Are Kiwi refs ever gona learn??

The funny part is that penalty against Rhodes which put  the Crusaders in the lead in the Stormers game.  Rhodes was onside and only moved forward when the ball was already in the hands of the scrummy and he was passing.   A player is not off-side at that stage if he moved forward.   However, if Rhodes was off-side by centimeters fine - but 5 minutes later - when the Stormers was attacking near the Crusaders line - Todd was meters off-side and he was not blown up.   Then followed a scrum virtually under the post.   The Crusader prop took the scrum down twice and the ref moved over to the other side.   When the same thing happened again - also the fault of the Crusders prop - he penalized the Stormers - all to save the Crusaders from defeat,  
That was the shenanigans of Jackson the line judge  - he called Rhodes off-side - but did not call Todd off-side.  He should have called that the Crusader prop was taking down the scrum - but he did not.   
The story was save the Crusaders from a certain loss at all counts - and they have achieved their objective.   Bloody poor show.       

Gee whizz you guys are sooks ,ref this ref that dont hear anything when it goes the other way !

 the Stormers were doing the offside banana bend defense ALL night long - it finally caught up with them. I thought the Guilty Stormers player was part of the Crusaders backline - he was that far offside.
Put your other eye in Mike and Boklogic and things will be much clearer 
I would blame the Stormers loss on that almost certain try that they botched on Daggs wing. 

Quite so bok log and Mike. Every year its the same old crooking by the kiwi refs. Why SARFU put up with this rubbish only they know.Worse still is they make a guy like bryce lawrence their ref of the year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!It boggles the mind how shameless they are. 'Oh that the kbbs would repent. Given a fair ref they would seldom win a match methinks. Certainly the stats at Super 15 and International level would look vastly diferrent and there would be no world cup etc etc etc etc etc.

 Y ou have to be a real warped DUD not to see it. 

@mikey,

i noticed u made the same arguments on another thread (original comment) and here is what u said which in my usual trademark have highlighted in bold and responded to underneath.
i will give u the benefit of the doubt and say u just genuinely didnt see my response hence ur zero reply on the original thread which i have provided a link for,

"In one case the ruled Rhodes off-side and Taylor converted the penalty tot take the Crusaders into the lead"
there was nothing wrong with that penalty. rhodes was standing a half meter in front of the last stormers foot in the ruck.
at no stage was rhodes ever onside.

"Five minutes later - while the Stormers were attacking in the Crusaders 22 - Todd was off-side and he was not penalized."
we might need a time stamp from the games clock to know what incident ur talking about, cos after taylor nailed the penalty, there was only one time where matt todd was involved while the stormers were on attack in the crusaders 22, and he wasnt offside. u can find that in the at 78:12 - 78:16.

incase u were referring to todd being penalised at another time, a time stamp would be helpful, as i watched matt todd only 4 different times after taylor landed the penalty to take the lead, and he was never once off side.

"Minutes later the Stormers were 5 meters out - a scrum was formed and the Crusaders twice took it down.  The third time they did - the ref rewarded them with a penalty so as to save the game for the Crusaders."
u definitely got this one wrong, there was not one scrum awarded to either the crusaders or stormers after the penalty which taylor converted.
therefore its impossible for anything u have said to have happened.

 when are you boks fans gonna learn to copp a loss on the chin, and stop confusing your team sucking, for the ref sucking. You really have to get over this whole lawarence thing, one mistake in the wc semi is not the reason you lost.
 You lost because your execution was poor for most of that semi, tbh if boks were better team from the kick off, you wouldent nees to use the ref as an excuse, even if it was justified, you would be up by 100 points by then, but alas boks couldent pass or catch to save their life in that match . Im not saying lawarence diddnt screw up, refs do all the time, but it seems to me bloggers are really cynical, and you constantly blame the ref any chance you get, all it is convinience. Nz refs are great refs, one bad call in a semi btw even if boks did win no guarentee they would of beat the abs at home cos that performance agsingst aussie, no team on the planet would of beat them that night. Point is doesent make bryce lawarence or any kiwi ref a bad ref, you just need to learn to suck it up and move on. Same with saders and stormers blaming the ref, same sorta thing happened againgst canes, did canea blame ref? No their luck just ran out, just like stormers did.

