FIXTURESNo upcoming fixtures — check back soon.
FORUM / RUGBY /  Some humour from the gospel of Judas aka Mark Treason

Some humour from the gospel of Judas aka Mark Treason

Started by What's going on?10 REPLIES366 VIEWS· 18 Sept 2013, 01:58
SHAREXFACEBOOKWHATSAPPTELEGRAMREDDITLINKEDIN
WG
What's going on?Club Pro237 posts
18 Sept 2013, 01:58
#1
18 Sept 2013, 01:58#1

Brother Bueno your favourite Kiwi journo Mark Reason's back to massage a few delicate egos...

Springboks too nice for their own good

OPINION: It hasn't always been so, but South Africa's sportsmanship over the past decade is a remarkable phenomenon in the cynical world of professional sport. The Springboks players and management very rarely criticise refs, they have been known to apologise for violent play and their graciousness in defeat is a lesson to us all. But, with head in hands, I do wonder if this decency is hurting their chances.

 

A number of instances arose from Saturday's test between the All Blacks and the Springboks which suggest that the method of smooth diplomacy, so successful at the 2007 World Cup, may no longer be playing out so well. Too often are the Springboks finishing on the wrong end of poor refereeing. It cost them their place at the last World Cup and it might have just cost them this year's Rugby Championship.

The All Blacks are a very different beast. They let the referee know when sinned against, a tradition most famously marked by Andy Haden's infamous leap out of the lineout in Cardiff in 1978. Over the years the All Blacks have been serial communicators with the ref. This is not criticism - that really would be the pot calling the kettle black, hush my mouth on a Saturday afternoon - but an observation.

 

There can be little doubt that New Zealand greatly contributed to Bismarck du Plessis' sending off and that Springboks captain Jean de Villiers did little to save him. When Dan Carter went down in a heap from du Plessis' entirely legal tackle, the All Blacks waded in. This inflamed the situation, inflamed the crowd and must have had a subconscious influence on the referee.

 

In the aftermath Romain Poite got his question hopelessly wrong of the TMO. The Frenchman requested, "I have a decision, but check if there was any foul play afterwards."

Skipper de Villiers politely enquired what was wrong with the tackle.

"No arms," said All Blacks captain Kieran Read, quite wrongly.

"High and shoulder and no arms," added Poite.

 

As we all now know, not least from Carter's very decent public statement, Poite was talking tripe, a dish of which the French are particularly fond. But an All Blacks captain in the same situation would have pleaded for him to check the video footage and the ref would have complied.

But we never saw the most conclusive angle until du Plessis had been shown the yellow card. We didn't see it, because Poite had not requested to see the tackle again, just the ensuing brawl. TMO George Ayoub did not adjudicate on the tackle because he hadn't been asked to.

 

After the match coach Heyneke Meyer said, "We don't have any excuses, we wanted it to be a spectacle... I truly believe that guys are well educated so we've got a saying that the ref is always right."

This is the modern Springbok way. Excepting the erratic Peter de Villiers, it has become part of their rugby culture. Jake White was supremely gracious after the Brumbies lost the Super 15 final. Meyer, you may remember, publicly apologised for Dean Greyling's wretched forearm smash on McCaw last year.

 

And Jean de Villiers said after this latest defeat, "We've seen how far we are behind the All Blacks. They are a fantastic team and we can still learn a lot from them. Defensively we were very poor."

The Springboks forwards may have wondered about their captain's words. South Africa's back three was appalling. Bryan Habana made a costly kicking mistake, Zane Kirchner couldn't catch the ball and Willie le Roux's positional naivety was constantly exposed by New Zealand's clever kicking. But the forwards were smashing New Zealand at the breakdown and winning the set piece battle. They know the loss of du Plessis decided the match.

The hooker was outstanding while he was on the pitch and for the 35 minutes when there was parity in numbers the score was 10-10. For the 40 minutes the All Blacks had an extra man, the score was 19-0. And the Springboks won the five minutes when they were a man up 5-0.

The second yellow card and sending off of du Plessis was crucial and again it was unsatisfactory. For a start the IRB needs to address this area because nothing in the current laws regarding foul play satisfactorily defines the fend.

 

Steve Hansen said, in sour contrast to South Africa's post match dignity, "I don't think it's legal putting your elbow in someone's throat. The second one may have been a red."

This is drivel and may well be designed to defuse any sympathy ahead of the re-match in South Africa. Du Plessis may have been reckless, but he was turning away, almost stationary and had his eyes shut when he made contact with Liam Messam's neck.

I found three similar instances later in the half. One was by Owen Franks, off the ball and ahead of play, on Eben Etzebeth, and contributed to Read's second try. One was by Charles Piutau on Jean de Villiers and the final one was by replacement Jan Serfontein.

 

The Piutau incident was very similar to du Plessis'. The difference was that de Villiers did not reel away clutching his throat and go down in a heap. I am not saying Messam was play-acting. I am saying the reaction of the player influenced the assistant referee who was decidedly late in signalling any concern.

South Africa may well ponder that in both instances the reaction of the All Blacks exacerbated the situation. They may well ponder that their dignity is not leading to a fair hearing. Sad to say, sportsmanship rarely pays off in the win column.

