Nic White told referee Mathieu Raynal that he had cost Australia The Rugby Championship when the pair clashed verbally after the incredible climax to Bledisloe I.
Nine’s Sports Sunday program revealed fresh footage of the aftermath of the game, where the French referee’s highly contentious call led to a late All Blacks win.
“Nic I’m sorry, you know exactly what I wanted,” Raynal told White, while poking him in the chest, in the footage shown Sunday.
“I told you two times and then you still continue (wasting time).”
The vision shows how Raynal was struggling to keep his emotions in check after his bewildering decision to throw convention out the window.
White complained that Foley was in his kicking motion when Raynal intervened and he should have been given the extra time to kick the ball for touch.
“He was just about to kick it out and for two seconds,” said White. “Mate, that just cost us The Rugby Championship.”
“I tell you, you first, because you are the captain then I tell to your 10 (Foley),” Raynal responded.
“I’m warning him, I say ‘if you don’t play immediately, I will give a scrum’. So that’s not fair what you did at the end, you just run the time and you know exactly. If you think I’m not capable to give a scrum, you’re making a mistake. So now you know it.”
Raynal’s version of events to White is not backed up by audio of the original event, where Raynal never mentions the word scrum.
Nine commentator Morgan Turinui backed the Australians, who felt hard done by by what was an extremely rare interpretation.
“That’s the emotive part but it’s interesting getting current and former international referees, former players, former coaches, come out and say they’ve never, ever seen that sanction in the history of Test match rugby,” Turinui said.
“A decision that has never been seen before at the most crucial of times in a Test match. That situation should never have come about. Indefensible as a decision, unjustifiable and incomprehensible.
“The Wallabies were the better team, they put themselves in a position to close out the game with about a minute to go and they were denied that opportunity.”
Legendary referee Nigel Owens backed Frenchman Raynal.
As the fallout continued over the decision to ping Bernard Foley for time wasting with 90 seconds left on the clock in the All Blacks 39-37 win in Melbourne, Owens took to social media to offer support to the official, while Foley had a shot at All Blacks coach Ian Foster.
Welshman Owens is still a go-to source for fans after every major refereeing controversy.
“As so many of you have been in touch to ask … clear communication and warning to the player to get on with it,” Owens said on Twitter.
“A fair and strong refereeing call by Raynal I feel. Learning here is not for the referee, but the players to get on with it when ref asks.”
Owens then took part in a spirited exchange with several users who continued to make the point that while Raynal’s decision might have followed the letter of the law it was not consistent with how he had previously adjudicated the game.
Wallabies coach Dave Rennie and captain James Slipper, and All Blacks’ Sam Whitelock all said afterwards that they had never seen a similar decision played in hundreds of Test matches.
But that argument carried little weight with Owens.
“The player made the error not the referee. How many warnings do you want?,” he said. “The player error put the decision in the hands of the referee. The referee made the correct call. Stop blaming the ref.”
Foley, meanwhile, had a crack at Ian Foster, whose reaction after the game was forthright.
“I thought it was very clear cut,” said Foster. “They were delaying the kick. He said time off. He warned him then he said time off and then he said to speed up then he said time on. Then he asked him twice to kick it. I understand there is a contentious nature about it but it was very clear cut from the opposition.
Referee Mathieu Raynal speaks to Nic White and Bernard Foley. (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
“Part of your game management is listening to the referee. So when the referee says time on you have to play it. I heard very clearly what the ref said.”
Foley, speaking on Stan Sport’s Between Two Posts show, said he was disappointed with Foster’s comments.
“When you get away with one there should be a bit of empathy or sympathy,” Foley said. “That’s the disappointing thing because had the shoe been on the other foot it would have been interesting to see.”
Foley said he didn’t hear the referee tell him he was going penalise and he didn’t hurry up because he believed time was off.
“The ref was trying to speed the game up. For us, we were just trying to get certainty about the call. It was loud – 55,000 people in there roof closed – so we were just trying to get clarity.
“There’s a process we go through when we’re kicking for touch and we just go through that and my comms to the referee were he said ‘time’s off, can you hurry up and kick?’ There was no (suggestion) there was going to be a repercussion or that time was back on.”
