Dear World Rugby... You Can't Hide The Truth!

You will recall our fair weather Bok supporter  have a meltdown when Rassie's video of over 40 ref errors was leaked on You Tube. Oh the trauma these little darlings went through. How can you be defending the Boks against a crooked/incompetent ref they wailed. somebody may call us whingers Sob!

 But take a look at this some hypocritical coaches are unmasked. Bwahahhahahahahahaha its hilarious. These heroes of the anti Rassie brigade go up in smoke!

Take a look at the comments re the above clip. Clearly soe people are a lot saner that the misfits here!

I don't understand why people are saying Rassie has crossed the line. Why are players and coaches not allowed to call out bad decisions (in their views) after the game? I agree we should respect refs... on the field, but when the final whistle has blown and he has stuffed up, call him out on it.

World Rugby was quick to refer to Rassie and frame him, but that was their way of avoiding accountability after years of protecting bad and unprofessional refs that were openly biest to specific teams at critical times in the last minutes of the game or where bonus points were at stake!! Every journalist that understands, nails World Rugby and the unprofessional ref's in all rugby games

Are people really prepared to accept inconsistent officiating in a professional sport in 2022 , under the pretext of respecting the game? Referees can be forgiven for missing things on the field, to be fair the rules are just too much, but TMO with a benefit of replays, multiple angles,etc misses things, it’s inexcusable. .. WR needs to empower the refs so that they can have better games, and there will be less talk about them after the match..

Referees are human and they like all people make mistakes.    The fact is that when anybody makes a mistake it is normally regarded as a human error that should not become the norm.    There are also clear evidence that northern hemisphere referees interpret the laws differently from Southern Hemisphere referees do.

Take a simple example - the case of Malherbe being penalized in a scrum in the England test.    In the relevent case the English team was going backwards and the English prop concerned ended up flat on his stomach taking the scrum down.    So Malherbe was blamed for the scrum collapse and that was a farce.    Obviously one of our posters  agreed with the referee - not based on fact - but on prejudice.

I also think that in some cases World Rugby did deal with some cases where obvious wrong decisions were taken and the referees was banned for short periods of time.   Roman Poite made a complete hash of a test between the AB's and the Springboks went on holiday for three months and came back a better referee being used in the 2019 WC referee panel.   In that case the outcome for the referee evaluation after a match became public notice - in most cases any evaluation is kept secret by World Rugby and no obvious actions against errors made by referees in matches are ever released and became public.    Take another example - Lawrence was the referee in the Aussie - Springboks match in the 2011 WC.  After the match he was placed on ice by what is now World Rugby - but afterwards rewarded and made the head of referee training in New Zealand. 

Should referees be regarded as a protected species and not be subject to methods  applied in all other careers and dealt with in secret afterwards and should obvious mistakes be allowed and any exposure be treated as a offence against the game?    The World Rugby apporach should eb different - World Rugby should be transparent and indicate what was wrong in the games and indicate what measures were taken to avoid a repeat of mistakes by referees.    The Poite case I refer to was dealt with correctly - afterwards it became a farce.

The Erasmus case was typical examples swallowed by Erasmus' pet hate opponents on site and is regraded by them as a means to attack Erasmus, but then they are desperate to find reasons to try and discredit Erasmus as a person and as the Director of Rugby in SA.   Take for instance Mozart - when I stated in a thread that he never once criticized Meyer in the four disastrous years he was the Springbok coach - he came up with one case where he mildly criticized Meyer as coach.    Compare that with his must be over a thousand postings he made since 2018 attacking Erasmus.

Mike all one asks for is a little honesty. Is that too much to ask for I say with tears in my eyes Hahahahahaha

Mike all one asks for is a little honesty. Is that too much to ask for I say with tears in my eyes Hahahahahaha

...because i know someone will say something.

" />

The Boks have had a tremendous amount of forward passes uncalled since last year. I can think of a few that were game changers. It all makes a mockery of Erasmus' little game. Were this 2011, he would have far more support. 

I don't think that Rassie only has a problem with the calls that go against the Boks.

It's probably more that, as director of rugby, he can only speak on what affects SA.

If you were to ask him, I'm sure he'd say that he wants better calls across the board. Same as I do.

Posted during the match:

Hall Of Fame

36973 posts

Of course if Harrassmiss reviewed the try he would have said Arendse obstructed Stewart and both passes were forward.

Here’s are the two points I’d make:

1 The implication of all Harrassmiss’ utterances is that the Boks were unfairly treated.

2 Refs aren’t a protected class, but I believe 99% of the time they are trying their best to call the game right…..and there are no better refs out there. So we have to either accept the status quo as providing a reasonable compromise, vastly simplify the rules which will change the game or subject ourselves to endless reviews and corrections which would make the game a series of brief bursts, almost like American football.

Yes there is some software we could provide TMOs which could improve some aspects with regard to offsides and forward passes. But most decisions remain in the area of judgement.

If we think about big calls that affected WCs I can only recall 2, the French forward pass and the JdV forward pass call in 2011. A pretty small crop.

This whole issue with Ronaldo "touching" the ball has really been interesting due to the detailed information and focus that has come out regarding the ball itself.

We know this technology has been around for a long time already, but I did not know that the sensor in the ball can read any of the ball's activity, by up to 500 instances / variations per second....

Wow, that is impressive

I don't see how that can not be utilized to some degree, in rugby.

Check this crazy pic of the balls being charged like cellphones before a match 

World Cup Balls

That's impressive.....the sensor will most probably have to be adapted for the oval Rugby ball but it can help especially with Forward Passes.

