Jonathan Kaplan - time to call it quits

Craig Joubert a good ref? hahahaha. That is funny. Craig Joubert is by far the worst ref EVER. Kaplan is not a bad ref. His assistance ref is the one that was wrong here. And no refs get all the calls right all the time. There has been many games the springbox, stormers, etc have lost just due to bad referring. eg. 2010 Super Rugby final by craig joubert. Stormers were penelised constantly for no reason and bulls left to do what they wanted. Just just be a man and take the loss. That is how things go in rugby. 1 mistake cost you the game. Grow up and deal with it, instead of calling for his head for 1 mistake that was not his. And it is the british / welsh refs that are among the worst in the world. Other than Craig Joubert who is consistently bad game in and game out.

you right

kaplan does not like the Bulls and over the years he has proved it he should be even aloud to blow school games

I believe its Jaapie? Denoting simple country type people due to Jaap being a common name in South Africa?

What Rees did isn't even a penalty, why would it be cited?

Was that try illegal Mr Happy Socks?

'Watson said the English front row were completely out on their feet, and Australia were getting on top' Are you being sarcastic?

Found this excellent assessment on the South African Referees forum about Kaplan and Allan's performance. http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2704361.htm "There is understandable upset in the Irish camp about the try scored by Mike Phillips of Wales that helped Wales top beat Ireland 19-13. The try should not have been allowed on three accounts. Jonathan Sexton of Ireland, outside of his 22 kicked the ball into touch onto the full. He kicked the ball into the crowd and the assistant referee/touch judge moved to the place where the line-out was going to be. There Matthew Rees of Wales threw in quickly to Mike Phillips who ran off to score in the corner. The try was eventually given and James Hook converted it, making the try worth seven points. It should not have happened. The kick went into the crowd. For that reason a quick throw-in could not be allowed. Law 19.2 Law 19.2 QUICK THROW-IN (d) For a quick throw-in, the player must use the ball that went into touch. If, after it went to touch and was made dead, another ball is used, or if another person has touched the ball apart from the player throwing it in, then the quick throw-in is disallowed. The same team throws in at the line-out. That was the most obvious reason for not allowing the quick throw-in. Secondly, the quick throw-in was taken from the wrong place. Law 19.2 (b) For a quick throw-in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the place where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line The quick throw-in had to be taken between the place where the ball went out and the Welsh cornerpost, not upfield towards the Irish cornerpost. The throw-in from the wrong place is not the touch judge's primary function but the referee's - which does not mean that his assistant cannot advise/alert him, as he does with knock-ons, forward passes and offside. Law 6.B.5 (e) It is for the referee, and not for the touch judge or assistant referee, to decide whetheR or not the ball was thrown in from the correct place. If, by some stretch of the imagination, it was considered that a line-out had been formed because there were at least two players from each side at the line of touch, the throw-in should not have been allowed because Rees threw in straight to Phillips and not down the line of touch. Throwing in backwards at a quick throw-in is allowed but not in a formed line-out. The Irish protested and the referee, Jonathan Kaplan of South Africa, asked his assistant just one question. He asked him twice if it was the correct ball. The assistant, Peter Allan of Scotland, affirmed that it was the correct ball. Was seeing if it the touch judge's job to see if it was all right for the ball to be thrown in quickly? Law 6.B.5 (d) When to lower the flag. When the ball is thrown in, the touch judge or assistant referee must lower the flag, with the following exceptions: Exception 3: When, at a quick throw-in, the ball that went into touch is replaced by another ball, or after it went into touch or it has been touched by anyone except the player who takes the throw-in, the touch judge or assistant referee keeps the flag up. It was part of the touch judge's primary function to keep his flag up to indicate that the ball was not available to be thrown in quickly. The suggestion that the television match official be consulted is not on at all. The International Rugby Board has a protocol for how the TMO may or may not be used. On protocol states: The areas of adjudication are limited to Law 6. 8 (b), 6.8 (d) and 6.8 (e) and therefore relate to: Grounding of the ball for try and touch down Touch, touch-in-goal, ball being made dead during the act of grounding the ball. This includes situations where a player may or may not have stepped in touch in the act of grounding the ball on or over the goal line. The TMO could therefore be requested to assist the referee in making the following decisions: Try No try and scrum awarded 5 metres Touch down by a defender In touch – line-out Touch-in-goal Ball dead on or over the dead ball line Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal All kicks at goal including dropped goals. The TMO must not be requested to provide information on players prior to the ball going into in-goal (except touch in the act of grounding the ball). The TMO must not be asked to assist in any other decision other than those listed. The referee must make an effort to make an adjudication. If he is unsighted or has doubt, he will then use the following process (4). It is clear that the throw in many metres down the field does not fall within that area of jurisdiction allowed in consulting the TMO. In the case of this try the referee had no right at all to consult the TMO and the TMO had not right at all to make the call. It was sad in this case that it was not so. Experiments have been made with possible errors in the build-up to the try but it is a difficult and time-consuming operation. In this incident both officials are highly experienced. Kaplan was refereeing his 63rd Test. Allan is a referee with Test experience, a top referee in Scotland. Both of them would have known what thew correct procedure should have been.

