Dodged a bullet: Aurélien Rougerie
This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with the RWC Final fall-out, England's brat pack problems, the overcoming of huge injustice and a small philosophical thought on refereeing...
There were two disciplinary events in the wake of the World Cup Final that show some serious flaws in the disciplinary processes - and thinking - of the IRB.
The first was this - I'd be astounded if nobody had seen already, but just in case:
The second was made a little more public through official channels: the French response to the haka in the Final - you can also see this here:
Guess which one got punished? The response to the haka of course...
Aurélien Rougerie has dodged a bullet, with the citing period of the post-match expiring without complaint, but at some point, certainly for transgressions like these, ought there not to be simply an automatic disciplinary hearing convened? Teams can keep it out of the disciplinary hearing by not citing, but the media has had a field day with this in the two respective countries, meaning the incident is very much in the public eye, so to speak. Does the IRB really want those considering coming to rugby to know that it's possible to stick your fingers in someone's eye without any form of censure whatsoever?
Meanwhile, the haka response fine... seriously? The Kiwis have been defensive of the haka and its associated traditions for some time now, occasionally to the point of preciousness (remember the shenanigans over when to perform it in Cardiff that resulted in the indoor haka?) but there's a good deal about it to defend, not least the right to do it at all. It is one of the game's most iconic ex-play elements, perhaps even the most iconic.
It's worth noting the IRB punishment was not for the response itself, but because - and I kid you not - the French stepped over the halfway line. They actually came - breathe deep before this one - within eight metres of the All Blacks!!!
For the IRB to tell teams not to front up to the haka, not to respond as they see fit, is ridiculous. A few decades ago, the haka looked like this.
And even in the 70s, it was hardly theatre.
But nowadays it becomes a vain-straining, eye-popping, team-firing piece of opera. There is no doubt whatsoever that, if it wasn't already there, the adrenaline level in the All Blacks is at 100 per cent post-haka. It's a huge mental boost.
So it's a touch rich, in a sport where the average top-class match inflicts the same wear and tear upon the average body as six minor car crashes, not to let the opposition get themselves a little adrenaline leg-up of their own in any manner of their choosing. Anything that doesn't involve flying fists or the risk of serious injury, just as in a game, should go.
But alas... it seems teams will now have to pay a price to create historical moments like these...Click here.
England rugby is in a titanic mess at the moment. Ousted ingloriously from the RWC quarter-finals, dogged by reports of player misbehaviour during the tournament, the national union without either long-term Chairman or CEO to receive the World Cup baton...
Yet the players show no signs of abating. In the past few days alone, we've had two England internationals yellow-carded for asinine on-pitch fouls, an anecdote about a former England player poncing around and up to training in his Ferrari, and the threat of a strike an hour before the World Cup squad announcement as a result over an argument involving the cost and control of image rights. Indiscipline, fast cars, petulant squabbling... boy oh boy.
In England more than anywhere else, the rise and rise of rugby, and the monies involved in rugby, to prominence is creating a serious sporting brat pack problem: a lot of big fit youths strutting around, so mentally bored/boxed in by their trade yet seemingly offered no way of relieving that boredom, that they'll resort to jumping off ferries, lying about nights out, abusing hotel staff and attempting to use national squad status as leverage for more perks. All for a team that can do no better than barely emerge from the weakest pool of the World Cup and then sink without trace.
The next CEO of the RFU needs to be someone with as draconian a sense of justice and as mulish a will as possible, for without that England have the potential to be a laughing stock in 2015.
Few outside of Gauteng will have cheered as loud as I as the Lions rolled their way to victory over the Sharks in the Currie Cup Final on Saturday.
The Sharks made it to second in the table behind the Lions with a Bokless squad that played some cracking rugby at times, yet found it necessary to stuff their Currie Cup Final starting XV with no fewer than seven players returning from World Cup duty.
Meanwhile, the Lions' only returning Springbok was afforded a spot on the bench.
Had the Sharks won, it would have been a monstrous mockery of the tournament; it was already a significant poke in the eye for those Sharks players who had to make way for the Final from the squad that had carried them there. It would have been an archetypal 'ringer' scenario.
Fortunately, the end result - the Lions'emphatic 42-16 victory - shows that you can load a side all you like, but you'll always struggle to beat a true team.
Finally, a word on refereeing. There've been a lot of comments recently lamenting that some rugby referees make a game all about them, that the result of the game is down to them, blah blah blah... essentially, that referees are too prominent in rugby.
A friend asked the other day: "do referees really have the capacity for such an influence on the game?"
Well, yes. In a game where a referee can award a penalty for a transgression which can - and often is - turned into three points from 50m, it's obvious that the referee will have far more an effect on the outcome of a game than, say, soccer, where points (i.e. goals) are all too rare.