Yep, I agree

I saw that Eddie Jones and Gatlin moans to the media. The only difference, it is during a press conference that can easily be wiped our edited out. Once you post it on social media, it is pretty hard to get rid of. It also has a way bigger reach and it can reach people phones. So it exposes refs far more. It is also easier for fans to contact refs directly to give them an an ear full. 

However, the world has gotten so woke that words are now violence and there is simply not enough safe spaces for these snowflakes. 

Bobby Skinstad made an interesting comment over the weekend, stating that World Rugby should copy what they do in the NFL, separate the two from each other and let the refs govern themselves. Then if things go wrong then the refs had to take responsibility where as today, World Rugby is in charge of the refs and tell them what to do. So rather allow the refs to create the frame work and work with the players, decouple the two and we could see better results. 

I definitely agree that test matches should have technology, but there is a massive cost associated with this. I don't think half the world rugby clubs or leagues can afford to use these. It is mainly to do with the licensing model and you could like at min $100k and it goes into the millions. Can see a cash strap league forking out $5 million for some technology. 

That said, well placed cameras and good AI can be trained to facilitate a lot of calls. 

But I still come back to the fact that the ruck area is a mess, the scrum is a mess and take way to long. 

One good point Eddie did make is that rugby is a game of many contest, but these days the ruck and scrum have become very hard to compete. The line out is probably the only mini contest still left in the game. 

Take for example the scrum. The only advantage a team use to have is the call of when the scrum is fed. The rest was down to Hooker and the entire unit. These days it takes so long and props trying to milk penalties. This whole touch, pause, engage is a load of bull. What they should do is just get the front row to lock in first, then the locks and followed by the back row. However, Props love the hit like buffalos and smash the other player, but with player safety and the size of these guys, it is no longer safe. So why not lock in, and the best scrummager should win the ball. 

I also think that the ruck is a problem area, how many people come in from the side, join the ruck at the wrong angel, some support players look like they are at a rodeo, straddling the ball carrier. 

I would say, not hands in the ruck at all unless you are either the tackler or tackled whereby you have to jump onto your feet before you can play the ball. I want to see proper rucking. Not big blokes building a wall over the player on the ground. Some player that has their hands on the ground and then just end up laying on top of another player. 

So now with the defence of incompetent/ biased refs in shreds they anti Rassie brigade try another ploy. Oh they say bad call happen to sides that play against the Boks. Of course they are all a bit to dumb to understand they are simply making my point.

But overall it seems these refs like to pick on the Boks. Anyhow a hearty congrats to Rassie for opening this can of worms and forcing the ref blunder deniers to admit there are big problems 

 Bwahahahhahahahahahahahaha Yes I am sure Rassie would be allowed to comment on calls made that went against England. More embarrassment for the Rassie bashers! But how absurd to suggest that only Rassie has criticism of refs. Look at that clip regarding Old Eddie Jones making an ass of himself. Its hilarious really but shows how bent the anti Rassie brigade are.

The refs like to pick on the Boks ….ag shame, no man. You have to love it when these Oaks play it right out of Woke playbook. Harrassmiss the victim….hahaha. Well it doesn’t seem to have put him off his food.

When you win say little, when you lose say less.

Rassie's childish & a poor loser with his one-eyed videos.

I agree, he should have done things differently. 

My one mate was worse than Rassie on overseas refs especially in the Super rugby era.

He reckons Barnes is fine though. So if we not gonna get any ref  better than Barnes then we going have to play a more running game. 

That's the new trend that has been rising for time now: victimizers enjoying painting themselves as victims.

SA rugby have been the beneficiary recipients of many doubtful calls. That gave them three WCs.

Nevertheless, they are the most vocal about being supposedly screwed.

Victimhood is very high among SA rugby.

Bitterbal Trad... totally missing the irony here...Foeitog.

What irony. SA rugby players are regularly less punished than every other player for offenses.

Last example could be the red card against FR. Guy got a lighter punishment than other players involved in red card incidents.

Better, the action itself was worth two red cards (SA rugby n 12 should have got one too) while the number 8 was also guilty of a yellow card offense (pushing a team mate before contact with the consequence that followed)

Ref turned a blind eye to two cards.

Yet SA rugby perceived themselves as persecuted.

Nothing surprising, though, mentality comes from deny of justice that has come with the end of the Apartheid. When one could clear oneself by simply confessing atrocious actions, consequences followed.

Yes I am sure Rassie would be allowed to comment on calls made that went against England.

Probably not.

The situation is different from any other union when one person sometimes goes railing against reffing.

The SA rugby attitude is a strategy that involves people at all levels: players, directors of rugby, head coaches, players' wives etc

It is a concerted effort that can not be passed as one venting one's frustration at the end of a game.

The question comes from the lack of reactions from other unions. They could also take the same path. In fact, they should if indeed the refs are biased in their favour.

These days, pointing out that somehow the victimized side (here supposedly SA rugby ) has benefited from ref mistakes or things is enough to dismiss the whole claim about victimization.

Classical trick these days and this would allow other unions to secure the favourable bias.

Yet nothing comes from the other unions. It could be because they were never screwed against SA rugby and therefore have nothing to provide.

Or it could be that they refrain themselves from doing so.

Of course, the latter is the answer.

SA rugby have understood other unions' concerns about the future of SA rugby, and their determination to avoid at all costs the unavoidable termination of SA rugby.

SA rugby keep using it to their advantage: they know they can hit other unions without fearing of painful retaliation since any meaningful retaliation would speed up the termination of rugby in SA.

SA rugby is like a special kid who understood that people do not want to go hard against a special kid and keeps abusing his condition to harass the said people.

Generally, when such a situation arises, when all the levels of a structure work in a certain way, financial penalties are applied. No financial penalties have been applied to SA rugby, no fines, nothing.