Waratahs and Wallabies coach, Michael Cheika, has been warned by the administrators of Super Rugby for approaching referee, Jaco Peyper, during the Waratahs Round 7 match against the Blues on March 28.
It is understood that Cheika entered the match officials’ room during the half-time break to discuss the officiating of the game until that point.
Peyper and Cheika exchanged words and then the second half resumed.
The Waratahs held a one-point lead over the Blues at half-time, despite a penalty count of eight to one favouring the Blues. As the second half played out, the Blues would wrangle a slim lead with 25 minutes to play, before a string of penalty goals would put the game back in the home side’s favour.
The penalty count in the second half of the match was nine to one in favour of the Waratahs.
The Roar understands that Cheika was contacted last week by Super Rugby’s governing body, SANZAR, requesting an explanation.
In the wake of the incident, Waratahs chief executive Greg Harris stated: “Michael was not even aware of that ruling and would not have approached the match officials’ room if he had been aware of it.”
Cheika was fined $6000 and banned from involvement of any kind in all forms of rugby at any level for a period of six months, suspended until 31 August 2015; a ban that would be triggered by a subsequent proven breach of the applicable Code of Conduct.
SANZAR deemed that the circumstances showed there was no breach of the SANZAR code of conduct, with no further action to be taken despite the code stating no discussions should take place between match officials and coaches during a match.
The official statement from SANZAR follows:
SANZAR confirms that it received a formal complaint in regard to the alleged conduct of Waratahs head coach, Michael Cheika, following the Waratahs v Blues match played at Allianz Stadium on Saturday 28 March.
After undertaking a thorough investigation, including receiving statements from all parties involved, it was determined that Mr Cheika had approached the match referee, Jaco Peyper, in front of the other match officials to seek clarification on a scrum interpretation during the half time break of the Waratahs v Blues match.
In a short and polite exchange that took place in the referee’s change room, Mr Peyper responded to Mr Cheika’s request for clarification. No other issues were discussed. Both Mr Cheika and Mr Peyper have subsequently acknowledged this exchange should not have taken place and apologised.
There is no evidence that the referee was influenced by the exchange in his handling of the match, nor in the circumstances has there been a breach of the SANZAR Code of Conduct and no further action will be taken.
SANZAR has issued formal warnings to both Mr Cheika and Mr Peyper and has written to all referees and coaches, reminding them that no discussions should take place between the match officials and coaches during a match.
The New Zealand Herald has responded to the incident by raising concerns regarding SANZAR’s intentions to “cover up” Cheika and Peyper’s half-time conversation.
sully
Guest
Nice, id completely forgotten about that.
Baiden
Guest
Pretty poor by SANZAR really now that it has come to light he has been fined twice before for the same thing.
ads2600
Guest
So, it turns out this isn't the first time?! From the NZ Herald : "They might think about doing something similar with Waratahs coach Michael Cheika after his uninvited arrival in the referees' room at halftime in the Waratahs recent Super Rugby match with the Blues. Cheika has a rap sheet for similar behaviour and knows referees are out of bounds during matches. He was fined after admitting two charges of misconduct when he approached referee George Clancy during and after the Amlin Challenge Cup final between Harlequins and Stade Francais on May 20, 2011 in Cardiff. After those attempts, Clancy asked for protection from security guards. During a subsequent hearing, Cheika volunteered details of a previous incident in 2005 when he had made a sizeable donation to charity and another incident in France earlier in the 2010-11 season when he abused match officials and was banned for a month from the touchlines. After the Cardiff hearing in 2011, the judgment said: "The disciplinary committee noted that Mr Cheika had been angry and agitated and had approached the referee repeatedly at halftime which he knew was not permitted under ERC rules. "He has been coaching at the highest level in the Heineken Cup for a number of seasons and would have known before speaking to the referee that this was not permitted." "Sanzar has form for reversing decisions. They produced that volte-face recently when they challenged one of their own judicial decisions and imposed a heavy sanction on Sharks midfield back Francois Steyn for a dangerous tip tackle. They might think about doing something similar with Waratahs coach Michael Cheika after his uninvited arrival in the referees' room at halftime in the Waratahs recent Super Rugby match with the Blues. Cheika has a rap sheet for similar behaviour and knows referees are out of bounds during matches. He was fined after admitting two charges of misconduct when he approached referee George Clancy during and after the Amlin Challenge Cup final between Harlequins and Stade Francais on May 20, 2011 in Cardiff. After those attempts, Clancy asked for protection from security guards. During a subsequent hearing, Cheika volunteered details of a previous incident in 2005 when he had made a sizeable donation to charity and another incident in France earlier in the 2010-11 season when he abused match officials and was banned for a month from the touchlines. After the Cardiff hearing in 2011, the judgment said: "The disciplinary committee noted that Mr Cheika had been angry and agitated and had approached the referee repeatedly at halftime which he knew was not permitted under ERC rules. "He has been coaching at the highest level in the Heineken Cup for a number of seasons and would have known before speaking to the referee that this was not permitted." Now Cheika has done something similar and been issued a naughty boy note while on a suspended sentence. Sanzar investigated the infringement and concluded there had been no code of conduct breach yet issued warnings to Cheika and referee Jaco Peyper. If there was no breach why did the incident provoke a warning for Cheika about his actions? If there was a breach why was Cheika given an extra warning instead of having his suspended ban activated? How intense was the Sanzar investigation into Cheika's behaviour? No matter how polite or trivial the conversations were between Cheika and the officials, Sanzar cannot excuse his halftime "discussion" nor can they waive it as a one-off. He has form for that sort of intrusion and knows referees are out of bounds during matches and Sanzar must have been apprehensive when they were confronted with the formal complaint. If they invoked Cheika's suspended sentence that would have removed him from coaching the Wallabies at the World Cup and caused additional friction with Sanzar CEO Greg Peters, who is often a guest at Waratahs home games, and his son who is on the Tahs technical staff."
