By Guy Smiley -
June 29th 2009 @ 7:00am
Get a Roar profile
Loading ...Related coverage
Boks v Lions left us all breathless
In the aftermath of this epic test match feelings are still running high, even 24 hours later. Most of them are deeply felt stirrings of pride from both Springbok fans and Lions fans. Both teams can hold up up their heads high and say we did everything we could.
But amidst the driftwood washing up when we sit back to remind ourselves of this wonderful example of combative, intense rugby there are a number of issues that merit further discussion.
1) This mattered. Every single player on that park was fully invested in that game. There were no passengers. It was a beautiful reminder of what a great game rugby can be.
2) How good did Loftus look and sound? The atmosphere on TV was sensational, well done to all those Lions fans who turned the bearpit into a home game and the home fans who, in every close up, were baying for blood. Passion exemplified. NZ or Australia could not do this.
3) What on earth was Bryce Lawrence up to? There have been a number of articles suggesting the referee was at fault for not sending off Burger but Christoph Berdos did not see the incident – it was entirely up to Lawrence as the officiating witness to recommend a red card. Alan Quinlan got 12 weeks for a similar, but lesser offence in the Heineken Cup semi-final after the fact – Schalk Burger was caught in the act and gets 10 minutes in the bin.
Granted he will be banned but the damage is done now. Sent off after 30 seconds and the Lions would have won, no question. It was a disgraceful, appalling non-decision by the Kiwi linesman and he should be severely censured – yes he said said ‘at least a yellow’ but that was weak – sorry, yellow of Lawrence not to take appropriate action. Coward.
4) O’Driscoll’s tackle on Danie Roussouw effectively ended the contest. Roussouw went off in a daze after just a minute but two key events followed. Firslty O’Driscoll himself went off, unable to shake off the shattering colllision himself. Secondly, and more importantly, it allowed Heinrich Brussow to enter the fray.
Brussow was the player required from the beginning not Russouw or Burger. This tackle killed the Lions’ hopes in one fell swoop as Brussow demonstrated a masterclass in ‘fetching’ – he was awesome and almost single handedly swung the game.
It also proved what a reckless idiot Pieter de Villiers is as a coach, requiring a moment of fate to correct his poor decision-making.
5) Carrying on from 4 – Pieter de Villiers could not coach a schools team. It is a tribute to Smit, Matield, et al, that they succeed despite their coach, and credit must go to Dick Muir and Gary Gold. Brussow had to start as did Fourie – once they were on, they were imperious, as they have always been.
To cap it all he then makes a comment about the eye-gouging being ‘part of the game’. Fool, coward, charlatan, call him what you will, but above all he is an embarrassment to rugby and to South Africa.
6) Morne Steyn came of age – calm, prodigiously talented and composed. Well done to the young man who proved himself in the cauldron under extreme pressure. Likewise Heinrich Brussow who turned the game around with expert and instinctive foraging, you couldn’t help but admire his skill and intuitive ability.
7) The glut of Lions’ injuries took the wind from their sails. To lose both props in a dominant scrum, and then both centres all within 10 minutes was too much to bear. That, and Burger’s non-red card gave the game away.
Despite all this the Boks played with wonderful brio once they worked it all out. That kind of self-confidence is worth it’s weight in gold and they worked it to their advantage ruthlessly.
9) After watching this game I have fallen in love with rugby all over again.
To all those warriors out there yesterday (except Burger, you cynical cheat), you were a credit to yourselves and the game.
Going to the Waratahs v Brumbies blockbuster at ANZ Stadium, Saturday 24 April? If you're keen to meet up with other Roarers, register you interest and we'll keep you informed on the place to meet. Register now.
Get Australia's best Rugby opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(18)
Andystath said | June 29th 2009 @ 3:08pm | Report comment
Good article Guy.The final statement couldn’t possible adhere to Bakkies Botha, the bloke represents everything that is wrong with SA rugby.
Hammer said | June 29th 2009 @ 3:41pm | Report comment
“What on earth was Bryce Lawrence up to? There have been a number of articles suggesting the referee was at fault for not sending off Burger but Christoph Berdos did not see the incident – it was entirely up to Lawrence as the officiating witness to recommend a red card …. Granted he will be banned but the damage is done now. Sent off after 30 seconds and the Lions would have won, no question. It was a disgraceful, appalling non-decision by the Kiwi linesman and he should be severely censured – yes he said said ‘at least a yellow’ but that was weak – sorry, yellow of Lawrence not to take appropriate action. Coward.”