Cause Goddard would have been hauled over the coals by the refs assessor for that blunder.

'lineouts, rucks and mauls have won the NH how many world cups?' None, but they certainly helped SA win 2.

Who says he can't go to the TMO??? It's happened before in a high profile match - South Africa vs New Zealand in Cape Town. 2008 Tri Nations Springbok wing Bryan Habana claims to have scored a try but Assistant Referee Wayne Barnes (ENG) has his flag up and insists that Habana stepped into touch some 20 metres back. After consultation with his Assistant Referee, the Match Referee Matthew Goddard (AUS) refers to the TMO and asks the following... "Could you please check to see if the green number 11 stepped into touch in the lead-up to the act of scoring a try" or words to that effect. 20 metres away from the "in-goal". Assistant insists no try. Referee says let's check to make sure and goes upstairs. TMO confirms Barnes' decision. No try. Why couldn't Kaplan have done the same? All Blacks won 19-0 btw.

Just for every one to notice: There is understandable upset in the Irish camp about the try scored by Mike Phillips of Wales that helped Wales top beat Ireland 19-13. The try should not have been allowed on three accounts. Jonathan Sexton of Ireland, outside of his 22 kicked the ball into touch onto the full. He kicked the ball into the crowd and the assistant referee/touch judge moved to the place where the line-out was going to be. There Matthew Rees of Wales threw in quickly to Mike Phillips who ran off to score in the corner. The try was eventually given and James Hook converted it, making the try worth seven points. It should not have happened. The kick went into the crowd. For that reason a quick throw-in could not be allowed. Law 19.2 Law 19.2 QUICK THROW-IN (d) For a quick throw-in, the player must use the ball that went into touch. If, after it went to touch and was made dead, another ball is used, or if another person has touched the ball apart from the player throwing it in, then the quick throw-in is disallowed. The same team throws in at the line-out. That was the most obvious reason for not allowing the quick throw-in. Secondly, the quick throw-in was taken from the wrong place. Law 19.2 (b) For a quick throw-in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the place where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line The quick throw-in had to be taken between the place where the ball went out and the Welsh cornerpost, not upfield towards the Irish cornerpost. The throw-in from the wrong place is not the touch judge's primary function but the referee's - which does not mean that his assistant cannot advise/alert him, as he does with knock-ons, forward passes and offside. Law 6.B.5 (e) It is for the referee, and not for the touch judge or assistant referee, to decide whetheR or not the ball was thrown in from the correct place. If, by some stretch of the imagination, it was considered that a line-out had been formed because there were at least two players from each side at the line of touch, the throw-in should not have been allowed because Rees threw in straight to Phillips and not down the line of touch. Throwing in backwards at a quick throw-in is allowed but not in a formed line-out. The Irish protested and the referee, Jonathan Kaplan of South Africa, asked his assistant just one question. He asked him twice if it was the correct ball. The assistant, Peter Allan of Scotland, affirmed that it was the correct ball. Was seeing if it the touch judge's job to see if it was all right for the ball to be thrown in quickly? Law 6.B.5 (d) When to lower the flag. When the ball is thrown in, the touch judge or assistant referee must lower the flag, with the following exceptions: Exception 3: When, at a quick throw-in, the ball that went into touch is replaced by another ball, or after it went into touch or it has been touched by anyone except the player who takes the throw-in, the touch judge or assistant referee keeps the flag up. It was part of the touch judge's primary function to keep his flag up to indicate that the ball was not available to be thrown in quickly. The suggestion that the television match official be consulted is not on at all. The International Rugby Board has a protocol for how the TMO may or may not be used. On protocol states: The areas of adjudication are limited to Law 6. 