Coach's Comment
Guest
The Kiwi papers are not done with Cheika, today they print details of other "naughty boy" actions by MC while coaching in Europe years ago. More charges, more fines. If true, he has a longer" prison" record than we think. They want SANZAR to review the whole incident, just like they reviewed Steyn's tackle on Cruden a few weeks back and increased the punishment from Nil to 5 weeks. What awaits MC. I know one think, he will have a very low profile when he next visits NZ with the Tahs or Wallabies.
Mike
Guest
"i can’t remember the exact wording " That's okay - you haven't even known the wording for most of this thread, but that didn't stop you making confident pronouncements as though you did know it. "but it is clear by the reaction in New Zealand anyway that ..." That reaction by a few NZ journos and some (not all) kiwis and non-kiwis, says a great deal about them, and very little about Cheika.
Mike
Guest
Interesting... yet we have confident pronouncements from the usual anti-NSW bunch that they KNOW Cheika breached, even though they don't know what's in it. What a useless bunch of muckrakers
Kuruki
Roar Guru
The actual wording of code of conduct relating to this issue was in the paper today, i can't remember the exact wording but was along the lines of, a coach may not do anything during the game that can bring the integrity of the match into question with the public or viewers. I can't remember the exact wording but it is clear by the reaction in New Zealand anyway that he has done exactly that and is therefore in breach of the code.
RobC
Roar Guru
Here it is Akari. Its in the First video. It comes up after the Pumas Italy scrum http://www.theroar.com.au/2015/04/10/scrumma-mogram-front-row-seats-for-south-african-referees-joubert-and-jaco/
Buk
Guest
Kuruki's post did deal with facts that are pertinent: 1. Cheika spoke to the referee at half time. 2. Coaches and teams warned by SANZAR that this type of conduct is not acceptable. 3. Cheika was already under a suspended sentence for a breach of the SANZAR code of conduct I don't see it as non sequitur that Kuruki implies that Cheika was let off with a warning because he is also WB coach and in a RWC year. In fact Kuruki's logic and SANZAR's logic appear to follow part of the same path - in RWC year, with the Australian coach, the punishment of enforcing the 6 month ban would put him out of the RWC. I presume SANZAR considered this current act either completely unrelated to his previous (abusive) breach, or insignificant, or both. I personally think the matter should rest there. Cheika has done great things with the Waratahs & brought in a style of play that is attractive to watch, as well as a winning formula; but Kuruki has every right to challenge his actions and those of SANZAR.
Buk
Guest
Jemain, I must confess I normally enjoy it when I see the Blues lose. But your comment that the conversation should never have taken place I totally agree with. Pretty obviously Chieka did it to try to obtain something of help for his team - whether what was discussed actually helped their cause is debatable.
Shane D
Roar Rookie
Mike, the CoC is contained in the Super Rugby Tournament Manual. This manual is provided to the Super Rugby teams. I don't think its a public document.
Mike
Guest
Well you have well and truly shot down the argument of the anti-Cheika crowd on this thread. If that's what the Code of Conduct says then nobody could be expected to work out what it means in practice. The egg is caked on a lot faces like asphalt.
Mike
Guest
Because codes of conduct are usually expressed in very broad terms. It's like saying "shall not bring the game into disrepute" - a lot depends on the interpretation placed on it. The fact that neither Cheika, Peyper nor other match officials present saw a problem shows that this is an interpretation thing. This is simple common sense, but many of the people complaining on this thread wouldn't know what that is.
Yogi
Guest
Harry I don't get why the Stormers are resting DV for this game. It suggests they see it as unwinnable. Wrong message to the players.
taylorman
Roar Guru
No...as a 'ref' you said some loser lodged it...
maximillian
Guest
This from the herald today: Section 8.3 of the Code of Conduct clearly states: "All persons ... shall not engage in any conduct or any activity on or off the field that may impair public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of a match." SANZAR had backed themselves into a corner with their earlier suspended sentence for any further breaches so they effectively had to come to the conclusion that no breach was made. But then why give the written warnings? I dont believe Cheika should cop a 6 month suspension for this minor infringement, but to say no breach was made because he was polite is ridiculous.
RebelRanger
Guest
If said Checks is the same one on a suspended sentence then yes
HiKa
Roar Rookie
He has certainly made sure the Tahs won't have Peyper reffing their finals. You'd have to be happy with a result like that.
HiKa
Roar Rookie
Your last paragraph tells how good a ref Pepper is. Putting my conspiracy glasses on, I think Jaco is the protected species here rather than Cheika. I haven't forgotten that in 2012 Jaco from the Republic was miraculously selected to ref the Reds elimination final in Brisbane against the Sharks. How often has an Aussie ref ever been picked to ref a Kiwi team's home final against an Aussie team, or likewise an Aussie ref reffed a Saffer home final against an Aussie team? A more effective shut out from a ref I've never seen. Sharks were 2 metres offside all night, killing the Reds running game. It was a convenient result for everyone except Queenslanders. I reckon Jaco has friends at SANZAR.
Shane D
Roar Rookie
Why did he do it if not to gain an advantage? why could the clarification not wait until after the game in his post match referee report? Once he clarified the interpretation did he share that with the opposition coach to ensure that no advantage was gained?