De Villiers’ outburst about referees should be punished
Roar Pro By Wally James, 12 Sep 2009 Wally James is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- Peter de Villiers, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies, Wayne Barnes
Related coverage
After the Wallabies victory in Brisbane, the following comments were reported: “We can’t go public about certain things because we don’t have all the evidence, but the body language of certain officials when things went against us in that game made us worry.”
And: “It doesn’t matter if we ask for an explanation of the scrum rules. The problem is pointed out but is not officiated properly by the referee and the other officials on the field. The officials were so happy when decisions went against us on the day. I am talking about the number one rugby team in the world. Shouldn’t they really get the other guys to that level?”
Guess who? Peter de Villers.
If that is not an allegation of cheating against referee and touch judges, well I’m not a good judge. What an extraordinary outburst.
The referee was Wayne Barnes (Eng). Before the match Dick Muir (Springbok assistant coach) said Barnes was a well credentialled referee and his side was confident he would control the scrums well.
Bryce Lawrence (NZ) was one of the assistant referees last Saturday. De Villiers did not allege any improper conduct of him when he reffed the first Test against the Lions recently.
You may recall the Bok scrum demolished the Lions pack that day. Funny how Lawrence reffed the scrums so well then but not the other night.
Vinny Munro (NZ) was an assistant referee in the Lions games as well as last Saturday. A justifiably well respected man.
London to a brick, de Villiers’ risible tirade is not indicative of Bok fans’ feelings. Team supporters of the team on the wrong end of the scoreboard will always have some gripe about a referee.
That’s only human. But to assert a conspiracy?
De Villiers defamed three men whose integrity was questioned, without any evidence. He already has one IRB fine. Perhaps he deserves another.
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Peter de Villiers, robbie deans, Rugby Union, Springboks, Tri Nations, wallabies, Wayne Barnes
September 12th 2009 @ 3:03am
Working Class Rugger said | September 12th 2009 @ 3:03am | Report comment
Wally
Actually most of the Bok fans I have encountered in the past week ( and where I live there are plenty of them) have been gracious about the defeat. Most acknowledged that the Wallabies were the better team on the day. And no real griping about the ref. The Boks seem to have this difficulty believing our scrum can handle them. It seems to be quite alot of deflection of blame from Smit. Who many even Bok fans are questioning whether his leadership on the field is worth exposing a fundamental weakness in the front row.
I wouldn’t take too much of what PDv says. Most of the time I can barely understand him anyway. He reminds me a bit of Boomhauer from King Of the Hill actually. And I’m quite used to the South African accent.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:24pm
Invictus said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:24pm | Report comment
Boomhauer! Ha,ha!!!
September 12th 2009 @ 3:23pm
Wally James said | September 12th 2009 @ 3:23pm | Report comment
Working Class, old chap
I have no doubt the fans have a fair response in the main. That’s why I bet London to a brick on it. Smits grace in defeat would suggest that.
But I do take notice of what de Villiers says. He is the Bok coach. Kids listening to him will think that the ref was a cheat and that’s not good.
I too have trouble understanding him sometimes and not because of his accent but because he talks nonsensically.
Cheers
Wal
September 12th 2009 @ 3:43pm
Working Class Rugger said | September 12th 2009 @ 3:43pm | Report comment
Wally
Good point in regards to kids listening to PDv. Its not the message he should be sending. Not good for his credibility.
You mustn’t be all that familar with King of the Hill. My ‘Boomhauer’ reference was alluding to his nonsensical nature. The accent just contrubutes to it.
September 12th 2009 @ 3:52pm
Wally James said | September 12th 2009 @ 3:52pm | Report comment
Working Class
Sorry. I’ve never seen it. I get your drift now
Cheers
Wal
September 12th 2009 @ 4:49am
pothale said | September 12th 2009 @ 4:49am | Report comment
and I can recall a certain period when Wayne Barnes was pilloried from on high for his reffing. And all NH referees in general by both players, coaches and fans alike.
What makes PdV’s comments so special?
He’s just doing the same as many SH commentators do.
September 12th 2009 @ 5:02am
matty p said | September 12th 2009 @ 5:02am | Report comment
But Pothale, there’s a massive difference between criticism from commentators – that’s their job, to commentate, including to point out refereeing deficiencies – and criticism of refs by coaches and officials. In any case, comments such as these – from anyone – are bordering on defamatory and PDV would be well-advised to put a little more thought into such statements.
September 12th 2009 @ 5:17am
pothale said | September 12th 2009 @ 5:17am | Report comment
Sure he should. And so should other coaches and players from other countries is all I’m saying. I wouldn’t have to go far into the archives to find some.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:28pm
Jerry said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:28pm | Report comment
I reckon you might struggle to find a coach who’s gone this far. There’d be plenty of times a coach or player has said a ref’s performance was crap, but I can’t recall anyone saying it’s because of a deliberate bias.
