Boks caught cheating

According to World Rugby's law 3 (k) it also appears the Boks may have been fortunate not to play the final stages with 14 men, following the decision to revert to uncontested scrums due to replacement Trevor Nyakane being listed as a loose-head prop and being forced to play on the other side.

The particular law states "when 23 players are nominated for a match, or if the Union having jurisdiction over a match or a match organiser decides that where uncontested scrums are ordered as a result of there being no suitably trained and experienced front row replacement for any reason the team concerned shall not be entitled to replace the player whose departure caused uncontested scrums."

Essentially, with Koch leaving the field, it seems the Boks should not have been allowed to replace him.

 Hakwa
With respect I think your interpretation is wrong.  It would have applied if Nyakane was not a suitable replacement for Tight head.  He plays on both sides of the scrum  regularly - so he was a suitable replacement.    There was factually no reason for uncontested scrums in this case.  It was a balls-up made by the management and the referee.
I think it is dangerous to read part of rules and not the full rules.  Fact is that there was no real need for uncontested scrums in this case - since Nyakane was properly trained and equally capable of scrumming at tighthead as well as loosehead.  Matter of fact he was in Super 15 frequently switched even during games from Tighthead to loosehead and vice versa - so what was the problem with him causing uncontested scrums?   Nothing I am afraid. 
      

Uhmmmmm, fishing again, Hakwa?
Yes, you are correct. We should indeed have been a man down but that is not to say that it was the Boks who were cheating. However, I am sure that you do know that. 
Having said that....... Remember the game where the All Blacks brought on a player that was "accidently" not even on the team sheet? De Villiers, being the gentleman, agreed on-field that the game could carry on with the player in question.
Splinter............... log.............eye.

Hakwa: this is becoming embarrassing for our Bok friends. I hope the Boks team members & coaches finally read the laws with understanding & that they decide to follow said laws.
JW looking out for the interests of the no. 2 team

 Then again, Hakwa, had the ref not decided to call for uncontested scrums, this would not have been the case. 

ou hacked waaaugh at lesst gave it a try feeble though it was! Its embsrassing being a kbbs. Hacked best lie low and try not to attract attention. Be sure never to.listen to a word brycy lawrence says. He is so benr he is circular! BWHAHAHAHA.

 Hakwa seems to be very silent about McCaws try. Or is this an attempt to direct the lightning away from that little incident?

reading over the laws and what happened on gameday, the fault of the uncontested scrums lies squarely with the Boks.

Boks had only nominated koch as the tighthead replacement, meaning that officially there was only two players in the Boks match day 23 capable of playing tighthead.

the ref had no choice what so ever but to go to uncontested scrums.

my interpretation is, had the Boks said from the beginning that nyakane could play tighthead, the ref wouldnt have been forced to make the only call he could???

and as hakwa rightly pointed out, the Boks were not allowed to field 15 players, they were not entitled a replacement.

there was also the lineout incident in the first half where pienaar stopped a quick throw opportunity to the All Blacks by slapping the ball out of the hands of read (i think it was).
that should have been a yellow card and had it been one of the regular refs in the spXV, IMO it would have been.

Boks were very lucky the refs helped keep the floodgates closed,

Ceradyne: here is the proof that McCaw's try was legal. Hakwa was silent because he is a good sport
McCaw try legal

 Well done Hakwa on exposing more Bok blatant cheating.I don't know how Hasbeeno can live with himself. This info is devastating to his cause...

 According to the Law you cannot have a 3rd designated tighthead – if you lose two tighthead props (or 2 loosehead props) it is automatic golden oldies scrums. The Law says a prop is not allowed to swap sides because on the TeamSheet he has a certain number.

Cloudy bringing a calm and feminine resolution to the school girls crying in the play ground.Thanks.  

No man Hakwa!!!! This is a Beeno type post! Beans, this is the kind of post you get in response to your one sided views! Now our NZ posters are of the opinion that we all think like you! 

"According to the Law you cannot have a 3rd designated tighthead – if you lose two tighthead props (or 2 loosehead props) it is automatic golden oldies scrums. The Law says a prop is not allowed to swap sides because on the TeamSheet he has a certain number."NagWa,  now which law would that be? The same fictional laws McCaw plays to and Brycie officiate? 

 Its good tosee wee mcheat getting flack. Hahahahahaahhahahaha
Blue (sans the Bok) unfortunately many saffas are not able to think like me due to inherent limitations!  

Hacked waaugh has tried to deflect criticism but failed dismally along with his kbbs cohorts.
The wee abs are a disgrace to world rugby. Away with them!! 

Beanhead your bleating is only reinforcing the fact that you need to catch up to current Laws of the Game. You cannot pick and chose only the ones that suit you .

 Hacked waaugh its compulsory for you to read Dr Brendan Venters article re wee abs cheating.Its game set and match really.Away with wee mcheat and his fellow cheaters. Ban the blighters I say! Yes the whole rotten team.  Ban their refs as well!!!!!!!!!!!! Finally ban their fans as their ignorance is legendary 
That should sort matters!

 moolaa

Status: Bok regular
Posts: 955 RE: Boks caught cheating
July 29, 2015, 12:23:39

 Well done Hakwa on exposing more Bok blatant cheating.

I don't know how Hasbeeno can live with himself. This info is devastating to his cause...