Springboks fined for Botha armband protest

David - you're shifting the goalposts. You wrote: "The arbitrariness in disciplinary matters is only part of the problem though. The IRB still suffers from a UK-centric outlook. The strike in France last year which the French rugby board supported are evidence of the tension that exists in Europe and the “colonies” are all still treated as such. Rules are arbitrarily changed to suit the UK teams as was once again evidenced by recent changes to the highly successful experimental laws. There was little discussion with Southern hemisphere teams on this point." The point you're making is that IRB is not administering rugby properly. To support your statement you raise the point about arbitrary decisions on disciplinary matters. But you say this is only part of the problem - being UK centric is the other. I'm not being pedantic. I'm questioning you about a central part of your theory and the examples you give which are misinformed and inaccurate. The fact that you haven't responded to the specifics, would reinforce this view. You make generalised assertions which are, in my view, inaccurate. The IRB's structure is based on union membership. They took votes based on recommendations from the committee which met on the rules. It was clearly flagged in advance that countries other than the UK ones of England, Wales and Scotland, were not happy with some of the ELVs being trialled. They included France, SA, Ireland and New Zealand. Those ELVs did not get adopted. It's called democracy. And it was backed by a representative sample from world rugby. Also since the IRB put the ELVs into trial in the first place, and you claim it is UK-centric and NH dominates everything, how come they even let them trial the ELVs in the first place? Why didn't they just dump them if you believe they are so flawed and biased in favour of NH teams/UK-centric? Why did they adopt any of them if the IRB didn't like them? You wanna make assertions or accusations about the IRB - feel free. But don't be surprised if people take issue with the 'facts' you use to support your argument.

Calm down and drink a lemonade, Hemjay. We all know the drill now.

Are you saying that the IRB is administering rugby properly or do you agree with the larger point and are just being pedantic?

@Grant P Sorry to take you up on something that is a side issue in your post, but Pieter de Villiers is not the puppet everyone thinks he is. He is certainly eccentric, and has caused a media circus in the aftermath of the Burger eye gouge incident that did way more to bring the game into disrepute than the armband incident. One can do an analysis of the contributing factors of that incident alone. (mix in a hysterical and baiting press, an indefensible act with video evidence, misplaced loyalty to a player, poor language ability by someone who in his mother-tongue and idiom has the gift of the gab, some personality issues related to the success of his predecessor and the political expectations because of his minority status, more than a little discomfort with his employers, and a few other things and you have some of the biggest cringing moments off the pitch) BUT, that said, Pieter de Villiers is not the window-dressing puppet (that does not actually coach) that most people on this forum seems to believe he is. The Springbok squad seems to be very comfortable with him and there are lots of reports of how he relates very well on a personal level with all the players. And this is not just because they are winning, it was also the case when the squad came last in the 3Nations last year (when incidentally they tried to play the same ball in hand game that Graham Henry now champions). PS. of course I believe that there are many better coaches out there. I for one would love to see John Mitchell coach the Springboks (not that he ever would, but I think that he will be the coach to bring the best out of the squad of players). The only point I want to make is that Div is definitely not a puppet. I think that many people who pushed to get him appointed as coach THOUGHT that he will be their puppet, but it turns out he is not.

These 'fines' imposed by the IRB are laughable and just feed the arrogance of the Springbok coaching and playing staff. The IRB or should I say PTA are becoming more misguided with every decision they make. We, the paying public are paying their wages and quite frankly we are being dudded at every turn. The flagrant disregard for health and safety issues by the Boks has become an institution in South African rugby that has been allowed to continue for far too long.When is the IRB going to stand up and make an example of them. De Villiers is a loose canon whose lack of PR nouse is obviously being exploited by the rest of the powers that be. The puppetmasters must be laughing heartily. IRB wake up! Grant P

It would be wonderful if this were true, David. But all the SH teams did not campaign hard for all the ELVs as played in SANZAR to be adopted. There were aspects of the ELVs that all Unions were unhappy with. "The SH teams had to adopt to the way the NH had been playing the game." This is not accurate either. Get your facts right. The ELVs that were eventually adopted into the Laws of the Game, has meant all club teams having to deal with a revised set of Laws for the Game for the upcoming seasons in NH and SH. The NH test teams will be at a disadvantage to the SH teams when they play the November tests, since SANZAR national teams will have already played the 3N under the revised Laws of the Game. Rolling maul was reinstated after not being played for a season. NH clubs will experience this for the first time in September. The lineout law was not implemented thus the existing Law will change how people play this aspect of the game. The no pass back into the 22 was introduced, so all teams will be used to playing this. So I restate the questions to you based on your comment: What rules were arbitrarily changed to suit the UK teams? And why only the UK teams, since other countries had differing views on which Experimental Laws should be adopted and which ones not? These other countries include Ireland, South Africa, France, and New Zealand. And which experimental laws were ‘highly successful’? I await a response on this with interest.