September 12th 2009 @ 6:13am
JJ said | September 12th 2009 @ 6:13am | Report comment
And one more thing…this is PDV we are talking about…I mean…this is quite low on his “Worst of” list of quotes as far as I’m concerned. Seriously…who the heck takes his comments seriously anymore?
September 12th 2009 @ 12:18pm
Jerry said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:18pm | Report comment
Seriously? I’d say this about the most outrageous thing he’s said so far.
I mean, saying the AB’s or Wallabies cheat – fine. They’re the opposition, they’re trying to win.
But saying the IRB appointed refs are being deliberately impartial? That’s defamation. If he’d named anyone outright, it’d be an open and shut case, and even without specifically being named I reckon Lawrence and Barnes would have a pretty damn good case (though Barnes would have to first deal with the half a million pending cases against NZ message board posters…)
September 12th 2009 @ 12:38pm
Invictus said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
PDV lives in his own little universe as far as I can tell. Does anyone think he does any actual coaching of the Springboks or is he just an SA style statement in political correctness?
September 12th 2009 @ 12:47pm
Jerry said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
I think he does do the coaching, but he’s admitted that he’s a ‘players coach’ rather than a visionary. I think he takes a lot of input from the likes of Smit, Botha, Matfield and Du Preez in terms of tactics and game plan. He inherited a successful experienced squad and hasn’t exactly imposed himself on it, but then he’s not needed to. I’d be interested to see how he dealt with a few injuries to key players or a lean spell, but at the moment (I believe) he’s got the best record of any Bok coach so he’s obviously confident enough to say whatever daft thing pops into his head.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:58pm
Invictus said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:58pm | Report comment
I see he’s in trouble for not selecting enough ethnically suitable players, as well.
How exactly do you keep the Boks winning as well as change over to a predominantly coloured squad? Don’t get me wrong, the non-white players currently selected are pretty damn good but making the team majority coloured at this point would be suicide, eg I don’t think there is a coloured player to replace Matfield, or Broussow, or du Preez, or Morne Steyn etc.
It will come in time. The SA government doesn’t seem to understand this.
September 14th 2009 @ 8:34pm
Ben J said | September 14th 2009 @ 8:34pm | Report comment
Who exactly is he in trouble with Invictus? I do not think PDV is the kind of man that will take abuse from irrelevant sports portfolio comitee members, they are to busy with the Caster “Two Balls” Semenya saga to worry about the Boks.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:48pm
JJ said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:48pm | Report comment
Jerry…read Invictus’ post below…own bubble and all that…this is the reason his outburst hasn’t got much play. No one cares what he has to say. Sad but true.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:54pm
Jerry said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
While that might be relevant in determining damages (in that a court might say people don’t take his opinion seriously so less damage to the ref’s reputation has been caused), “being an idiot” isn’t a defence to defamation!
I don’t think anything will come of this, cause refs get criticised and have to rise above all of it to get by, but I also think the IRB should step in and issue a fine (if they’ve got the authority). It’s a pretty big slap in the face to the IRB especially after the armband debacle.
September 12th 2009 @ 3:24pm
Wally James said | September 12th 2009 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
JJ old chap
I reckon Barnes, Lawrence and Munro would take the comments seriously. Absolutely insulting.
Cheers
Wal
September 12th 2009 @ 8:29am
LeftArmSpinner said | September 12th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
taking it down in the front row is hard to work out who is the perpetrator. however, when a scrum pops out the top, it is clear. the First one out, and last week it was Smit or DuPlessis, have clearly been outscrummaged and so the problem.
So says the fullback.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:26pm
Invictus said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:26pm | Report comment
Interestingly, I’ve quite often seen the non-popping side be penalised for scrumming up and not through.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:29pm
Jerry said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:29pm | Report comment
Well yeah, if they’re obviously pushing up, but the Wallabies front row was scrumming horizontal last week.
September 12th 2009 @ 12:35pm
Invictus said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:35pm | Report comment
Now I think about it, I haven’t actually seen it for a season (maybe two).
Good to see the stronger scrum getting the advantage more often than not. I make that comment regardless of jersey colour, BTW.
One of my favourite refereeing quotes comes from Joel Jutge – “You must find a way to compete.”
September 12th 2009 @ 12:45pm
Bruce Ross said | September 12th 2009 @ 12:45pm | Report comment
You are excused, Lefty, because a fullback never gets to see scrums side-on. All they see is a cluster of arses. But what you are suggesting is the opposite of what the Laws dictate. According to Law 20.8 (i):
“Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards.
This is dangerous play.
Penalty: Penalty Kick”
Thus on the face of it, “the first one out” is not the offender and it is the lifter who should be penalised. But this is where it gets tricky. 20.3 (i) says:
“Player forced upwards. If a player in a scrum is lifted in the air, or is forced upwards out of the scrum, the referee must blow the whistle immediately so that players stop pushing.”
This means that when a scrum is being overpowered one of the props can come up out of the scrum and force the referee to blow his whistle and reset. This illustrates why scrums cannot be regulated by straightforward application of the Laws. Laws can always be manipulated and therefore the referee has to exercise judgement particularly in relation to intent.
