It seems a shame to look back on Saturday’s stellar Super Rugby final with anything other than fondness.
Sydney’s ANZ Stadium – bedecked with blue and positively effervescing with the fervour of 60-thousand supporters – supplied the vibrant backdrop for eighty minutes of classic Southern Hemisphere rugby.
It is painfully easy, as a Scot, to gaze with envy across the equator at the sheer swashbuckling thrill our southern counterparts are treated to – and in a final, no less!
Indeed, to pick holes in what has already – perhaps a tad prematurely – been labelled ‘the greatest final ever’ from such lowly ground by contrast leaves one susceptible to scorn.
Only the churlish would seek to undermine a wonderful day for Australian rugby, and a fine advert for the sport at large. Yet only the hollow would allow their desperation to bask in the much-needed glow of NSW success to prevent them from acknowledging the game’s fatal flaw.
The game’s not-so-secret blemish.
For Craig Joubert’s bold call to penalise Richie McCaw – an offence punishable by fifty Jonah Lomu hand-offs to the forehead in New Zealand – for side entry with a minute left on the clock, which handed Bernard Foley the chance to knock over the match-winning goal, was wrong.
Tolu Latu, the Waratahs carrier, lost his footing and slipped to ground as he ran at the Kiwi talisman. There was no tackle, no ruck, no offside line and no requirement for McCaw to enter through the ‘gate’ – it was pure open play.
In analysing the penalty, we have entered the murky realms of split-second judgement – the clash took place in an instant and was over just as fast – but Joubert and co. are paid handsomely to get these calls right when the chips are down.
The Durbaner is one of the world’s best, and should not be chastised for an error that any of his colleagues might also have made – one mistake does not a bad referee maketh. He wasn’t at his most impressive with the whistle on Saturday, nor did he have a howler.
But to have the Super Rugby Final decided by a refereeing error ought to rankle.
It has certainly caused SANZAR a degree of consternation. I understand that behind closed doors on Monday, the body’s national referee managers and selectors recognised the slip.
Internal missives seem at odds with referee boss Lyndon Bray’s drive for public accountability, the New Zealander having broadcast the dropping of the under-performing Lourens van der Merwe, Francisco Pastrana and others across the media earlier in the season.
English whistleblower Wayne Barnes once told me, rather forcefully, that the public perception of referees as untouchable, unanswerable pillars of righteousness was a ‘myth’.
Unless the private discussion is a precursor to a press release – which seems more unlikely with each passing day – why dish out an internal admission without corresponding public acknowledgement? As a born cynic, I’d suggest PR as the prime motive.
Another northern counterpart of Joubert’s on the IRB Elite Panel expressed his concern over the handling of the issue, admitting that while he was “surprised someone of Craig’s calibre got it wrong”, he felt “SANZAR seem happy to throw the new guys under the bus, but are hiding now the pressure is on”.
Perhaps ‘the greatest final ever’ needed a helping of poetic antipodean justice to set it apart from the rest. Leaving aside Crusaders juggernaut Nemani Nadolo’s brush with the touchline on his way to the whitewash, how many times has McCaw emerged triumphant from acts of outrageous breakdown mischief?
Saturday’s showpiece should be celebrated and cherished for many years to come. Some may question the logic in SANZAR fronting up to Joubert’s mistake, and perhaps they’d have a point – it isn’t as though the match can be replayed, after all.
But I can’t help but feel its lack of honesty serves to tarnish rather than bolster its credibility in the wake of one of its finest hours.
MattyJs
Guest
Scurfs has nailed it. Watched the replay myself lots of times. Tackle no tackler.
Scurfs
Guest
Disagree. Ball carrier lost his footing- yes. When you watch the replay, you see that McCaw puts his hand on Latu's backside, whilst he is on the ground, BEFORE playing the ball. Therefore; tackle, no tackler. Therefore; McCaw must go through the gate. He's a champion player, no doubt. If anyone was to get away with it, it would be him- an art he has mastered. On this occasion, Joubert got it 100% correct. You can't argue that he placed a hand on the ball carrier whilst he was on the ground, prior to playing the ball. It perhaps just seems unjust, because for years referees have interpreted the laws of the breakdown differently when he is involved.
Firstxv
Guest
ABs were in exactly the same position vs England and chose not to take the kick, knowing that a penalty scored by the opposition in the remaining 4 minutes would undo it all....so thats one team that might not take the kick. But the ABs against England might be an easier proposition that the Saders against the best defence in the competition.
The V Man
Guest
We will see who is crying in a fortnight.........
richard
Guest
For Wyatt Crockett,I'll raise you Bill Young.
richard
Guest
or C)McCaw is too good for the opposition,and they are essentially whining about him because he isn't playing for their team,and D) if teams. fans and coaches bleat long and loud enough,it may influence the referees.Which is pretty much what has happened.
wazza perth nz ex pat
Guest
RUBBISH
Jokerman
Guest
I'm getting like Joubert and can't even put my name up properly.. It contagious these errors. it's Jokerman!
joker an
Guest
Great article and yes the final had a sour taste because it was decided by the ref.
Schuey
Guest
Because it's more fun to chew over the controversial decisions after the game than not.
ols
Roar Pro
Brett I don't think George was even looking at where the foot was. We had a replay where I believe George decided that the grounding was ok and that's what he was focused on in that replay. Next thing we hear "you may award the try" I don't think he ever focused on if the foot had touched the line.
DMac
Guest
Why does there have to be conclusive evidence not to award the try? This isn't the nrl where benefit of the doubt goes to the attacking team. Surely it's balance of probabilities.
DMac
Guest
Never will be. Gee Kaplan hated the Tahs. What was their record under him? 2 from 23?
Jerry
Guest
To be fair, I think they can come into a mall from whichever direction they want as long as it's open.
Joe Blow
Guest
Watching the game again last night I noticed Joubert penalizing NSW twice within the first ten minutes of the final for very similar ruck offenses. By doing so he set the tone for the match and line was drawn for the likes of Richie McAWE and Michael Hooper, who also copped one or two debatable penalties at the breakdown during the match. Joubert wanted a fast game, as did the fans. Nodolos try was a farce. He almost certainly touched his foot on the line before touching down (if you can call it that) but the try was awarded. Them's the breaks.
Ammon
Guest
I'm an nz rugby fan and have no problem with the result and I think plenty of other kiwis think the same.. Good win to the tahs!! Now bring on bledisloe so we can get one back on yas!!
Jerry
Guest
Yeah, I don't think that's a valid interpretation. If McCaw's over the ball when a ruck forms beside him, at worst he's gonna be deemed to be part of that ruck. Besides which, as I said below - 1: He's almost certainly making some contact with Funnell when the ruck is formed. 2: Beyond that contact, he doesn't really initiate any more contact with those two players until he's driven into them by the next arriving player.
maxxlord
Roar Rookie
McCaw was where before any other player? Where Latu slipped? yes, he was. Was there a ruck with only him and Latu? No there was not. McCaw was therefore not part of a ruck OR a tackle, he had touched noone. Two players then made contact with each other over the tackled player forming a ruck, McCaw was not a part of the ruck as he had not made contact with either . McCaw then makes contact with those players from the side, thereby joining the ruck/tackle of which he was not previously a part,FROM THE SIDE.
William Tell
Guest
Brian O'Driscoll.
William Tell
Guest
Hear! Hear! But I know what you mean.