The Roar’s Brett McKay, Harry Jones and Jim Tucker reflect on the big call in our podcast. Stream it here or in your app of choice
South Africa deny cocaine rumours
South Africa Rugby have strongly rejected allegations of cocaine use within their camp, saying the reports in SA media had caused A “distracting and destabilising” effect on the squad ahead of their win over Argentina in Buenos Aires.
SARU released a statement that called reports “unsubstantiated” and accused South African media of launching a “deliberate attempt to sabotage the team’s preparations”.
It has been reported by SA Rugby Mag that Rapport, a South African paper, was set to publish a story detailing that several Springboks players have tested positive for cocaine.
That came just days after flyhalf Elton Jantjies and team dietician Zeenat Simjee were sent home amid rumours of an affair – which both have now denied.
“SA Rugby is aware that unsubstantiated allegations of failed tests for recreational drugs by Springbok players are circulating among members of the media,” read the statement.
“Disappointingly, these allegations have already appeared online despite the absence of any evidence to support them.
“SA Rugby has consistently advised all inquiring media that no such reports have been received by SA Rugby or any player from the only authority permitted to perform such tests, the South African Institute for Drug Free Sport. SA Rugby does not conduct its own tests.
“Despite the absence of any such reports, players and management in Argentina have been contacted to ‘tell their story’, distracting and destabilising the entire camp in the build-up to today’s Test against Argentina in Buenos Aires.
“SA Rugby wishes to repeat that it has no evidence of any adverse analytical findings for any kind of drug – be it performance enhancing or recreational – by Springbok players and regards the publication or the threat to publish such allegations as a deliberate attempt to sabotage the team’s preparations.”
South Africa beat Argentina 36-20.
Earlier Jantjies and Simjee both denied reports that they had a tryst in the lead up to a Test against the All Blacks.
Simjee released a statement that read:
“I am the subject of some extremely negative media reports over the last week, tarnishing me personally and degrading my dignity.
“I appreciate the support of my fellow Springbok management team members who concurred with my choice to return home to work through this with the support of my family and relevant professionals.
“I chose to maintain a dignified silence while the media storm was raging, as I am severely traumatised by what has transpired.
“Let me unequivocally state that I am shocked at the level of sensational journalism from the newspaper that first published the article. I am devastated by the fact that a journalist and his newspaper could publish such damaging allegations on false and baseless hearsay. It is disappointing.
“As a young professional, I hold my profession in high regard. In the same light, it is an honour and privilege to represent my country and be part of the Springbok Team. As a person of values, I will not bring about disrepute to myself, my family, my profession and all the many incredible people that have been kind, positive and supportive towards me throughout this ordeal.
“The weekend ahead of the Test week in Mbombela, I had been with my parents dealing with family bereavement. So, the allegations of me spending time with Elton Jantjies at a guesthouse is devoid of any truth.
“This has cast an extremely negative aspersion and disgraceful perspective on my character to which other media houses have also added their perspective. I appeal to the original publisher to retract and apologise for the negative sentiment cast on me.
“I am committed to the Springbok Team and would like to expediently get this behind me so I can continue with my professional responsibilities to the Springbok team.”
Kerevi determined to make RWC
Injured Wallabies ace Samu Kerevi is adamant he will be fit and firing for next year’s World Cup despite his ACL injury suffered at the Commonwealth Games.
Kerevi was on hand in Melbourne this week to watch the Wallabies’ agonising loss to the All Blacks.
He said his Japanese club team had reacted well to the injury that will keep him out for up to nine months. He is in his final year with Sungoliath.
Samu Kerevi. (Photo by Chris Hyde/Getty Images for Rugby Australia)
“I was not sure how they were going to react at the time, but after speaking to them, they have been really supportive,” said Kerevi. “They understand it’s part of footy. No one wants to get injured, and it’s part of the game. They’ve been supportive, and I’ll be heading back in December to finish my rehab there.”
Kerevi said he was hoping for a return to play in April or May and he was hoping to play some matches before the finals in Japan.
Kerevi revealed he sought advice from Wallabies great Tim Horan, and had the same doctor – Peter Myers – as Horan used for a serious knee injury in 1994.
