By Wally James -
June 29th 2009 @ 7:19am
Loading ...Related coverage
Burger’s eye gouge will prompt a judiciary’s roar
What is it about the Springboks? An eye gouge by Burger which does not lead to a send off? A shoulder charge by serial offender Botha leading to a prop off for the Lions, and again no sinbin/send off?
Ask Brendan Cannon about the teethmarks in his back which resulted in no lost game time for Botha.
And then a seemingly innocuous O’Gara contest for the ball… followed by a Bok victory.
Forget for the moment the difference a send-off and at least a further sinbin would have had on the game. As soon as there were uncontested scrums (caused in part by Botha) the Lions lost momentum. The Lions’ strength was their scrum until then.
It seems the judiciary will have the last say about this test.
But I suspect the poor old French ref will come under criticism. A reasonable game I thought apart from what became critical decisions. But what a test that was!
Super 14 Tipping now live on The Roar. Join now.
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...
(28)
Tony from Northbridge said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:10am | Report comment
Agree with you Wally, but perhaps its a cultural thing. In France, eye gouging is practically compulsory. Its just a run of the mill offence over there, viewed perhaps in the same way as we might view an early tackle.
Jerry said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:14am | Report comment
Just heard it’s apparently 8 weeks – same as Parisse. Piss poor, in my opinion – Burger’s offence was far more serious.
USRugbyFan said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:45am | Report comment
The charge against Botha is crap. How can you charge a player trying to counterruck with a shoulder charge?
Hoy said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:47am | Report comment
That was some pretty bad eyegouging.
eric said | June 29th 2009 @ 10:04am | Report comment
I didn’t see the incident but numerous laws would cover shoulder charges into an unprotected player in a ruck/maul. ( A Botha special in my opinion.) I thought you had to join rucks arms first and bind (Law 21.1)
Terry Kidd said | June 29th 2009 @ 10:59am | Report comment
Two weeks ago I said in a different thread that this series would contain a Botha cheap shot somewhere …. and I haven’t been disappointed.
What could Burger have been thinking? So early in the test it must have been premeditated, but why? He didn’t play Test 1 so ‘get square’ doesn’t come into it. I would dearly like to know what the thought process was behind his action.
If 8 weeks is true that will take him out of half of the 3N.
Sin-ick said | June 29th 2009 @ 11:34am | Report comment
So does Burgers suspension cover 8 weeks, or 8 games? What happens during the weeks where South Africa doesn’t have a game?
Nird99 said | June 29th 2009 @ 11:50am | Report comment
When they say eight weeks do they mean weeks or games??
Ben C said | June 29th 2009 @ 11:50am | Report comment
Terry Kidd
I suspect that there was no thought process at all, hence the stupidity of the attack.
Jock said | June 29th 2009 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
Not forgetting the incident that led to the prop being taken off – McGeechan needs to be sacked – He and hist coaching staff lost the game
The laws (law 3.5) specifically require teams with 22 players to have suitably trained 5 players that can play front row – there is no logic to go into a game where you as a coach are fully aware that
1. the beast is playing
2. scrummage is the key to the game – winning it
3. this would be a physical encounter
What coach would go into the game with 3 props and 2 hookers – even given that the law requires a player on the bench to act as a hooker – why not have a smarter 2 props plus one hooker – why was shane williams on the bench – he was never going to get much game time in this game –
Some state that the loss was down to no real scrummage – who is really to blame
Working Class Rugger said | June 29th 2009 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
Whuy only 8 weeks? Didn’t Alan Quinlan get 12 for a similar incident recently.
Hammer said | June 29th 2009 @ 2:19pm | Report comment
Jock – I may need correcting on this but this appears to be somewhat of a tactic of the McGeechan / Edwards coaching set up … Wasps have ended games with uncontested scrums on a semi regular basis …. the strange thing is in the end it counted against the lions …
Ytraboy said | June 29th 2009 @ 2:20pm | Report comment
Qorking Class, I think you’ll find most roarers asking the same thing?
Viscount Crouchback said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:32pm | Report comment
It is a cultural thing. The South Africans’ beastly behaviour can be explained by the fact that most of them are descended from the Dutch. They were never exposed to the traditional British virtue of “fair play”. It’s not a coincidence that most of the eye-gougers and ball-grabbers in rugby come from non-Anglo countries.
When you add in the uniquely troubled history of South Africa, you have a truly toxic mix.
Brett McKay said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:38pm | Report comment
good onya Viscount, that’ll go over great!!
Nird, Sin-nick it’s 8 weeks for Burger. With the scheduling like it is, he’ll only miss about 3 games..
Ian Jessup said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:50pm | Report comment
3 Tests for eye gouging in the first minute of a match?
Is the IRB be serious?
Why not 12 months?
One thing you can always expect from South Africans is cheap shots.
My suspicion is that the right-wing WASPish world of rugby union is still feeling guilty about South Africa’s sporting ban due to apartheid – a ban it opposed vehemently – and as such now turns a mostly blind eye (get it?) to such dastardly acts out of sympathy for the Boks going without Test rugby for 22 years.
Ben J said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:54pm | Report comment
Enough of this! Fitzgerald should count his blessings that he still has a good eye! He probably told Schalk he likes his new hairstyle and then viciously attacked Schalk’s fingers with his nostrils.