- © Fairfax NZ News

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Sept 2013, 02:12
#2
18 Sept 2013, 02:12#2
Read was lying about the tackle - if that was what he said to the referee. He should be ashamed of himself in that event. If that is the kind of conduct that we can expect from an All Black captain it shows a level of conduct which does not befit any sportsman. But maybe the Hamburger Thief encourages that type of thing
MO
MozartCaptain49,914 posts
18 Sept 2013, 02:16
#3
18 Sept 2013, 02:16#3
A nicely "reasoned" piece
HA
hakwaPro4,146 posts
18 Sept 2013, 02:17
#4
18 Sept 2013, 02:17#4

you're not stooping to name calling now are you Mike? That's not very nice - infact that's not very clever!

CL
clevermikeCoach57,555 posts
18 Sept 2013, 02:50
#5
18 Sept 2013, 02:50#5
Sorry Hakwa I apologize. I took a resolution this morning to be nice to posters - even to Mozart - and treat all of you him with respect. And what did I do - I broke my resolution and the old Mike was back. Sorry again if I hurt your feelings.
BO
bobbok...Captain10,129 posts
18 Sept 2013, 03:09
#6
18 Sept 2013, 03:09#6

Mark Reason's a pom, son of Chris Reason also a sports jounalist .

OI
oimateyPro1,870 posts
18 Sept 2013, 05:30
#7
18 Sept 2013, 05:30#7

Yea - he's spot on about that second card. I reckon nine times out of ten Messam takes that contact and finishes the tackle as if nothing happened, but it caught him wrong, obviously stunned him and his reaction is what caught the refs attention. There didn't seem to be any intent in Bissies action that I saw. 

 

 

 

JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
18 Sept 2013, 09:03
#8
18 Sept 2013, 09:03#8

 IMO Meyer and his captain de Villiers are role models - old school. This is how we were brought up in NZ. In truth though there is a part missing in this article.

We were also taught to play hard - full force. That the first hit on your opposite number should set the tone, ie intimidate him. We were out to win the game any way we could (but within the rules). Our games were wars (we were only school boys but that is how it felt).

But if someone was hurt we were always supportive (regardless of if he was on the other team) we would help him up and even help him off the field if necesssary. We would  clap with enthusiasm if he got up to continue or if he was off the field due to injury.

Although the games were hard we always felt good about the opposition and it was handshakes, laughs and slaps on the back all around. No gripes  about what happened on the field. We partied with the oppostion afterwards and man some of those parties were fantastic. Some I don't remember of course, lol

So I like the old school way Meyer and de villers conduct themselves but that does not mean that they are not tough as hell & will do almost anything to win a game. De Villers also tries to" manage the ref" as all good captains do. Small comments and questions which are designed to make the ref think and get any small advantage he can. The same as McCaw and Read. Let's not be niave about that.

So, I admire Meyer and de Villers in the way they conduct themselves but there is also the other side of the story. IMO it is the same as it was when  I was a school boy and it is part of the rugby I know.

CL
CleanCutPro9,905 posts
18 Sept 2013, 10:10
#9
18 Sept 2013, 10:10#9

 

So in other words ... Read was looking for an advantage ... he went out of his way to encourage the yellow card ... whether it was justified or not didn't matter. 

 

It was never about the contest ... but all about the win. 

 

He obviously noted that the Bokke were cleaning up at the set piece and something had to be done asap ... cause if the Bokke suddenly settled into a rhythm, all hell would break loose ... especially with a blistering Bismark upsetting the apple cart as well as he did ... he saw his opportunity and took it ... clever man.. 

 

Thanks for that Just_Win ... your explanation is spot on. Could not have said it better.

 

Setting honour and decency aside for the win somehow doesn't quite sit right with me. There is more to it than winning at any cost. I guess I'm also old school. I much prefer to rejoice and celebrate a win with heart felt enthusiasm, than going through the farce of a subdued celebration, knowing full well, in the back of my mind that it wasn't really a win ... no matter what it said on the score board.

 

I hope we never learn to play the game like that. I hope it will always be about the contest for us. Where it's us against them. Where our focus is to beat the other team on the field, playing rugby ... and not to develop a special skill at manipulating the ref so that he can win the game for us.

 

 .

JW
Just_winCaptain18,570 posts
18 Sept 2013, 10:44
#10
18 Sept 2013, 10:44#10

CleanCut: looks like I have given you something to be excited about.

In fact if you read what I wrote I was not referring to the comment Read made to the ref on the Bismarck tackle on Carter. I was making a general comment on how captains (including de villers) try and manage the ref. On that particular comment, who knows why he said it - he is a very decent guy. My guess is he believed what he said. It was the heat of the moment over in seconds and both teams were hot. So, no, my guess is he was not "manipulating the ref" but we can only guess as to his motivation.

In my day the captain hardly said a word to the ref. Usually the ref would just talk to the captain asking him to make sure his team did this or that.

What about the rest of my post? How was it when you were a school boy? I can't beleive you didn't go all out (within the rules) to win & surely there was respect for the opposition. Honor, of course there was!

NT
ntangaClub Pro336 posts
18 Sept 2013, 11:34
#11
18 Sept 2013, 11:34#11
Great post, this guy is very good. Well....
— END OF THREAD —

More from Rugby

More news