“The same doctor that operated on him, operated on me,” Kerevi said. “Hopefully I get some good luck from that. Shout out to Peter Myers, he’s a great surgeon and has been telling me a lot of great stories about boys that have come back from an ACL. I have a lot of confidence I’ll come back fine.”
Mehrtens expects Super resolution
All Blacks great Andrew Mehrtens believes the stand off between Australia and New Zealand will be resolved but it won’t be an easy process.
The Stan Sport commentator told stuff.co.nz that he was “confident there is a solution there.
“It feels a little like, not quite toxic, but a marriage with some tension, with blame flying, and maybe each side not listening to the other’s perspective,” he said.
“Both partners know they need the other, nobody wants the divorce, but within that both parties want to do what’s best for themselves … It’s almost like we need a really good independent mediator who says, ‘guys, this is what’s fair’.
“It’s what it feels like. There is acceptance that we have mutual interests, and there needs to be compromise on both sides. At the moment it’s like both sides to a marriage going into the first counselling session and pointing the finger at each other.”
Mehrtens said the two unions were using media to get their narrative out.
“Both sides, and maybe more Australia at times, are using media to put certain narratives out there, and sometimes it sounds a lot more combative than what it is behind closed doors,” he said.
“We’ve seen how strong public opinion in New Zealand can be with the debate around the [All Blacks] coaching the last few months, and there is a bit of media manipulation going on there.”
On Thursday, RA chair Hamish McLennan reiterated his union was not bluffing and a split from NZ for Super Rugby remained an option as the Australian seek a greater share of income the competition generates.
“I think the new regime understands and appreciates that New Zealand’s future is tied to Australia’s success,” said McLennan.
“Whether you call that respect, I don’t know, but I think there’s an acknowledgement that we’re actually a pretty important part of their mix now.”
Breaking away was a real option, he added: “we wouldn’t have said it if we weren’t real.
“There’s no doubt, we’ve said it publicly, that the high performance outcomes would probably be better with New Zealand in the mix.
“But we’re not going to play second fiddle, so time will tell if we’re bluffing.
“They know we’re serious – we’ve got the backing of our member unions, Super Rugby club chairs and Channel 9 to go domestic.
“And look, we haven’t won a Bledisloe in 20 years so who’s to say that a domestic competition wouldn’t deliver more money to Rugby Australia and possibly, with more teams and more players, better high performance outcomes? We’ll see.”
Jibba Jabba
Roar Guru
Foleys folly.. all players know there can be a sanction for time wasting.. whether or not the ref outlined the exact sanction at that time is irrelevant.
Danny McGowan
Roar Rookie
I question about who is fibbing or not, we have sen people say that Foley was just in the act of kicking the ball? Why was he doing that if he thought time was off as he says??
Tycoch
Guest
Foley was blatantly time wasting. He was warned. He continued to ignore the ref. The ref awarded New Zealand a free kick. The team being awarded a free kick can elect to take a free kick or a scrum. New Zealand selected a scrum. Incidentally the ref significantly helped Australia twice - 1. He missed the forward pass on a try (The Wallabies took a nanosecond to take the conversion) and 2. He only gave Swain a yellow - should have been a red.