For the true aficionados, resetting of scrums is not an annoyance or a blight on the game. It simply gives an additional opportunity to watch a truly beautiful art form and an opportunity to bore those who would rather have the ball flung about than wrestled over.
September 12th 2009 @ 7:22pm
Knives Out said | September 12th 2009 @ 7:22pm | Report comment
Obviously Bryce Lawrence is not aware of any of these rules.
September 12th 2009 @ 1:31pm
Working Class Rugger said | September 12th 2009 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Bruce
Were you a piggy too. All I know is last Saturday its was quite clear that the Wallaby front drove through the Boks not up. The pressure created by this effectively ‘popped’ Smit and Du Plessis backs out of the ideal position. If you have ever had that happen to you its not a good place to be. I know if I successful did it to an opposite prop I’d drive in hard to force him either retreat or raise up out of the scrum. And if PDv had half a clue about scrums he’d be able to tell how a scrum will go from the hit. You could see Smit was in trouble in most of the scrums from the hit. As were the Wallabies when the Boks got the better of it. The facts are its not the refs or some conspiracy against the Boks. It the Boks themselves and in order to overcome it they need to forget about crying foul and fix it.
PDV a ‘player’s coach’. I guess that is what is wanted really. But if he takiong his cues from the player’s. That’s setting him up for a fall. Say if he does consult with the likes of Matfield and Smit. That’s fine as both have very asute Rugby brains. But they are also amongst the oldest in the squad. what happens if at the end of this years guys like Matfield, Smit, Botha, De Villers and Fourie those who from the majority of the experienced leadership all retire, even if it happened over the next 18 months. PDv could be in trouble. Yes, the would be the talent to replace them. But not the know how and influence.
September 12th 2009 @ 2:03pm
Bruce Ross said | September 12th 2009 @ 2:03pm | Report comment
Yes, Working, I played all my rugby as a prop. I have always held to the view that the main reason for playing rugby is that it was the only way I could get to scrummage.
I totally agree with you that there was nothing illegal in the Wallabies’ scrummaging and that the referee was clearly right in penalising the ‘Boks pack.
In my opinion the most uncomfortable situation to be in is where you end up with your head on your chest and your feet come off the ground. That is scary.
It is great fun to establish dominance and to terrify your opposite number but it should not be overdone. I have always believed that a really competent prop should try to prevent his opponent going to ground or standing up. You want him to be in a position where you can effectively continue to impose force on his scrum.
Many years ago I watched a very good Kiwi prop playing in the Illawarra club competition. He was rumoured to have been an All Blacks triallist, but in those days they all were. He was up against a big, young and clearly inexperienced prop whom he popped in every scrum. I thought it was the dumbest thing I had ever seen.
Once a player is popped all the forces in the scrum are resolved and, as in this case, the half back on the weak scrummaging side has no difficulty getting the ball away and his backline is no longer forced to back pedal.
September 12th 2009 @ 2:20pm
Working Class Rugger said | September 12th 2009 @ 2:20pm | Report comment
Bruce
As bad as this may sound. I always recieved sort of a buzz when I knew I had my opposite Prop. But at the same time I only happened if he put up a fight. I disagree with your point on competence. I was an aggressive player. And I believed that if you weren’t experienced in that position you shouldn’t be playing in it. I learned to scrummage intially by playing two grades above my own. Where more often than not due to the age difference my opposite had the experience on me. The front row is no place for the faint hearted. And should be merciless. I learnt the hard way. I lost a spot in a Schoolboy team in the early rep stages. I faced a obviously inexperienced prop who’s binding was dangerous. I helped him out by fixing it and went easy on him in the hit by the ref’s request. At the end of the trial my School Coach who had previously coached successful NSW Schoolboys campaigns (U16′s) had me as a sure thing. Come the next day. I missed out and the prop I had eased off on was in. It’s not the competence of the dominant, it’s the incompetence of the weaker Prop.
September 12th 2009 @ 2:42pm
Bruce Ross said | September 12th 2009 @ 2:42pm | Report comment
Sorry, Working, I didn’t make myself clear.
I have nothing against props being totally aggressive and ruthless. But the purpose of dominant scrummaging in my view is to drive the opposition backwards rather than to pop the opponent.
September 12th 2009 @ 3:26pm
jeznez said | September 12th 2009 @ 3:26pm | Report comment
Aaah, a conversation after my own heart – I agree with both of you Bruce and WCR. After the weekend there were two things I really took away from the scrums.
1. our dominance disappeared when TPN went off, that last scrum for him at the 32nd minute was a thing of beauty. I so hope he is back and fit next week.
2. with twenty minutes to go Alexander started reaching for his hit, left his feet too far behind him and we started seeing a lot of collapses. I think it was just tiredness, it was only his second run on test and he hasn’t played 80 mins regularly for a while. Cannot understand why Cowan wasn’t brought on.