Whoa there … before you head off down that track I think we need to know the protocol in these instances – i.e. is it incumbent on the touch judge to make such recommendations or are they only able to firstly report and then respond directly to questions asked by the ref – which from what I’ve seen on numerous occasions seems to be the case.
If that’s so then Lawrence can’t carry the can on this …. granted the ref was unsighted but Lawrence gave him a report of the incident after which the ref posed the question “Penalty or yellow-card” … given Lawrence’s response you could draw a conclusion he was surprised by that question …. Was he able to respond – “no, red card” – that’s what someone who has done his ref’s course needs to answer …
mind you given the video ref’s call in the NZ / Italy game – they’re definitely a law unto themselves so perhaps he should have just said Red …
USRugbyFan said | June 29th 2009 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
Maybe Lawrence or Berdos didn’t want the thing to be decided by handing out a red card in only the first minute of such an important game?
Jerry said | June 29th 2009 @ 3:54pm | Report comment
As regards the non-red for Burger – would Lions fans really want to win vs 14 men and forever wonder whether what would have happened if it was 15 v 15 for the final 70 minutes? A red card early on tends to ruin the spectacle entirely, unfortunately. Burger has been suspended and there was no permanent damage done – surely a win against 14 would be a bit hollow (given we now know that with 15 men on the pitch the Boks won).
Guy Smiley said | June 29th 2009 @ 4:22pm | Report comment
Jerry I reckon about 100% of Lions fans would quite happily take a win over 14 men, no problem whatsoever. The win mattered way more than how it would have been achieved (unless by foul play). It’s a bit naive to suggest the gentlemanly ethos inherent in rugby extends it’s generosity that far. As for permanent damage you can’t be serious – the game was undoubtedly lost on that one call.
Hammer – Berdos saw nothing and has English as a second language. It was Lawrence’s duty to be crystal clear. Eye-gouging is a mandatory red and the non-decision cost the Lions the game. Simple.
Jerry said | June 29th 2009 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
Yeah, it was won and lost on that call – but quite frankly if the only way the Lions could win was against 14 men then that’d a hollow victory in my book. You reckon 100% of Lions fans would happily take a 15 on 14 win – I reckon there’s a fair few Lions fans who’d want a win to be against the best the opposition have to offer.
Bad call aside, I reckon a match with 15 on 14 for 79 minutes would really take away from the occasion and spectacle.
Hammer said | June 29th 2009 @ 5:01pm | Report comment
Guy – my question was is it really that simple ?
Lawrence reported what he saw clearly to the referee and obviously he then responded within the scope of the question asked to him by the referee … what I’m asking is that all he is permitted to do – once Berdos asked “Penalty or yellow-card” is he bound to respond with a recommendation in that scope … and is that why Lawrence responded with “at least yellow” trying to hint it should be more … I’m speculating and until we get a ref on here to clarify I’m not prepared to hang Lawrence out to dry
If Berdos hasn’t got a grasp of English and couldn’t communicate clearly with his touch judges then his appointment needs to be questioned
True Tah said | June 29th 2009 @ 5:02pm | Report comment
I hope the ARU was watching this game and noting the time the game was played at, i.e. afternoons.
Re: Botha and his boneheaded play, well the Lions really needed to stand up to him, and one man did, shame Andrew Sheridan came on as a replacement, he is the man to sort out Botha, and should start next week.
Was a true test in every sense of the word, those players left nothing on the field, giving their all
IronAwe said | June 29th 2009 @ 5:26pm | Report comment
I am a true Southern Hemisphere fan. Never before last night have I barracked for the Lions. I love what they represent, and I love the history, but I am beginning to worry that maybe, like a few have mentioned, there is no room for them in the professional era? Last night I so badly wanted them to win I nearly cried when they lost. It would be so sad to lose something like the Lions. They havn’t won a series in so long, I really thought this year was their year. They seemed to have got everything spot on, except having two games at altitude, not sure if they had a say in this.
I guess at the end of the day though, the Lions proved they were more than competitive and it was a fantastic specticle, and as long as they can remain competitive and entertaining they will always have a place in world rugby.
What infuriated me about this tour was that every sports journo said they didn’t stand a chance against this Boks and that this was going to be a white wash, when their only proof of this seemed to be the example of the last Lions tour.