James DUPREE (senior)
Roar Rookie
I was intrigued by the remarks of so called Legendary referee Nigel Owens and referee Frenchman Raynal. I went looking for a basis in the rules for the decision and the "penalty" imposed upon the decision. I regret that my research may be faulty as I was at a loss to find a satisfactory copy of the Rules of Rugby as they applied at the time of the decision. If it is though that I am wrong or missed an important rule permitting the "disgraceful" decision please correct me however this is what I found: The Roar basing it self on the transcript (it would also seem generally accepted) asserted that the time from from go to the "disgraceful" decision is: 78.25: Penalty. 78.50: Raynal - "Play on please". 78.55: Raynal - "Quick play". 78.56: Raynal blows time off. "Time off. 7 seconds elapses. "You play now. Time on." Three seconds. 78.59: Raynal "Ten?" - Foley looks back, begins kick. 79.04: Blows freekick 39 seconds had elapsed I suggest that it hard to see any time available for Foley to "Stuff Around". Noting the very limited time as calculated from the "official recording" of the incidence I see no evidence of a "fact" or a "law" as referred to in Law 6 Rule 5 that empowers the referee to award the scrum in order for him to rely on Law 20 rule 5 to justify the "disgraceful" decision. I have concluded that the only delay penalty permitted by the rules in the context of an allegation of "delay" is the awarding of a free kick - Law 9 rule 7(d). The only sanction for "time wasting" is a "free kick" - Law 10 rule 2(d). There does not seem to be a power in the referee to award a "scrum" for the stated infraction. See Law 19 It would seem that the "Foley" penalty kick was awarded for a "serious infringement" see Law 21. The only time limit in respect of penalty kicks is in Law 21 Rule 4(c) which delay has to be in the course of kicking for a "penalty kick at goal". Law 5 4. The referee keeps the time but may delegate the duty to either or both assistant referees and/or an official time-keeper, in which case the referee signals to them any stoppage. In matches without an official time-keeper, if the referee is in doubt as to the correct time, the referee consults either or both the assistant referees and may consult others but only if the assistant referees cannot help. 5. Any playing time lost is made up in the same half of the match. Law 6 5. Within the playing enclosure: a. The referee is the sole judge of fact and of law during a match. The referee must apply the laws of the game fairly in every match. b. The referee keeps the time. However, the match organiser may appoint a time-keeper who will signify the end of each half. c. The referee keeps the score. 13. The referee may consult with assistant referees about matters relating to their duties, the law relating to foul play and timekeeping, and may request assistance related to other aspects of the referee’s duties. Law 9 B2 (e) The kicker must take the kick within one minute and thirty seconds (ninety seconds) from the time a try has been awarded. The player must take the kick within one minute and thirty seconds even if the ball rolls over and has to be placed again. Sanction: The kick is disallowed if the kicker does not take the kick within the time allowed. 7. A player must not: a. Intentionally infringe any law of the game. b. Intentionally knock, place, push or throw the ball with arm or hand from the playing area. c. Do anything that may lead the match officials to consider that an opponent has committed an infringement. d. Waste time. Sanction: Free-kick. 27. A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship. 28. Players must respect the authority of the referee. They must not dispute the referee’s decisions. They must stop playing immediately when the referee blows the whistle to stop play. Sanction: Penalty Law 10 2(b) Time-wasting. A player must not intentionally waste time. Sanction: Free Kick Law 19 The purpose of a scrum is to restart play with a contest for possession after a minor infringement or stoppage. 1. Where the game is restarted with a scrum and which team throws in is determined as follows: (a). A knock-on or throw forward at a lineout; incorrect throw at a lineout; incorrect quick throw. (b). A maul that ends unsuccessfully. (c). An incorrect kick-off or restart kick (scrum option). (d). A Failure to “use it” at scrum, ruck or maul. (e). The ball or ball-carrier touches the referee and either team gains an advantage. (f). A penalty attempt at goal not taken within the time limit. Law 20 Taking a penalty or free-kick 5. A penalty or free-kick must be taken without delay. 6. Any player from the non-offending team may take it, other than for a free-kick awarded for a mark. 7. The kicker must use the ball that was in play unless the referee decides it is defective. 8. The kicker may punt, drop-kick or place-kick (other than for touch) the ball. 9. The kicker may kick the ball in any direction. 10. Other than the placer at a place-kick, the kicker’s team must remain behind the ball until it has been kicked. 11. The ball must be kicked a visible distance. If the kicker is holding it, it must clearly leave the hands. If it is on the ground, it must clearly leave the mark. Once the kick has been successfully taken the kicker may play the ball again. Sanction: Scrum. Law 21 Penalty and Free Kicks - A kick awarded to the non-offending team after an infringement by its opponents. Unless a Law says otherwise, a penalty kick is awarded at the place of infringement. Penalty: Awarded against a team for a serious infringement. 4(c) No delay. If a kicker indicates to the referee the intention to kick a penalty kick at goal, the kick must be taken within one minute from the time the player indicates the intention to kick at goal. The intention to kick is signalled by the arrival of the kicking tee or sand, or when the player makes a mark on the ground. The player must complete the kick within one minute even if the ball rolls over and has to be placed again. If the one minute is exceeded, the kick is disallowed, a scrum is ordered at the place of the mark and the opponents throw in the ball. For any other type of kick, the kick must be taken without undue delay. REGULATION 24. MATTERS NOT PROVIDED FOR Any Matters not provided for in these Regulations shall be dealt with by the Council.
