Surprise! Lawrence refereeing produces a dour game
Roar Rookie By Spikhaza, 10 Oct 2011 Spikhaza is a Roar Rookie
- Tagged:
- Bryce Lawrence, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Springboks, wallabies
150 Have your say
7,953 readsRelated coverage
- Rugby Union news
- Wallabies news
- Rugby World Cup 2011 news
- South Africa Springboks news
- Rugby 2011 news
- 2013 Wallabies squad news
Thank goodness Australia won. And I’m not saying that because If not, this country would lose interest in the World Cup and have a ‘rugby reccession’. Although that would have happened.
I’m saying that because I can now safely say that Bryce Lawrence’s refereeing at the breakdown was incompetent, without coming across as a bitter rugby tragic.
As Lawrence reffed matches tend to go, there was just the one try. In fact, that has me amazed, how can a side with 75% territory and something like 90% of the ball not score a try?
Which do you think is more useless, the Springbok attack or Lawrences breakdown refereeing? (Leave ‘bokkes’ or ‘Lawrence’ at the bottom of your comment.)
It took 19 minutes for the first penalty, and there were very few penalties in the first half, slightly more in the second.
Very few penalties you say? isn’t that meant to be a good thing in rugby?
No. Because the breakdown was reduced to a farce. I could rant and rave about my point being proven and analyse why the Springboks lost.
However, after reading all the match reports, I believe the reason the Boks lost was because of this, and I quote the telegraph in the UK:
“The South Africans thought that the tackler would have to release the ball carrier. They thought that the offside line would be respected.
They thought that men would have to stay on the feet. Instead it was a complete shambles.”
There you have it folks. South Africa honestly thought that Bryce would actually penalize all those infringements! How silly of them. Much has been made of Australia’s failure to play to refs this year, they certainly did it today. If South Africa were smart, they should have known Bryce would never penalize those infringements for either side.
The team that played to the ref won. And with 10% of the ball.
Sport, all day long. Does this sound too good to be true? We're searching for a Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. If you're a sales star who doesn't mind a hit, kick, throw, or cycle, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
- Explore:
- Bryce Lawrence, Rugby Union, Rugby World Cup, Springboks, wallabies
October 10th 2011 @ 7:32am
Rugby Realist said | October 10th 2011 @ 7:32am | Report comment
The Boks attack is not great but Lawrence was appalling. He was too afraid to referee the breakdown. In many respects the match was reminiscent of the ABs v France quater final 4 years ago — one side taking their chances better (with the ball and with he ref), one side losing influential players (Brussow – Carter & Evans), a team absolutely domianting possession but not converting that, partly due to their own ineptitude, partly due to a referee who let it become a school yard free for all at the breakdown.
Heroic defence by Australia, but they were lucky to win imo.
Lawrence
October 10th 2011 @ 7:54am
Hopperdoggy said | October 10th 2011 @ 7:54am | Report comment
Lawrence – players off their feet (on both sides) – made the contest a lottery!
October 10th 2011 @ 12:58pm
Nat said | October 10th 2011 @ 12:58pm | Report comment
Actually it reminded me of the 1995 RWC final between SA and the (Suzy poisoned) All Blacks. SA put in a great defensive effort to win that one against an obviously superior team using similar kicking tactics to those used by Australia yesterday.
SA claimed that win in 1995, so they can hardly complain about losing to the Wallabies this time around..
October 10th 2011 @ 7:38pm
David said | October 10th 2011 @ 7:38pm | Report comment
The difference between that game in 1995 and this game was some poor ref decisions and a numpty ref who had no control over the game. NO control over the breakdown by a ref with no balls.
October 10th 2011 @ 9:04pm
Bert Snyman said | October 10th 2011 @ 9:04pm | Report comment
Did you actually watch the game?!!!
October 10th 2011 @ 9:38pm
Richie said | October 10th 2011 @ 9:38pm | Report comment
Suzy poisoning is definitely arguable – what happened on saturday was as clear as day and in front of everyone – not so arguable. Clearly unfair and unjust. Poor reffing and the Springboks should feel robbed.
How are the 2 games even similar. Suzy poisoning is an excuse for losing, you can’t even compare.
October 10th 2011 @ 10:25pm
Jack Petro said | October 10th 2011 @ 10:25pm | Report comment
Richie McCaw – you better start worrying about Pocock, cause he’s coming!
Blame the ref for the Springbocks loss? Actually earlier in the game – and any little time the Wallabies got into the SA half, Smit and crew infringed all over the place.
