Deans exasperated by scrum calls

By David Beniuk, 20 Jul 2009 David Beniuk is a Roar Pro

Tagged:: Al Baxter, Bledisloe Cup, robbie deans, Rugby Union, scrum, Tri Nations, wallabies

Related coverage

An exasperated Robbie Deans believes the Wallabies scrum is being picked on by referees because of the bad reputation it has had in the past.

Australian tighthead Al Baxter was pinged several times by South African referee Craig Joubert for scrum infringements, some of which cost the Wallabies priceless attacking opportunities during Saturday’s 22-16 Eden Park loss.

Even New Zealand commentators were bemused by some of the decisions, while Deans was seen on television throwing his hands up in frustration after one call.

He later agreed with a television interviewer who had suggested Baxter was being “picked on”.

Asked at the post-match press conference how frustrated Baxter was by the decisions, Deans replied: “Clearly very frustrated. I think he was frustrated with good reason, to be fair.

“I don’t wish to talk any further about it. I don’t see any benefit in it. It’s an area of frustration.”

But the disappointed coach did elaborate when asked later if Australia’s reputation for poor scrummaging – largely dispelled by a powerhouse performance against England last year – was still costing his side.

“There’s absolutely no doubt about that,” he said.

“It’s not my area but there are people responsible for that, the adjudication of the game, they should deal with it because it’s a source of frustration, not just for players but for spectators as well.

“It’s nonsense.”

Baxter said Joubert had an issue with his binding in the scrums.

“He was saying I need your bind higher on the opposition,” the prop said.

“Obviously there was a disconnect between what I thought I was doing and what was happening.”

But Baxter said he would analyse video of the game before deciding whether the calls were fair.

“He’s a top-level referee, he’s been there plenty of times before so it’s something we’ll have to look at and make sure we get sorted out.

“It certainly hurt momentum at certain times.”

Deans also said Australia’s wobbles under the high ball were partly due to refereeing.

“There’s a lot going on around that I think needs to be adjudicated as well … (at times), you can’t even get to the ball,” he said.

Asked if the refereeing was the most disappointing aspect of the Wallabies’ loss, Deans was philosophical.

“That’s just part of life, that’s the way it is, life is unjust,” he said.

“What did Bill Gates say? It’s unjust, get used to it.”

Deans said the loss, after the Wallabies had led 10-0 at their hoodoo ground, had flattened his players.

“I guess in this instance they have a sense of not being far away which in an ironic way makes it worse,” he said.

“I suspect just from observation that it probably hurt more (than other games).”

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

The Crowd Says (36) | Page 1 of Comments

Hoy said | July 20th 2009 @ 9:30am | Report comment

I found it almost premeditated by the referee to ping Baxter. I am certainly no prop, but some of those penalties were not from Baxter’s fault.

Indeed across the game, I thought the ref was a little poor, and almost had an axe to grind against the Wallabies. 10 metres for Robinson throwing the ball? Come on!!!

Reply
Brett McKay said | July 20th 2009 @ 9:47am | Report comment

Hoy, you have to wonder why an attacking prop, on his own feed in the opposition’s 22 would deliberately bring down a scrum. I’m like you, not even remotely close to understanding the dark art of proppery, but even I can see that that scenario makes no logical sense.

Refs are smart guys, they have to work which one of 30+ rule interpretations to apply at each breakdown, so surely they could also apply logic in that situation??

Reply
Dean Pantio said | July 20th 2009 @ 10:52am | Report comment

Good grief. It’s the requirement of a prop to stabilise their own scrum and disrupt the oppositions. In this scenario you have one of the world’s premier loosheads up against a tighthead with a reputation over years of playing as being a bunny in the scrum. What did you think would happen?

Baxter folds quicker than a origami speed champion if he doesn’t get the hit. He also kept binding illegally on Woodcock’s arm. Joubert told him to stop doing it.

Stop blaming the ref for the player’s inadequacies.

Reply
ohtani's jacket, said | July 20th 2009 @ 11:15am | Report comment

I wonder if Deans is trying to take some of the hurt off his players. If it had been the Crusaders or Wallabies getting those sort of calls, he’d be pleased as punch.

Reply
LeftArmSpinner said | July 20th 2009 @ 11:23am | Report comment

Deans is surely taking the hurt but, enough of the protection. The wallabies behave like an endangered species. they are not, either the hopping or rugby type!!!!!

Reply
craig said | July 20th 2009 @ 12:54pm | Report comment

Dean P – Woodcock did not bind at all. He tried to get under Baxter and failed and hence fell to the ground. He doesn’t bind so it should be a penalty to Aus all day everyday. It seems you suffer from looking at a players past and therefore determining who is at fault in the present. Sorry mate decide each play on its merits and Woodcock had the Ref bluffed completely. Sheridan tried the same thing last year and was found out by the ref early. After that we had honest scrumming where he was beaten by Baxter time and time again. As I’ve said in other posts I don’t blame the ref for the loss in anyway but think people talking about Baxter’s ‘inadequacies’ should look at the S14 games this year and see how he went against these same players. As for Woodcock being one of the world premier looseheads.. please! He’s adequate but no more

Reply
Dean Pantio said | July 20th 2009 @ 1:21pm | Report comment

Craig: They only have to be bound correctly in accordance with Law 20.3 when the ball leaves the scrum half’s hands – not before. Law 20.7 heading states “WHEN THE SCRUM BEGINS” whilst 20.7 (a) states:
“Play in the scrum begins when the ball leaves the hands of the scrum half”
The word “play” is within the body of the Law indicates the start of the contest for the ball rather than the engagement process.

Reply
Andrew B said | July 20th 2009 @ 1:44pm | Report comment

If people want to examine this refereeing performance, I suggest they leave the scrum calls alone. Not that I disagree with the argument that Baxter was hard done by, but the fact no-one will ever agree on what goes on in a scrum and what caused it to collapse, and who should have been penalised. They should focus on the numerous forward passes (Aussies), offsides (both teams, esp the AB’s in the last 3 minutes), and the worst example of Advantage I have ever seen in an international game when he called “advantage over” just before O’Connor knocked on. The ball was 10m behind the advantange line, centre field against a set defence – no territorial or tactical avantage in sight.

There is enough evidence to show a substandard ref performance without questioning the dark arts of scrummaging.

Reply
gavin said | July 20th 2009 @ 5:10pm | Report comment

typical to blame the ref. Get clear rules sorted so interpretation is no problem

Reply
ohtani's jacket, said | July 20th 2009 @ 6:23pm | Report comment

Woodcock is adequate but no more? Is that the same as Kaino being overrated?

No wonder the Wallabies keep losing if that’s the overinflated sense of worth you have in your own players.

Reply