Ruckin Oaf
Guest
Ahh in the good ol days Sir Ritchie just gave the ref clear instructions as to how the game would be run and everybody was happy. :happy: :happy: :happy:
Ruckin Oaf
Guest
Yep if you want to split hairs the ref did not spell out to Foley that there would be some kind of penalty if Foley continued to ignore the ref's instructions. This makes what difference exactly ?
jameswm
Roar Guru
Seriously. How uch do I have sto spell this out? The ref said to White something similar to this: "I told your 10 if he doesn't take it I will give Black scrum". Does he have to warn us of the sanction? No. Did he say that to Foley? No. So he lied. Have you seen the post-game footage? The ref lied. Simple.
aussikiwi
Guest
You say lying ( ie deliberate false statement) is no big deal (I disagree) yet you give an alleged lie great significance. There are numerous other plausible explanations of what Raynal said, which you do not acknowledge. Not least of which, as another poster noted, that he had explicitly warned of a scrum against the WBs for timewasting earlier in the game and that was the warning to which Raynal was referring. Once it is accepted that Raynal warned that he would award a scrum against WBs for time wasting earlier when they were down to 13, there is no basis for complaint. And no lie.
Ruckin Oaf
Guest
So the game has to be faster but the ref who penalised slow play should never officiate again.
Ruckin Oaf
Guest
I don't know if I would see it as a lie. ie a deliberate untruth as told. The ref told Foley (more than once) to play the ball. There is a sanction to follow from ignoring the ref in this situation. Foley did not play the ball as direction hence the sanction resulted.
Ruckin Oaf
Guest
Here's the big secret, if you don't break any laws then it won't matter which ones get enforced or not.
FrancisF
Roar Pro
ABs wasted time kicking penalties past 90 seconds. Why they were not caught ? You tell me.
FrancisF
Roar Pro
CPM English not his first language??? That’s a lousy excuse.
jameswm
Roar Guru
It doesn't. But he said to White that he specified this to Foley, which he didn't. So he lied to White. That is the issue.
Ruckin Oaf
Guest
Hang on but the scrum is the sanction. So why did it need to be specified ?
Gary Roberts
Guest
The Aussies are very sore.losers and should be ashamed or themselves as they had foul players who are also in this whole equation. Nobody has mentioned how Whitelock could see that White had lost his temper and was threatening the Ref .This has not been mentioned by the Aussies anywhere . The fact that the AllBlacks scored in the time remaining shows that the Australian Foley as wasting time at a crucial moment in the match. I think the French Ref did a good job .
Morsie
Roar Rookie
Is that the best you've got........ The clip shown on the Roar zooms in on the incident, something you won't see on the game replays. Sio was within a poofteenth of a serious knee injury. Yes, it was very similar.
Davis
Guest
Whinge and moan all you like but the fact the officials haven't done a single thing in response tells you that the penalty was correct and there is nothing to answer for. The ref was very clear why they were penalized and Foley was clearly trying to run the clock down. Both teams were ready to go and he kept standing there ready to kick but not doing it. It's all on Foley as far as I can tell. He lost possession due to time wasting at a critical point in the game and it cost them a win.
Paulo
Roar Rookie
Right, so now you play the Kispiracy card? You really are pulling out all the classics. Don’t forget to mention MacCaw was always offside too. That’s always a good one. If that doesn’t work, just throw in something completely unrelated like how many Kiwis live in Australia. Seriously though, from what poor vision there it, you can’t see anything on the contact and actions in Sios cleanout. There will be better footage somewhere and the citing commissioner and 9 would have made it known if it was the same. You are absolutely clutching at a hopium balloon if you think they are identical. You have no clue because what we have seen is so poor.
Kane
Roar Guru
The referee whilst speaking to Foley say "I will switch on the time and we play now" Blows Whistle "Time on" If a referee tells me that he will switch on the time and I need to play and then blows the whistle and says time on, I don't think I have a leg to stand on to say I didn't think time was on.