I often wonder what percentage of matches are influenced by a referee. I suspect there aren’t that many.
We often see spectators focus on the last-minute decisions by referees, especially in close matches where a three pointer can be the difference between winning and losing.
Yet they forget to consider the full 80 minutes of a contest as there are sure as anything other moments in a match where a referee has erred.
The important thing to remember is that referees are human, they are influenced by experiences, home crowds and the like.
During the June Test series between New Zealand and France, Benjamin Fall was red carded early in the match by Angus Gardener after Beauden Barrett landed dangerously after an aerial challenge. Gardener was hung out to dry by World Rugby on that occasion.
One has to wonder whether incidents like that influence how referees react.
This past weekend spectators were enraged at a TMO review in the 81st minute of the Test between South Africa and England when Owen Farrell attempted what most feel was an illegal shoulder charge, thus denying South Africa of a potential match winning kick.
While the question is legitimate the reality is South Africa should have taken the referee out of the equation – and England for that matter – after dominating the match in the first half.
Whilst England fought manfully during the first half they were ready for the picking and it was a plethora of unforced errors, poor decision-making and inability to adapt their game play that kept England firmly in a position to fight back.
Territorial pressure and possession pressure alone eventuates to nothing if you cannot add scoreboard pressure as well. You have to keep the scoreboard ticking over at regular intervals, and in that, South Africa completely failed.
During this period of dominance, Malcolm Marx over threw three line outs five meters from the English line.
Questions should be asked why South Africa did not opt for a scrum once the first few overthrows occurred.
Questions should be asked why South Africa did not opt for a scrum when Maro Itoje was sin-binned as South Africa had a clear advantage in the scrum and with Itoje off surely that would have been an option considering Marx’s atrocious line out throwing.
With such territorial dominance why was the drop kick never an option?
Why did SA not opt for the three points when things went askew?
On attack South Africa had numerous opportunities fluffed due to inaccurate passing, poor catching skills and simply unforced errors.
Damian De Allende had a brilliant match up to the point where his cockiness caused him to run the ball in one hand, fending off tacklers and not looking after possession. At that point he was ‘t interested in his support runners.
He was also the culprit to concede an absolute brainless penalty when he took up space in a ruck already won, and then proceeded to hack at the ball with his foot.
South Africa failed to build scoreboard pressure, they believed their own hype that they will dominate the English pack that they never even considered the fact that they needed to build a lead.
They simply continued to bash at the English with no regard to the fact that they weren’t actually achieving much.
The leadership group need to have more match awareness, they need better game management, they need better decision making.
Watching this team for the umpteenth time commit the same errors and poor decisions is seriously frustrating.
To win a match you need to score points, not one Englishmen cares their team were under the cosh, they used their limited opportunities to score the necessary points to win the match, thus giving their supporters the bragging rights, whilst us South African supporters once again have to wonder what the hell has to happen for this team to get things right.
Rassie Erasmus needs this team to consistently in every match make good decisions, manage the field of play and the match situation, build the score and take opponents out of the match when they dominate.
That is the only way you can take the referee out of the match.
Angus Gardener is not at fault here, he made one potential mistake, the Boks committed dozens of mistakes, they can only blame themselves for this loss.
Jacko
Guest
Haha...gardener reffinf the final??? Did 20 refs die in a plane crash on the way to the WC??
Jibba Jabba
Guest
As long as it is not a loss due to a glaring error by the officials, let the players on the filed win or lose the game..
Jibba Jabba
Guest
Why Neil, the offence was clearly committed, are you suggesting the referees are gutless? That the Boks could have and should have done more to win the game is irrelevant to that specific moment, it was a glaring error by tmo and referee and the Boks were clearly robbed of the opportunity to win the game.
Homer Gain
Guest
There is a God, and he may well be ironic, but as any fule kno, he's English.
Jacko
Guest
No one has said the result could or would change after the decision is made.....What we want is the right decision to be made in the first place...So basically what you are saying is that every test match decided by fewer than 8 points ( 2 scoring situations ) was potentially decided by the ref and that you are fine with that......I strongly disagree...and happy to do so....
