the refs have it in for us' and its a conspiracy of the refereeing officials are out to get us, the conspiracy isn't proven through tournament results or world rankings.

It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

mikey_dragon wrote:It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

Until all coaches and players are condemend such as Gats on Jonker prior to Test 1 which went unpunished by WR I can understand their position. It's not like Gats apologized and maybe said in hindsight it was overstepping the mark.

I hope this is a watershed where player/Coach questions decisions before or after games in public.  It won't happen and this won't be the last video to make its way to the media from coaches or Unions. It will just be less linked to the coach next time.

Was there something in the report where Rassie e-mailed SARU asking how others could others see the video as there were 8 views day one.  If true was it Rassie's or SARU fault.

And if another video makes it way in lets laugh at the stupidity of it and ban Erasmus again.

May be helpful for anyone wanting to read the whole thing: https://www.news24.com/sport/rugby/springboks/read-the-full-80-page-misconduct-report-against-rassie-erasmus-20211118

Brendan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

Until all coaches and players are condemend such as Gats on Jonker prior to Test 1 which went unpunished by WR I can understand their position. It's not like Gats apologized and maybe said in hindsight it was overstepping the mark.

Despite your on-going desparation, there really isn't comparison between what both coaches did. I also agree there needs to be more transparency with regards to feedback on refereeing performances, particulary those of French refs... But thinking the world is out to get you and to also think bringing the game into disrepute is okay is crossing a line. That's South Africans for you.

Personally I think that WR have been lenient and the time away from rugby in all its forms should be longer.  However I hope that the appropriate action will be taken  in the 6Ns when Jones/English coaching team says Porter doesn't scrummage straight/Farrell (or the Irish coaching team) suggests the English back row will target Sexton/etc, etc, etc in a bid to influence upcoming games.  This problem has arisen due to the acceptance of what is alleged as "fair comment" over the years.  Pretty much every coach does it, Rassie was an extreme example.

If a strong approach isn't taken then it will be a free for all.

However the best way of dealing with it is to improve refereeing standards across the whole of the game.  How can we expect top level international referees if there isn't a pyramid below supporting them.

mikey_dragon wrote:

Brendan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

Until all coaches and players are condemend such as Gats on Jonker prior to Test 1 which went unpunished by WR I can understand their position. It's not like Gats apologized and maybe said in hindsight it was overstepping the mark.

Despite your on-going desparation, there really isn't comparison between what both coaches did. I also agree there needs to be more transparency with regards to feedback on refereeing performances, particulary those of French refs... But thinking the world is out to get you and to also think bringing the game into disrepute is okay is crossing a line. That's South Africans for you.

Careful now Mikey, tarnishing all South Africans with the same brush is discriminatory.

Brendan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

Until all coaches and players are condemend such as Gats on Jonker prior to Test 1 which went unpunished by WR I can understand their position. It's not like Gats apologized and maybe said in hindsight it was overstepping the mark.

I am no fan of Gatland but you simply cannot equate what he said to the action of Erasmus - no comparison

mikey_dragon wrote:

Brendan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

Until all coaches and players are condemend such as Gats on Jonker prior to Test 1 which went unpunished by WR I can understand their position. It's not like Gats apologized and maybe said in hindsight it was overstepping the mark.

Despite your on-going desparation, there really isn't comparison between what both coaches did. I also agree there needs to be more transparency with regards to feedback on refereeing performances, particulary those of French refs... But thinking the world is out to get you and to also think bringing the game into disrepute is okay is crossing a line. That's South Africans for you.

So Jonker is appointed TMO, Gatland publicly brings up the issue.  It's no cocidence it was brought up as Jonker was TMO for the yellow card for Faf in the A game.  Within 24 hours the Lions have had a meeting with the ref team and again state they are unhappy but nothing they can do. Were SA given the same when they had issues with the reffing team.

Also I am sure if the ref on Saturday had only yellow carded the Fijian as he was looking to do and Fiji had won that, Welsh fans would only of had good things to say about him.  I know it's a rubbish publication but seems Biggar had issues with Berry through the match.  Again it's not an SA issue it's a rugby issue.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/he-just-fing-whacked-him-22163933.amp

WR should fund fulltime refs.  It is ridiculous that a top ref often has a second job to think about and why we have such problems because they are weekend refs.

geoff999rugby wrote:

Brendan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

Until all coaches and players are condemend such as Gats on Jonker prior to Test 1 which went unpunished by WR I can understand their position. It's not like Gats apologized and maybe said in hindsight it was overstepping the mark.

 

I am no fan of Gatland but you simply cannot equate what he said to the action of Erasmus - no comparison

Both were designed to win the next game and both achieved their objectives.  Calling out the impartiality of the TMO is ok before a match, but doing a video is not.

Do you think he's had this because he made a video alone Brendan?

Brendan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Brendan wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:It's amazing to still see how many South Africans think he was okay and completely justified in doing this.

Until all coaches and players are condemend such as Gats on Jonker prior to Test 1 which went unpunished by WR I can understand their position. It's not like Gats apologized and maybe said in hindsight it was overstepping the mark.

Despite your on-going desparation, there really isn't comparison between what both coaches did. I also agree there needs to be more transparency with regards to feedback on refereeing performances, particulary those of French refs... But thinking the world is out to get you and to also think bringing the game into disrepute is okay is crossing a line. That's South Africans for you.

So Jonker is appointed TMO, Gatland publicly brings up the issue.  It's no cocidence it was brought up as Jonker was TMO for the yellow card for Faf in the A game.  Within 24 hours the Lions have had a meeting with the ref team and again state they are unhappy but nothing they can do. Were SA given the same when they had issues with the reffing team.

Also I am sure if the ref on Saturday had only yellow carded the Fijian as he was looking to do and Fiji had won that, Welsh fans would only of had good things to say about him.  I know it's a rubbish publication but seems Biggar had issues with Berry through the match.  Again it's not an SA issue it's a rugby issue.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/he-just-fing-whacked-him-22163933.amp

WR should fund fulltime refs.  It is ridiculous that a top ref often has a second job to think about and why we have such problems because they are weekend refs.

You're still desperate I see, even bringing up clear Red Card offences and suggesting they should be yellow

No 7&1/2 wrote:Do you think he's had this because he made a video alone Brendan?

I don't but most people seem to think this is a Rassie issue and a SA fan issue and are coming across as though fixing Rassie fixes everything.

I am pointing out that this is just the next step in a long line of steps coaches, unions and fans have been on since at least 2007 France v New Zealand  though it has always happened that was just the first big one in a digital age.

Mind games are now part of the build up and they focus on refs and what coaches publicly have said about the ref.  After the match certain connected media people will say and write things that highlight the reffing issues.  I doubt they do it off their own back.  Maybe I just see things differently.  Jodi Barrett red card is a case in point when the best NZ rugby minds in media aligned together to provide the info for the NZRU to get the red overturned.  Happens all the time it's just at arm's length.