It is in fact the nature of the game. So be sceptical the next time someone says 'the ref made the game all about him'. It's probably just the fact he was doing his job.
Loose Pass compiled by Richard Anderson







Comments
carpelone says...
@ StunTheMullet
Try to be gracious in victory, at least.
And have a look at the video Kiwibok pointed, to appreciated how lucky you were. The amount of infringements reported is still something that I can't believe my eyes.
Some good old stamping at the ruck should be restored.
Posted 11:30 01st November 2011
StunTheMullet says...
Those pesky French players that weren't penalised for coming in on side of rucks, being blocking runners, flopping on the ball, were offside, getting on the wrong side of rucks and playing the ball on the ground needed their eyes poked out along with their one eyed supporters.
Posted 10:23 01st November 2011
rugbyheim says...
Anyone ever translated the French national anthem into english? It makes the Kapa o Pango Haka throat slit look like a scratch!
Posted 10:13 01st November 2011
isthatrightref says...
@ bvd... I once knew a bloke who swore blind Stransky's dg in the '95 Final missed - he claimed to have been sitting directly behind it, in fact - but the fact that he believed the kicked missed did not make it a fact that the kick missed, it was merely his opinion, vehemently held but still only an opinion. Same applies to you. Mind you, he was a notorious drunk & liar...
Please explain why no French player or official, either at the time or since, has cast any doubt whatsoever on the kick going over. Had it missed I'd have expected Dusautoir to perhaps get a little agitated, Yachvili, Clerc & the other little blokes to run around waving their arms, the bigger blokes to look all broody & menacing & ML to storm the pitch, harangue the ref & take his players off. So why did none of this happen? Were they, too, under orders to make sure AB won? If so, they made a pretty piss-poor job of it, IRB or whoever should only pay them 50% of the agreed fee.
Posted 09:43 01st November 2011
Altru says...
If Rougerie gouged McCaw purposely then it's because McCaw purposely smashed the head of Parra. That's why the Blacks did not complain about it.
Posted 06:05 01st November 2011
BokVanDam says...
Disgraceful article. Why not mention the fact that Donald MISSED his kick but it was allowed because and AB victory was the desired outcome. Fact is, the All Blacks CHOKED again and the ref and his sidekicks performed a heimlich maneuvre on them to make sure they won. They may have been the best team of the last 4 years but they certainly didn't deserve to win on the night.
Posted 05:45 01st November 2011
KingShark says...
Those who think the Sharks lost because of the Springboks did not watch the game. The returning Springboks played well but the Sharks were let down by their now all too familiar Achilles heel - the centers. Marius Joubert and Stefan Terreblanche should have retired a while back. Then there was Conrad Hoffman who had a howler in the 9 jersey...
@ Daibok - funny how the Cheetahs and Lions only play each other in world cup years in the final... I would personally see a complete re-jig of the international schedule, including the S15. The Currie Cup is almost 120 years old, yet we now have to see second stringers contest it. Why should that be acceptable when we already have an inferior competition in the Vodacom Cup?
Posted 04:38 01st November 2011
Kiwibok says...
The ref can have quite a significant outcome if he allows penalties that don't actually go thru the posts , as shown on French TV but ignored by the powers that be ;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZQx7H-HKeY&feature=related
Posted 22:17 31st October 2011
startledwombat says...
Was it an arrowhead that was gently tossed as a marker? The French response to the haka was excellent. In this household we suddenly remembered that there was several millennia of warrior history being brought to the fore.
(Mind you, some of our knowledge of French history comes from Asterix).
Posted 21:52 31st October 2011
Snewt says...
The IRB need to take a long hard look at themselves. As an ABs supporter, the Haka is usually a highly entertaining spectacle, I believe the French improved that spectacle with their brilliantly devised response. It appeared to work well for them as they played their best game of the tournament. The fact that the ABs Haka is protected paints the NZers in a poor light, and as the Haka is a challenge, all teams should be able respond as they see fit.
Posted 21:38 31st October 2011
Storm says...
Haka blah, blah, blah ad nauseam.
The IRB fined the frogs not the ABs who could care less about how the opposition respond to it.
The French took a calculated risk that they would be fined for advancing into no mans land during the haka. They got pinged, and came second, move on.
Posted 18:57 31st October 2011
jamesliveinhope says...
Getting bored of jumping to the defence of the English team but all they were guilty off was naivety. The trouble with the media today is that you only need a little bit of innuendo dropped onto the newswire and everyone with an axe to grind is reporting all sorts of misdemeanour. And by crikey to they like a bit of innuendo down south. The ferry incident, stupid as it was, only got the coverage it did because of all that had gone before.