Seriously, “eye goughing” is a serious offence up there with spear tackling and tackling the man in the air…what if Fourie du Preez broke his neck after O’Gara cynically shoulder charged his buttocks. Tom Croft shoulder charged Fourie in the first test and only got a penalty.Was that fair? Is it the Springboks fault that the Lions were falling apart at the seams? They did only score one very good try to 3 wonderful efforts and the fact that the Lions were still in the game after 60 minutes were more courtesy of PdV selection tactics then anything else. Everyone could see that Morne Steyn and Brussouw should have been on the park at halftime. Yes it was a wonderful test which should not be remembered for one incident after 32 seconds. It deserves much better than that.
The ref, ahh the ref…not good enough to officiate in any six nations games but here he popped out to ref the World Champions and BI Lions. He was shown up as a tv ref in the first test and realy should not have been there to manage a test of this magnitude.
And Viscount , aren’t the Dutch one of the most peacefull nations in history? The English are the real beasts of history past with their concentration camps and mushy peas:)
vinay verma said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:55pm | Report comment
Viscount–I can speak from experience. The Indians are grateful we had the British instead of the Dutch as the colonists.
I suppose that makes the Dutch just a colon!
Greg Smith said | June 29th 2009 @ 6:56pm | Report comment
@Viscount Brokeback
ha, ha …. ha, ha … ha, ha !
Fairplay… like Red Coats slaughtering innocent men, women & children around the planet ? Yeah… hurrah, British fairplay !
Your anglo-dutch ‘attempt’ is priceless and isn’t ‘toxic’ just French for England ?
katzilla said | June 29th 2009 @ 7:10pm | Report comment
Greg, I really hate to say this but your response is correct.
I partly agree with Viscounts dig at the Dutch but historically the English are no better.
Viscount Crouchback said | June 29th 2009 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
Well, no colonists are going to draw much approval in 2009, but it is notable that the British ex-colonies have been rather more successful than most.
Anyway, I wasn’t so much trying to have a dig at the Dutch – who, as Ben J states, are a relatively peaceful bunch (and get on splendidly with the English – there are probably no two nations in Europe with more in common). It was more of an observation that the particular Dutch settlers who landed in Africa were a pretty troubled, over-wrought bunch of fellows. The reason they insisted on calling themselves Afrikaners was that they didn’t much like the folk back home. Their history is one of feeling cornered and persecuted (sometimes with good reason), and people who feel that way – the Russians being another classic example – often act in a rather beastly manner.
Greg Smith said | June 29th 2009 @ 8:08pm | Report comment
@Discount Crotchback
Oh dear … I don’t wish to get into this crass cock fight but what the hell…
…Any original English colonist in Africa will (and rightly so)drop to his knee’s in due respect for the early kindhearted Afrikaners who assisted unflinchingly while they hardly ever judged the smelly, unskilled, uneducated, morally challenged lot being flushed out of Englands infininte ceasepool of sub-humans.
You, on behalf of your kind, show how you typically welch on your debts (eg debt of gratitude owed the Afrikaners) – The Africans call you locusts because of this wont. A plague that consumes like cancer. In the end, ask any old African … they side with Afrikaners over Englishmen. Why ? … they correctly see the differences in character. The Poms – they said were rotten to the core.
The Chinese might too have a point … the world could be a better place without Vikings, Angles, Saxon and Celts ?
But you’re going to mock the Russians… probably the Germans, the French, Japs, Micks, Macks… in fact everyone ?!
Funny that ? We don’t blame you. It’s the inbreeding. We don’t hate you either !
Viscount Crouchback said | June 29th 2009 @ 8:21pm | Report comment
Okay, Greg. Whatever you say, chum. Keep taking those meds.
Colin N said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:11pm | Report comment
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyunion/5674670/Lions-2009-Bryce-Lawrence-not-fit-to-officiate.html
This is what Brian Moore had to say about Lawrence.
Darryl SA said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:19pm | Report comment
Yep, that’s right. Oh what a relief. Now the Lions fans (and management it seems) can sleep peacefully. They lost the series and the Dutch are to blame. It has nothing to do with them, and the fact that they threw away a convincing lead due to a resurgent, and yet still under-performing Bok squad.
Man, was feeling for the Lions and sentimentally thinking it’d be nice if they won the final test. But with this constant excuse-making and whinging, and lack of class shown by the Lions management in not once congratulating the Springboks or admitting their own mistakes, now I’m just hoping the Springboks wipe the floor with them. Will be fun to sit back and watch the excuses mount then.
Greg Smith said | June 29th 2009 @ 9:35pm | Report comment
Yeah, I agree.
If the Lions showed a bit of grace in defeat then 2-1 was fair.
Now, it’s 3-0. Take this heroic ploy from them and embarrass them properly…
Highlights for me:-
1. Ronan O’Gara getting the old Jono Lomu treatment as Jacque Fourie ran straight over him to score
2. BOD and Gethin Jenkins getting a double (unintentional) headbutt from Habana ! Boing, Boing … two down !
pothale said | June 30th 2009 @ 10:29pm | Report comment
Danni Broussow – Bok hard man – playing wibbly,wobby wonder after being tackled by BOD was great to watch. They can give it out but don’t like taking it. Maybe de Plessis shouldn’t have pissed off BOD so much the previous week.
Jerry said | July 1st 2009 @ 2:43pm | Report comment
How’d that tackle work out for BOD, Pothale? It was a clash of heads, hardly a great hit considering it:
A) Put BOD out of the game meaning the turnstile had to take the field leading to 10 points for the Boks (not to mention Habana’s try while BOD was in lala land).
B) Meant dumbarse De Villiers had to actually bring his best loose forward on.