 Looks like you've been caught bullshitting AGAIN Mikey.....and take another look at the Rhodes incident; he was never behind the hindmost foot in the ruck...or do you not know the rules??

 Far out sill whining about Lawrence ??? If Morning Stain had done the ONE thing he;s supposedly good at and kicked his penalties maybe you wouldnt be still whining about it ,but then again I guess not ! And beandork saying " methinks " doesnt make you sound knowledgeable or add gravitas to your squawking ,only pretentiousness oozes from that word .......I think .

Correct on both counts, Wardad.

This continued bleating about refs is nothing short of embarrassing for real SA rugby supporters and as for the use of the word "methinks", that is just plain cringeworthy.

Hmmm, the fact of the matter is that refs have cost the Boks and South African sides many games. In case you hadn't realized, corruption, match-fixing, is illegal and we've seen it at the highest levels of the game! That's not something to moan amount, it's something to start arresting people for. It's the mark of the coward who will sit back and say nothing because he waits for a pat on the head for being a good boy. I personally wasn't brought up with a tail between my legs and I won't shut-up about it either. The sport is infested with corruption, end of damn story. And for once, even ex-All Blacks are talking about it!

Which ex- All Blacks have said such things Sun? 

 Are you actually accusing some nz players of cheating or match fixing? Lol thats my point cynism at its finest, moanings one thung but to be so ardent, biast, and arrogant enough to try and justify nz refs are corrupt lol please. Abs dont always win, and you may get a few ref sucked, but not to the level of some bloggers here.

We were brought up not to slink around with a tail between our legs also but we were also brought up to appreciate that we had two balls between our legs. Stop the winging about refs & congratulate teams that win. Most kiwis on this site do this, just check the blogs & you will see this is the case.

 Alutw . . . sorry, I mean Sun Tzwat . . . first off, do these recent replies from you to me mean that you're retracting your previous tearful and weak-arsed promise to ignore me on this forum?

Secondly, you may not have been brought up with a tail between your legs but you certainly don't have a pair of balls there either.

I know you're trying very hard to sound like some kind of tough guy but please note that to everyone else, you come across as snivelling little crybaby. I mean that in the nicest possible way.

Sasue 
There was a scrum awarded to the Stormers in the last minutes of the match - virtually under the Crusader posts.  The Scrum was taken down twice by the Crusader prop and then the ref moved around to the other side of the scrum.   It was taken down again by the Crusader prop and that is when a penalty was awarded to the crusaders.
Rhodes moved forward - as he was entitled to - after the ball was in the hands of the scrummie and the latter was in the process of passing the ball after the maul. Legally a player may start the move forward when the scrummie has the ball in hand, But the law was not applied correctly in this case
Todd never was behind the feet of the last player in the maul and standing beside the maul - so he was off-side all along.   Take a careful look at the position Todd took up and you will see why he should have been a penaltized in the first instance the moment he moved forward from where he was.   

Ou Maaik, I can't recall your other two instances (and I'm not sure how you can know which prop caused the scrum to collapse) but I can tell you that Michael Rhodes was clearly offside and that was definitely a correct decision.

 Rooinek 
I expressed my doubts about the off-side issue because  Rhodes was behind the last legs of the players in the rug and only moved forward when the ball was in the hands of the scrummie - so it remains a debatacle point whether he really was off-side.
The last two incidents both happened in the final two minutes of the game.
The scrum saga went as follows - a scrum was awarded to the Storners to put in the ball.  The ref was on the opposite side of the scrum from where the scrummie was to put in the ball.   The scrum collapsed twice - reason the Crusader player lost hois frip and leant with his right hand on the grass before the collapses.  That should have been penalized right away - but it was not.    The ref than moved  around to the side where the scrummie was trying to put the ball in - and the scrum collapsed again - also because of an infaction of the Crusader prop who was flat down on his face when the ref awarded a penalty to the Crusaders.   In this case the penalty should have gone to the attacking side - on three different occasions - but it was not - and the Crusaders was saved from certain defeat as a result.  
     