8 (b), 6.8 (d) and 6.8 (e) and therefore relate to: Grounding of the ball for try and touch down Touch, touch-in-goal, ball being made dead during the act of grounding the ball. This includes situations where a player may or may not have stepped in touch in the act of grounding the ball on or over the goal line. The TMO could therefore be requested to assist the referee in making the following decisions: Try No try and scrum awarded 5 metres Touch down by a defender In touch – line-out Touch-in-goal Ball dead on or over the dead ball line Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal All kicks at goal including dropped goals. The TMO must not be requested to provide information on players prior to the ball going into in-goal (except touch in the act of grounding the ball). The TMO must not be asked to assist in any other decision other than those listed. The referee must make an effort to make an adjudication. If he is unsighted or has doubt, he will then use the following process (4). It is clear that the throw in many metres down the field does not fall within that area of jurisdiction allowed in consulting the TMO. In the case of this try the referee had no right at all to consult the TMO and the TMO had not right at all to make the call. It was sad in this case that it was not so. Experiments have been made with possible errors in the build-up to the try but it is a difficult and time-consuming operation. In this incident both officials are highly experienced. Kaplan was refereeing his 63rd Test. Allan is a referee with Test experience, a top referee in Scotland. Both of them would have known what thew correct procedure should have been.

He is obviously calling South Africans that, never heard that term reffered to us like that.

What's a "yarpie"?

David Lord criticizes Kaplan for treating rugby players like children but Rees behaves just like your average pubescent teenage boy trying to deceive his father into giving him more pocket money….

Is Rees aware of the rules? And shouldn't he be cited for showing scant disregard for them?? We quick to have a go at the ref and touch judge but shouldn't the players be accountable for their actions?? David Lord criticizes Kaplan for treating rugby players like children but Rees sounds just like your average pubescent teenage boy trying to deceive his father into giving him more pocket money....

A lot of analysis going on here on how poor Kaplan and the touch judge were on the night but Rees is nothing but a cheat, taking the ball from the ball boy and taking a quick throw in when he knows it's against the rules. If anyone is guilty of anything it's him, no???

Did Rees see the ball boy hand the ball to Rees? How come no comment over the cheating Welsh hooker Rees?

I find this so amusing as a neutral spectator Aussies think their refs are the best The Yarpies thinks their refs the best and the kiwis we dont care. This is all so funny. Anyway what is Ireland bleating about if you think back in 2004 when Honiss told the yarpie captain to go talk to his players then allowed a try. So all in all Refs make mistakes we all believe they are biased that will never change. Personally i think it is easier to blame the ref than to blame the shocking performance of your team

Well the latest report states that he's slated - along with Allen the AR - to run the line in next weekend's 6 Nations, I don't think any sanction is going to be forthcoming. So that settles that. The IRB have supposedly apologized to the IRFU for the error, and have moved on. Nothing to see here folks.