Sorry but i can’t wear this ‘Wallabies given a hand up’ attitude – you are all kidding aren’t you?
October 10th 2011 @ 1:16pm
Mike said | October 10th 2011 @ 1:16pm | Report comment
In fairness, I don’t think SA are doing too much complaining.
And I think the only reason that the contest was a “lottery” (if it could be so called) is that you had two very fine teams that were not prepared to give up anything on the guts and commitment stakes, and applied maximum pressure to each other.
The boks’ attack tended to be focussed on taking the ball up hard and battering through. Their plan allowed little room for their backs to be creative. In retrospect, maybe they should have used their backs more; but then again, if they had done that, they might well have played into Australia’s hands. As it was, the Australian backs received very little ball and when they did get it, the pressure showed (and no, it wasn’t just Cooper, Genia and others also had big problems).
Four years ago, it would probably have worked. On another night it might well have worked. But the Australian forwards are proving to be as good at taking the hits and dishing them out as are the Boks. We lacked our best scrummager, but our scrum held on, and more importantly in the breakdown we were there and dishing it out as well as copping it. With an ageing (albeit skilled and tough) pack, missing bakkies and losing heinrich early on, the boks just didn’t have quite enough firepower to do it.
Amazing to watch though.
I am impressed with the number of non-rugby fans that I talk to this week who tuned in and thought it was tremendously entertaining.
October 10th 2011 @ 11:57pm
From SA said | October 10th 2011 @ 11:57pm | Report comment
I am from SA and trust me, we are complaining big time.
I cannot for the life of me understand how Australia can feel proud after a “win” like that! Have some pride. You had the ref in your pocket because he felt bad about the Ireland game.
We will support our Boks when they come home, as if they won, because for all good and purposes, they did. Even when the Aus supporters boo-ed our players afterward, they kept their heads up. Bryce Lawrence should have been man of the match for your team.
October 11th 2011 @ 12:54pm
Adams said | October 11th 2011 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
Thats’ right, you tell them. The Bokkies won that game everywhere except the scoreboard.
bwhahahah
October 13th 2011 @ 12:24am
Stukkend said | October 13th 2011 @ 12:24am | Report comment
Stop Bloody Whining ……………. SA lost the game, get over it!!!!!
SA were very lucky to beat Wales in the opening game and even Luckier to beat Samoa.
Lawrence is an absolute SHOCKER and should not even be allowed to ref school boy rugby in future. SA should have turned all that possession and territory into points which they did not.
Looking forward to a Wales Vs New Zealand Final
October 11th 2011 @ 1:55am
Ian Taylor said | October 11th 2011 @ 1:55am | Report comment
Number of non-rugby fans being the operative word, they obviously know as much about the game as Mr Lawrence!
October 10th 2011 @ 7:57am
Josh said | October 10th 2011 @ 7:57am | Report comment
Lawrence was terrible at the breakdown really gave the Aussies too much, especially when near the try line he let them come from anywhere and not once did they release the tackler….very bad reffing..
October 10th 2011 @ 8:50am
Will Sinclair said | October 10th 2011 @ 8:50am | Report comment
Surely that’s the end of Bryce Lawrence at this RWC?
He’s now won two Man of the Match awards – one for Ireland v Australia, and then he starred for the Wallabies in their big win over the Springboks.
By the way – I don’t think the Aussie were the only ones benefiting. I reckon Schalk Berger thought all his Christmas’s had come at once!
October 10th 2011 @ 1:59pm
ChrisT said | October 10th 2011 @ 1:59pm | Report comment
Rubbish Will. The Irish beat you fair and square. If you want a culprit in that match look no further than Alexander – completely exposed – and Robbie Deans, who clearly allowed his coaching staff to do zero research on Ireland.
October 10th 2011 @ 2:13pm
Mike said | October 10th 2011 @ 2:13pm | Report comment
I thought Ireland played very smart rugby in that pool match, to nullify Australia’s strengths and enhance their own. We didn’t see it coming (or if we did, didn’t see it clearly enough).
October 10th 2011 @ 2:38pm
mattamkII said | October 10th 2011 @ 2:38pm | Report comment
amazing.
Any other team pushes the boundaries and its ”smart play”
Aussies do it and they are ”lucky”
For the record, I think its all smart play.