 

@mikey,

"There was a scrum awarded to the Stormers in the last minutes of the match - virtually under the Crusader posts.  The Scrum was taken down twice by the Crusader prop and then the ref moved around to the other side of the scrum.   It was taken down again by the Crusader prop and that is when a penalty was awarded to the crusaders."
mike, im telling u bro, there was not one single scrum after tom taylor kicked the penlaty which gave the crusaders the lead.

ive watched it from when taylor converted the penalty, to the final whistle and there isnt one single scrum to either the crussaders or the stormers.
i checked it 5 times yesterday and then again after i read ur reply.

if u watch the game again, u should give me a time stamp of when this scrum took place, cos i am adamant there was not one scrum after the last penalty kick from taylor.

"Rhodes moved forward - as he was entitled to - after the ball was in the hands of the scrummie and the latter was in the process of passing the ball after the maul. Legally a player may start the move forward when the scrummie has the ball in hand, But the law was not applied correctly in this case"
what the officials correctly ruled though, was that rhodes was never onside. he was never behind the last hind foot.
IMO this can be clearly seen at 73:43 where rhodes is infront of the last stormers player.

each to their own though, but given that u saw imaginary scrums ion the last couple of minutes of the game, would it be too out of line to say ur opinion on visual judgment might not be the most reliable???

"Todd never was behind the feet of the last player in the maul and standing beside the maul - so he was off-side all along.   Take a careful look at the position Todd took up and you will see why he should have been a penaltized in the first instance the moment he moved forward from where he was."
u should really time stamp the example u mentioned for better clarification/verification.

the only rolling maul i can think that ur talking about is the one which happened from the stormers lineout at 76:06.

as the stormers work it up to the 22, the rolling maul collapses before the 22 at 76:36 which is when deon fourie picks up the ball and runs into keiran read.

todd who is next to read can be seen rushing forward, but the only problem is the camera angle dosent provide definitive evidence to support ur claims.

what u can see before read tackles fourie, is todds foot right on the side of the camera leap forward from behind the crusaders 22 which makes ur argument about todd ebing off side wrong.

if this ios not the maul ur tlaking about, then by all means tell me which maul ur talking about and add the in game time to make verifying the incident ur talkin g about much easier.
ive time framed most my incidents for that very purpose,

 Sasue - how come a penalty was awarded to the All Blacks five meters out and they kicked for touch - and the ball was thrown in by the AB'd - won and kicked out of play to end the game.  Why was that penalty awarded?

Get over it saders wan, it doesent mattrr how or why you wan, at the end of the day winnings winning. As Dom said haha "it doesent matter if you win by an inch or a mile, winnings winning". Clearly refs can contribute to end results, but the fact your still harping on a result for a game that endes three years ago, and forever using that as a point of reference to why all nz refs suck. Their doesent seem to be any form of reason or constructiveness in your posts, you seem to think its a prooven fact, when its opinion not fact. In reality if the boks were the better team, Bryce doing what ever he did, wouldent of mattered.Face it boks had 80 mins to win that game, and up to Bryce doing what ever he did, had several scoring oppurtunities to win, but their poor execution let them down not the ref. That bok side would of bn blown off the park in the semi, even if the ref was paid to make nz lose. You seem to think refs favor nz, yet if the boks wan, you would never say oh we only wan because the ref favored us would you haha. Sometimes the other team is just better, regardless of the refs performance, a team needs to be prepared for every possibility, the abs are just more prepared then anyone else right now, its as simple as that, consistently blaming the ref does not look good on your teams. As for rhodes he is offside, and its already being said nz refs are not the only ones who make mistakes, theyre human after all, irish refs are the worst 

Well a few Bok supporters have said it's not the refs fault. But what about the rest of you, have they found what was lost? 