It is ridiculous to compare this tour against the last one. It’s a completely different team with completely different coaches and management, and if they had just bothered to look at the selected players and coaching staff objectively this year, and the preparation etc they would have known it was going to be a close series. Especially seeing as the Boks were playing together for the first time, and their coach is NO match for McGeechan.
katzilla said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:22pm | Report comment
Hold off a bit on Lawrence, its easy to throw stones when you have the benefit of hours of replay footage and various video angles.
But in the heat of the moment he would have seen Burgers Hand pass across the face, and the whole thing would have taken 0.01 of a second. Its hard to establish right away whether it was intentional or damaging. So in hindsight the yellow was appropriate at the time. And now upon review of the footage he gets a stand down period which is also appropriate.
‘NZ or Australia could not do this’
Merely your opinion, many people at the 2000 Bledisloe (100,000+ of them) may disagree.
katzilla said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:48pm | Report comment
By the way. totally agree with the Brussouw situation, ever since that Crusaders/Cheetahs game hes been on the cards for greatness, probably before then, but until he faced McCaw you weren’t really sure.
I gave PDV more credit then he deserves, I went out of the room for a sec then came back and he was on. Didn’t realise Russouw was injured.
Before the series i thought he’d get a run in the third match if the Boks had it wrapped up, but it seems now he will have a mortgage on the bok 6, now that Burger will be having time off.
Darryl SA said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:31pm | Report comment
“Jerry I reckon about 100% of Lions fans would quite happily take a win over 14 men, no problem whatsoever. The win mattered way more than how it would have been achieved.”
Well I for one think that’s a very sad statement Jerry. I would never want the Boks to win a match playing against 14 men on the field. I’d just never feel like we knew for sure we were the better team. Different strokes for different folks I guess.
ohtani's jacket, said | June 29th 2009 @ 10:27pm | Report comment
“What on earth was Bryce Lawrence up to?”
It’s up to the referee to rule on foul play. Lawrence’s job is to signal foul play and report to the ref. It seemed like Berdos misunderstood what his touch judge was telling him and that’s why Lawrence said “at least a yellow.” At least that’s the way it came across to me. Berdos seemed to be heading back onto the pitch to award a penalty and nothing else.
Greg Smith said | June 29th 2009 @ 10:46pm | Report comment
To me … this referee mix up has a sinister underbelly.
If Bryce Lawrence isn’t in charge … he isn’t in charge ! Simple.
I think the two touch referee’s had one script and Berdos had another. And Lawrence was anxiously trying to push his script onto Berdos.
Since the 1st Test where Berdos got insulted by Lawrence I thought there was a conflict between the various officials.
Berdos and Lawrence were not on the same page. (I’ve no problem with Berdos, he’s the man in charge. My problem is with Lawrence and the possibility that he thinks he can manipulate the outcome of the game even from the sideline.)
Lawrence was very inconsistent in picking up Lions offences wasn’t he ? I’ve no problem with the Burger card. Lawrence was quick with the YELLOW CARD insistence for Burger BUT when in the first game Matthew Rees’ breach of Law 14(a) Striking or Punching … got nearly nothing, I thought ‘hang on’. If the touch judge didn’t call Bryce Lawrence back for the CLEAR punch… Matthew Rees would have totally escaped. As it is, their was NO citing for this.
If Bryce Lawrence blew the 2nd Test, the Lions would have won. Absolutely no doubt.
Brad said | June 30th 2009 @ 12:23am | Report comment
Greg Smith. You are on drugs, Bryce Lawrence did his utmost in the first test to penalise the lions for anything. What kind of game do we have when a prop is penalised for being weaker than his opposition? basically if the boks play samoa they can forget about a contest because the ref will penalise the samoan props at every scrum. no no no no and do not let me get started about the last penalty. Because O’gara misjudged his jump the lions lose a test series? as usual the rugby laws and the IRB tried to ruin the game.
Nelson said | June 30th 2009 @ 1:27am | Report comment
good post guy and i pretty much agree with everything you said. although i do think burger was lucky to stay on the field, i tend to agree with jerry’s sentiment regarding playing agianst 14 men. i even reckon theres a chance if burger was sent off and the lions won, the whole discussion would be completely reversed and people would be criticizing the ref for spoiling the contest. it would have have been an entirely different game and we’ll never know
Jerry said | June 30th 2009 @ 2:58pm | Report comment
Darryl – I didn’t say that, Guy Smiley did.
Darryl SA said | July 1st 2009 @ 12:47am | Report comment
Jerry, my bad. Shame on you Guy Smiley. That’s a losers mentality.