October 10th 2011 @ 9:13am
Guy said | October 10th 2011 @ 9:13am | Report comment
Although I have to say that the Boks have had a lot of difficulty this tournament converting pressure into points, there were any number of incidents that where infringements directly in front of Bryce Lawrence were blatantly ignored, calling the Maul consistently in favour of the Aussies regardless of how they played it … collapsing the mauls intentionally and getting away with it, but the Boks couldn’t even bind onto a maul without getting blown. the number times the Aussies affected the turn over from clearly illegal play from the ground when the Boks were being blown when they even looked at the rucks … it was appalling to watch, and I, for one, am highly embarrassed, just goes to show that no matter how good you are you can’t beat the ref! bokkes
October 10th 2011 @ 10:52am
Behind Enemy Lines said | October 10th 2011 @ 10:52am | Report comment
For what it’s worth I agree BL was terrible but he was consistently terrible and I don’t believe was pinging either side for something without pinging the other for the same thing.
the Boks couldn’t even bind onto a maul without getting blown.
The penalty count was in favour of the Boks with 4 against them and 6 against the Wallabies. The Boks must not have tried to bind on to too many mauls.
October 10th 2011 @ 10:03pm
sean said | October 10th 2011 @ 10:03pm | Report comment
The difference which is what is causing controvesy here is that the Wallabies should of been penalised at least double the 6 they got. 55 minutes played in the Wallabies 22, 147 tackles to 50 and yet the ball consistantly shot out of the ruck illegally into a wallaby hand on the try line with 5 springboks guarding the rucks.. not only is it illegal but its a yellow card offense. Pocock is the best fetcher in the game but he is not superhuman that he shoot a ball 2 meters out of rucks guarded by 5 forwards without cheating!
What makes this whole thing worse is bryce publically admitted to being harsh on Australia in the pool matches where he penalised the Wallabies 33 times, allot of his calls were wrong in the Ireland V Aus match. How can Paddy O’Brian choose him to offciate this match where clearly there is history with Bryce and Aus. What a way to make amends for his previous c0ck ups! I accept that South Africa should of taken more points through tries however it shouldnt of been required when if bryce played to the laws of the game Aus would of lost by 15 points on clear penalities in the red zone alone!
Disgracful performance by a ref not fit to offciate at this level and yes his poor officaiting was directed towards one team not both. Even that last penalty was harsh. It also screams of corruption when a Kiwi official(POB) puts in a Kiwi ref to manage the match of which the winner will play his country in the semi final!
October 11th 2011 @ 8:11am
Mike said | October 11th 2011 @ 8:11am | Report comment
Sean,
The Boks did very well out of Lawrence’s loose policing of the breakdown – that’s the reason they were camped in Australia’s territory for so long. When is the last time that the Boks were able to pressure Australia like that? Certainly not in the last two years.
There is no point in taking advantage of a referees looseness to get into opposition territory, and then complaining about that looseness when it doesn’t work for you.
You might also acknowledge that some infringements missed by Lawrence probably cost Australia points, in particular the cutting down of Ioane when chasing his kick and the failure to give O’Connor a second shot at conversion.
October 10th 2011 @ 9:22am
Bradley said | October 10th 2011 @ 9:22am | Report comment
Watchin as an outsider from Canada. Don’t see much rugby up here but as far as i know the interpretations of the rules of the game were almost completely ignored, in particular with respect to the breakdown. It was a free for all! Killed any opportunity for quick ball. Thought the irb is tryin to make rugby more entertaining by enforcing rules that favor attacking play??
October 10th 2011 @ 9:48am
Spikhaza said | October 10th 2011 @ 9:48am | Report comment
They are Bradley, just this ref is 1/10 that doesn’t know how to implement that. Watch Aus V NZ next week.
October 10th 2011 @ 9:44am
Touko said | October 10th 2011 @ 9:44am | Report comment
Lawrence was a disgrace, but you can’t (entirely) blame him for the fact that the Boks couldn’t score a try.
Who was the idiot who appointed him to the World Cup?! Surely there are half a dozen better referee in NZ? And if not, then nobody from NZ should have been appointed as a ref.
=> Bokke (with Bryce assisting)
October 10th 2011 @ 12:44pm
sittingbison said | October 10th 2011 @ 12:44pm | Report comment
They selected Mark Lawrence, buy a typo slipped through %)
October 10th 2011 @ 10:53am
Fraz said | October 10th 2011 @ 10:53am | Report comment
I am a Pom living in NZ and to be honest, I think the only reason that Bryce Lawrence keeps his job is because there are no other NZ refs to do the job. The only thing I can say in his defence is that he is consistantly bad to all teams. He was awful in the England – Argentina game, awful in the Australia – Ireland game and now got his hat-trick in the Aussie – SA game. It is a worry though that a referee has been picked when the winners of the game he is reffing go on to meet his home nation – the IRB need to sort things out.