                                    
                  & the delusional dog said: "Has anyone seen my balls?"                               but they were nowhere to be seen 
I couldn't resist a second baiting of the hook, lol

 There you go ,a bok fan in the form of rooie with some perspective ! Every team since the year dot has had bad calls ,the Pharonic 15 vs Moses' Nile River Bad Boys had what Ramses reckoned was a bad call from the ref ! Sum stew you dont want to be tossing match fixing and all that crap at our boys when theres more likely to be dirt on SA officials ,gold watches ,holidays for WAyne Barnes etc .Just win that wee brown dog proving elusive or just his tail ?

wardad: looks like a small limp tail but who wants to look any closer, lol

 Too true bro ,nasssty ! 

 lol! Rhodes is definitely offside and in front of his own players hindmost feet at the centre-field ruck (132:35). Anyone with a modicum of integrity would concede that point. Also, the last scrum of the game was in the 66th minute (124:50) and Kitshoff collapsed the scrum under pressure right IN FRONT of the referee. 

@mikey,

"Sasue - how come a penalty was awarded to the All Blacks five meters out and they kicked for touch - and the ball was thrown in by the AB'd - won and kicked out of play to end the game.  Why was that penalty awarded?"

huh???

u might as well have asked me in afrikaan bro, cos i have no idea what All Black game ur talking about, o_O

Nukefree: that video also shows how fair the commentators were in that game. 
Good to hear because I am sick of Skinstadd's childish bias & cheap attempts to appeal to the Bok audience. Just fires up "it's the refs fault" crowd.

Who was the Kiwi twat of a ref who told Smit that he could talk to his players on their goal line & in the next instant allowed the Irish to play on resulting in an easy score & their winning of the game ? May all his fowls die .

 Wasn't a Kiwi ref! Nigel Owens me thinks!

@cloudzter,
i dont think so, but mikey will help shed some light on the matter soon, :oP

@blobbok,
paul honiss is the kiwi ref ur talking about who reffed two Bok/ireland test matches which Boks both lost, one in 2004 where the Boks lost 17-12 and in 2006 where the Boks were destroyed in a humiliating 32-15beatdown.

im assuming ur talking about the 2004 test match???

 Thanks sazuke.......... apart from Paul F@#$% Honiss I remember little of either game, humiliating defeats are rapidly expunged from my memory bank .

 Oops, sorry. Honiss it was, never thought that ballsup was also due to a Kewi. Always thought it was a Northern Hemisp here bloke. Ah well, shit happens. :-)

 Gentleman, please...Simmer down to a boil please..I just posted the news for all of you. No further accusations..Why feel the need to defend yourselves again?? Its just the news ;-)
It is however, no news to us anymore..No mate..Infact, this is the standard of ref we have become accustomed to..Lets face it...Fair and NZL do not mesh well...

 The ABs are a fair way ahead of the Boks. That "meshes" well.....

 Yeah doesent say much when you expect ppl too feel sory for you because of the apparent bad nz reffinf. Face it the abs hv bn kickinf bok behind for three years now, so blaming the ref is a natural reaction

 Lets see ....least corrupt nation on earth ....NZ in a tie with Denmark ! and where is SA ? 77th ! And I recall a SA ref running up to shake the Bok Captains hand after scoring a try ! " Oh well scored Keptin sir ! "  with lots of oicky handwringing ...eerk ! And not allowing a kick to be taken for the winning penalty as apparently 30 seconds was far too long ?? Swings and roundabouts ,glass houses and many other cliches and such .[ joubert and his fellow saffa refs have laid the ghosts of past nasty saffa refs of the "Its all right for you but I have to live here "variety !]Crikey saffa reffing used to be bloody crook if even the good Dr Craven himself expressed his disgust by saying the Boks neednt cheat to win ,just like the ABS and our S15 teams dont need help !