It was the same in 2003 it was just that SCW was across it better and had a slightly more mature squad. (Hence the naivety remark, they can't say that the attention was unexpected)
I agree about the Rougerie thing there should be no escaping that sort of behaviour because leaving it unpunished is as good as endorsing it. I'm sure a Sale player got banned after and age a few years ago after an breaking Sean Berne's jaw. The reason for no immediate citing, no video evidence.
And now the Haka, you are quite right, it has developed from a bit of a camp mince into a sinister death threat so it must now be considered and advantage (as iff the ABs needed an extra one) England always used to meet it with tracksuits on so that there was a few minutes for everyone to calm down whilst they got ready. My personal feeling is that they would be better advised to throw on a morris dancer and get him to hit each kiwi with a balloon on a stick. If that doesn't diffuse the situation,nothing will.
Posted 18:52 31st October 2011
Saint_Andre91 says...
The fact that Rougerie was not cited (French + gougeing usually equals life ban from rugby or at the very least six months) along with Thierry Dussautoir winning IRB Player of the Year (two good games don't make a great year) just prove one thing: NZ got so embarassed by the way Joubert handed them the trophy by literally robbing France in the final that they did not want to rub more salt in the wound.
Speaking of transgression, McCaw spent his day (some would say his whole carreer though I am not one of them) in the French side of the rucks, "inadvertly" knocked-out the French goal-kicker, and ultimately got what? a cheap shot from Rougerie 3min from the final whistle. I think he was quite happy with it, considering that 25 years ago, he would not have lasted 5min on the pitch!
(for those who actually care, look a the full replay of the incident. Less than 4 minuts to play, France should have already been awarded two or three opportunities to win the game by Joubert, they play their hearts out. Enters Richie McCaw (from the side, needless to say), spoiling maybe the last French possession of the game:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tbKhbOCPkz8
and then Rougerie goes over the top...
Posted 17:44 31st October 2011
pog_mahone says...
All those white tongues at full stretch are more offputting than intimidating...
FFR SHOULD NOT pay that fine but should impose a ban on Rougerie for the sake of the game. A line was crossed that should not go unpunished. However their hypocritical response to Tincu's gouging ban a couple of years would tend to indicate that won't happen. Meanwhile we continue to try to persuade kids' parents that it's not that dangerous a game...
Posted 17:25 31st October 2011
pierredelot1 says...
There are disciplinary officers at all Heineken Cup matches, so surely they must have had them at the W/C. Not so long ago that the Lions Tour to S/A was short one Irish back row player because of a citing in similar circumstances, that went down like a lead balloon but there was no argument and it was the correct decision. Trouble is that we aren't allowed to know if the Rougerie incident or the McCaw incident were reviewed so we argue into the night without knowing whether or not it was even spotted. Citing officers should be ex players not referees, poacher come gamekeeper is always best in these situations as they know all the tricks. Bit like a front row player being allowed to referee the sets, I bet that would change the course of scrummaging for ever. But changes from the IRB I doubt it. As for France manfully accepting the challenge from the Haka, that decision is woeful, it was done with total respect. If teams can't react like that to a challenge then stop allowing the challenge. End of.
Posted 16:53 31st October 2011
Roger999 says...
Dear PR,
This article is a one-sided disgrace.
I would be happy to hear Mr Anderson's comments on how Morgan Parra was deliberately and savagely assaulted by various AB thugs (Nonu & McCaw) in order to have him leave the pitch after 20 mn, and on the consequences of this on the final result, given Parra's 80%+ accuracy with the boot.
Posted 15:12 31st October 2011
DutchWing says...
APV1
Since the new IRB ruling is in place, Ali Williams hasn't crossed his own 10-metre line. You can check all of his recent hakas.
I know this, because two years ago when this ruling came out, I found it ridiculous, now that the rest of the rugby world knows about this ruling, people start to complain. Way too late, get over it and pay the fine.
Posted 15:09 31st October 2011
ruggaluva says...
Hmmm eye gouging is definitely not on its wussy.... bring back rucking and then we can see something much better... the sight of somebody stomping on Mc Caws permanently offside mug, could only be an improvement to the game and his face !
Posted 14:49 31st October 2011
froggy73 says...
Regarding the Haka, there was no harm done there, the Kiwis did not complain, The French loved it, the world found it amusing.
Maybe the IRB don't like too much excitment. Anyway, the fine of 2500 euros will not make the FFR go bankrupt.
Posted 14:10 31st October 2011
fozza says...
@bokbokbok you're absolutely right there was no complaint from the Kiwi's on this occasion but I believe there have been complaints and quotes about opponents being disrespectful in the past, such as when Wales refused to move after the Haka. I personally thought this was a cracking response but there was a lot of fall out about it.
Also, I don't mean to sound disengenuous (spl?) but how magnanimous (Spl!?) would the All Blacks have been if the French had won?
Posted 13:42 31st October 2011