Jacko
Guest
Funbus I certainly dont.... SBW deserved his red and I havnt seen anyone say different....Farrell deserved to be penalised and a 50/50 on a YC...its still a consistancy issue and gardener failed
Harry Jones
Expert
If Andre performs exactly that kind of collision against Owen in a match that really counts, say, in Japan next year, at 81:00 with the Boks up by two, right on the 22, and Gus Gardner reffing the grand final. I think all of our heads would combust! The drama! Is there a God after all, and is He ironic?
Umm, Esterhizen doesn't throw in at the line outs, just saying.
FunBus
Roar Rookie
Some might suggest that the time spent 'playing it up for the media' might be better spent practising lineout throwing - but, each to their own.
FunBus
Roar Rookie
I'm fascinated. Do you genuinely believe that the Farrell tackle was the same as SBWs?
FunBus
Roar Rookie
Try as I might, I can't see a way either, NB. A full strength ABs are a better side than a full-strength England. A full-strength ABs against England with the availability problems they have is a potential hammering. The three things England simply must do to keep the score down are: 1. Stop giving stupid penalties away. SA had their three lineouts on the 5m because of dumb back to back penalties. Give that territory up to the ABs and it's goodbye. 2. Kick well. Must either find grass or the ball coming down on a AB with an England player in their sternum. 3. Don't cough the ball up and allow counter attack against an unstructured defence. Do all this and it still won't probably be enough, but it should make the game competitive throughout. No side, not even the ABs, likes to play the match in their own half with an aggressive defence in their face.
Yeah saw that, comedy gold
Pieter the Great
Roar Rookie
In other news I saw a video of Rassie Erasmus instructing Esterhuizen during training to practise our new "shoulder tackles", as he has said we should do, of course he's playing it up for the media, I guess he's trying to say something. https://ewn.co.za/2018/11/06/watch-boks-practice-no-arms-tackle
Thanks Nicholas, but the question begs, how long before these young'uns start to make the right decisions?
Yeah mate, I just don't understand how it isn't picked up by the referees.
Nicholas Bishop
Expert
Thanks Corne - I wouldn't be too hard on your fellow countrymen. Tbh I think they found it hard to believe how well the game was going in that first half, and forgot to convert the many chances they were creating. It didn't last forever ofc. Even so, not many sides come to Twickers and stop England scoring a try of their own, or even from creating a real scoring opportunity, so credit to the Bokke for that. They were just too 'young' in some of the decision-making positions to confirm the 15-20 point win that was on the cards...
Nicholas Bishop
Expert
Nice comment Neil - particularly the last one... It's curious that despite being an ex F/R himself, EJ seems to have so little feel for front row selection!? It was a gutsy display of character and tenacity from England, but the current teams is so limited in so many areas that it is very hard to see how they will find a way to beat NZ.
Uncle Eric
Guest
Maybe so Neil, but mostly had the ball in the wrong areas and whilst England played a better second half in my view it wasn't a great performance overall. Better cover your eyes on the weekend!!
Danny
Roar Pro
I would add having the ref and TMO wired for sound during consensus deliberations is a problem. Many people like sausages but few like watching them being made. I’d argue the wires should be turned off during TMO discussions and the ref can explain the decision once made. Would allow for more free and frank back and forth without an open display of dissent.
Danny
Roar Pro
Agree Gardner wasn't to blame for the Boks not being 20 ahead at the 81st min. But in a tight game refs shouldn't be afraid to rule a penalty in the 81st min that they might easily rule in the 21st min. For a close call there'll always be arguments on both sides. This wasn't a close call. Gardner bottled it fair and square. He's prone to do that - not up to international standard in this writer's opinion. Barely up to Super rugby grand final standard. Aussie Wayne Barnes. Is it so hard for all four match officials to watch a replay and come to consensus? Obviously the ref has the final say but I'd find hard to believe consensus wouldn't have penalised Farrell in this instance.