The SH teams all campaigned hard before the London conference for the ELV's as played in SANZAR to be adopted. The SH teams had to adopt to the way the NH had been playing the game. But you are missing the point which is that the IRB is structurally flawed. It is not so much which laws were applied but how they came to be applied that counts. The fact is that the rules the NH teams favoured won the day because of how the IRB is structured. The IRB is a boys club that is unrepresentative of the rugby playing public, that is undemocratic in the way decisions are made and applied and that is corrupt to the core. It developed in the colonial context and retains those roots. It has not kept pace with changes in the nature of the game. The issue about how the rules were decided upon is just one example of these issues.

No, QC. There would have been a decent game of rugby instead of the one-sided affair which graced our screens. Wonderful for Bulls fans, no doubt, but a switch-off for this viewer. A bit like watching NZ last year.

Looks like a Garth Brooks man to me.

I wonder if it's The Flying Burrito Brothers kind of stuff or Glenn Miller. I can imagine Botha sitting in his ice bath.. "I am a lineman for the County.."

The SA Rugby website says that Bakkies likes country music. Awesome. Cowboy Bakkies Botha. Mamas don't let your babies grow up to be Springboks.

And at IRB HQ they will say 'It's Miller time"

What about Mr Bojangles, and then Bakkies can come out and do a little dance in the middle of the pitch.

I would'nt call it racism Queen's Council, there are many terms you could rather use such as discrimination, bias, victimizing, xenophobia and others. The IRB is anti South African in a deep and entrenched way, almost like it's part of their DNA. They need a Truth and Reconciliation commission to clear them of their sins and they can start by admitting they hate it when the Saffers question their processes. No one else does so who else to do it than the bad boys of rugby? We need cash? Hey presto it's England for 2015. No matter that the SA government gave a financial guarentee, something the English were unable to provide. Want to open up a non existent Asian market? Japan it must be. No, the IRB is a largely NH fatcat organization who has a paternalistic attitude towards South Africa ( a former British colony) and have no shame in putting in the boot when it suits them.

I'm not having a dig, Ben, I'm just making an observation based on what I have seen over the past deacde. You're right, White did clean up the SA discipline but then look what happened during last year's 3N game against Australia and Burger's gouge (I'm not starting that debate again). SA has always been in the public eye for negative acts. I certainly don't think there is a concerted effort to 'thwart' them.

Bakkies Botha. June 29. Never forget. I suggest a vigil every year. Neil Young can sing Rockin' in the Free World.

No. I have said since I saw Australia play away in Europe that their ain't much going on, Photon. BUT.. and this is a big but, I thought the three consecutive games at home would be enough. Plus, SA and NZ were favourites and there wasn't much value to be had. As it stands I didn't bet on Australia at the weekend, and I certainly don't think they are going to come through. Without Barnes and Sharpe and Mortlock they could end up being nilled which certainly wouldn't reduce me to tears, put it that way. That said, maybe Ben Alexander is right and Australia will make a Lazarus-esque comeback... Maybe not though.

Ben J just ignore Knives, he's just in a foul mood caus the Wobblies and cosequently his prediction for Tri - Nations winners tanked this weekend :). So Knives, how much cash did you lose over the weekend, after the Wallaby capitulation, or you also subscribimg to "The Wobblies are gonna come through brigade"

Knives quit the paranoia mate, Sorry would you have preferred I say so great masculine men which rules did you trial? I cannot believe your bolshy attitude to this site that noone is right apart from you and your friend Pothale and who the #@* is this Hemjay that you accuse me of being? Your arrogance supercedes everything you write sunshine and its about time you pulled your head in. This is an opinion column so how about you stop trying to tear everyone down to bolster your own ego. I have noticed a few people having issues with they way you enforce your views on the roar and how you and your shadow Pothale are seemingly skipping along the yellow brick road hand in hand. It's time you took a deep breath Knives not everyone is out to get the North. My questions were genuine because I wasn't too sure off the top of my head which rules the Northern teams had trialled. Unlike you I have a life and don't spend all day trolling rugby sites and watching hours and hours of replays. So before trying to be a hero take that almighty chip off your shoulder!

I think it's fair to say that since Jake White came into the picture the Boks have cleaned up their act to a large extent. The Boks 2001- 2004 were in a shambles regarding discipline no argument there but it is one thing to have a few incidents go against you and another to feel that there is a concerted effort to thwart you at every possible oppurtunity. To hear on the news that some IRB officials wanted to kick the Boks out of the 2011 World Cup is a disgrace to the game and those officials should be scrutinised. I am sure the sponsors, fans and New Zealand tourism bodies would have loved it if the reighning world champions were banned from playing in 2011. Fact is that the IRB has consistently showed an anti South African bias and should be taken to task for it. Hence you have a united front in South Africa (players and adminastrators) regarding the protest. An 11k Pounds fine just shows that the committee did not believe in the process themselves hence the slap on the wrists.