October 10th 2011 @ 7:47pm
Glen said | October 10th 2011 @ 7:47pm | Report comment
Well said Fraz! I am still confused how a kiwi ref came to ref a SA / Aussie game in the first place????
The IRB need to sort that out big time!!!!
October 11th 2011 @ 3:45am
legen said | October 11th 2011 @ 3:45am | Report comment
I tend to agree. Let’s be honest if he is that bad at all games why select him for the s.a vs aus game, which was probobaly the biggest of all games in the quarter finals. As much as we can talk about the breakdown, have the rules changed for high tackles as well. Just before the penalty infringement high tackles were blatantly missed on Bismark du plessis. Also New-Zealand referee reffing a South Africa vs Australia quarter final to possibly face NZ in the semi-final?No offense but some might just call that a conflict of interest. But it just wasn’t the boks’ time. I mean to come top of the “group of death” to end up facing australia, lose coz a few terrible calls, morne steyn to miss a penalty. it happens
October 10th 2011 @ 12:10pm
Crazy Horse said | October 10th 2011 @ 12:10pm | Report comment
I’d rather have yesterday’s Lawrence letting the players decide the game as opposed to the whistle happy fool we’ve seen in previous matches. That said I’d rather he wasn’t in the tournament at all.
Bokkes. Yesterday’s result has been coming for years with the bokkes’ refusal to regenerate their squad and continuing one dimensional kicking focussed game.
October 10th 2011 @ 12:54pm
sittingbison said | October 10th 2011 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
I agree completely that the ref was a farce, but completely disagree with all the comment from quoting the Telegraph onwards. To suggest that the boks are choir boys who play to the rules is hilarious.
They cheated at least as much as the wallabies, lost because they couldn’t (or know how to) score a try, and the Ws refused to let them.
Bokke
October 10th 2011 @ 1:04pm
Spikhaza said | October 10th 2011 @ 1:04pm | Report comment
It was meant to be a joke paying out the telegraph at the same time – apologies
October 10th 2011 @ 7:05pm
NM said | October 10th 2011 @ 7:05pm | Report comment
Pls enlighten me how we cheated as much as Oz at defensive breakdowns, when we had 76% of the ball??
October 11th 2011 @ 2:36am
sittingbison said | October 11th 2011 @ 2:36am | Report comment
hmmmm…..let’s see….hands in ruck, in from the side, playing off the feet, lying in front, not releasing, tackling in the air come to mind.
But you can only see all that when both eyes are open %)
October 11th 2011 @ 4:59pm
NM said | October 11th 2011 @ 4:59pm | Report comment
How do we put our hands in the ruck and not release when we have the ball, thats a defensive strategy you sword!
Playing off feet, absolutely, a reaction to having to in order to secure our ball from being poached illegally.
Lying in front and tackling in the air? Grow a brain.
October 10th 2011 @ 11:18pm
Amazed said | October 10th 2011 @ 11:18pm | Report comment
sittingbison, it would be right to say that the Bokke have been very discplined this world cup. Historically perhaps not, but then, hey, lets not get into history as you will find yourself eating your own stupid words. The wally’s defence was very good, yes, but the Boks needn’t of even bothered trying as the Ref for his own sick reasons decided to play god that day. I wish I could say I look forward to watching the Kiwi’s thrash them, but I am also led to wonder how it was possible that a NZ ref was appointed to Ref (term used lightly) a game where the winners would come up against his own country…..food for thought !!!!!! So i’ll keep fingers crossed that neither NZ or Aus win as notibly neither deserve it…..!!!!!
October 10th 2011 @ 1:09pm
Eric the hlaf bee said | October 10th 2011 @ 1:09pm | Report comment
Irrespective of who did win/should have won/could have won. The fact remains that it was an extremely poor show of refereeing. It is unfortunate that players have to put up with poor interpretations of the laws and just as coaches publish team sheets with comments about why certain players are being dropped ie. “He’s going to play in the seconds to help improve his fitness/ speed etc”. So too should the referee association. I would suggest the following for Bryce ” He’s going to referee at the schools U/9 until such time as he understands the laws and how to interpret them. We will then move hime slowly up through the age groups until he is too old to referee ever again.”