Publications
Partners
Gary Boshoff
We could have had a much more exciting final weekend of the league phase of the Super 14 to look forward to if it wasn’t for that "no forward pass" call made in the dying seconds of the Bulls v Crusaders match last Friday evening.
What was clearly a forward pass was controversially ruled to be fair by the match officials and as a direct result thereof, the Bulls won the match. But more about the "forward pass" later.
If the Bulls had lost, Saturday’s clash at Newlands would have been a battle royal between the giants of South African rugby.
But I’m afraid that salivating prospect is now off the table since the Bulls have already clinched a home semi-final and if they win that, a home final.
Reports from Loftus Versfeld seem to suggest that the Bulls’ brains trust is seriously considering resting key players like Victor Matfield, Pierre Spies, Zane Kirchner, Wynand Olivier and a few others in anticipation of the semi-final. While this makes perfect sense from a player fatigue perspective, I’m not so sure if strategically it would be the wisest move.
Let me explain.
Looking at the three other possible semi-finalists, it could be anyone of the Waratahs, Hurricanes, Brumbies, Crusaders and off course the Stormers. Looking at the form of all these potential opponents from a Bulls perspective, the Stormers (based on performances this season and recent form) would definitely be rated the top of the crop by many experts.
Put differently, the Stormers should then logically be the team that, if you were the Bulls, you would least like to face in a final or semi-final. I would therefore argue that strategically it would be in the Bulls’ best interests to try and eliminate their strongest opponents, the Stormers, from the competition as soon as possible. On Saturday the Bulls have a golden opportunity to do just that because if the Stormers lose and don’t get a bonus point they could well be eliminated from the competition.
Why on earth would I want to see a South African team eliminated, you might ask? I don’t. I just think that sometimes this thing of player fatigue is exaggerated to the disadvantage of the fans and paying public.
The Stormers v Bulls game I understand has been sold out for a number of weeks now as it was widely billed to be a decider (that was if the Stormers beat the Sharks and the Bulls beat the Crusaders) on who would host the final (if both managed to get through).
Unfortunately, thanks to the Sharks, it did not pan out that way. The fans were looking forward to the two best Super 14 sides battle for supremacy in a spectacle of rugby at Newlands. Now all they will witness is the Bulls' second stringers in a training run against the Stormers. A travesty if you ask me.
All of this could have been avoided if referee Marius Jonker and assistant referee Jaco Peyper followed their own prescribed protocol when judging whether a pass is forward or lateral (and also if the Stormers had beaten the Sharks).
In the past, Andre Watson, the boss of South African referees, went to great lengths to explain what exactly referees consider when they decide whether a pass went forward or not. According to Watson the deciding factor is not the trajectory of the pass (because players are in forward motion - sometimes at top speed - when passing) as this can be deceiving and create the impression that a pass was forward when in fact it wasn’t.
The key aspect referees are instructed to consider is “how the ball leaves the hands of the passer”, meaning, they must check whether the ball left the passer’s hands in the direction of the opponents tryline - or not.
As far as I could tell, the big deciding factor in Friday night’s controversial instance was the fact that the ball went “forward” from an opposition player’s hand, which was factually correct off course. This was used as “proof” that the pass wasn’t forward, but that it was knocked back by an opponent.
However, if Jonker had applied his protocol correctly he should have looked at Bulls replacement hooker Bandise Maku’s hands and then he would have seen that he (Maku) passed the ball forward to get it past Ben Franks (the Crusaders’ prop) who was between him and Bulls wing Francois Hougaard.
Crusaders captain Richie McCaw was beside himself - and rightly so, as his team was on the short end of referees’ decisions yet again, just like the previous week when Stuart Dickinson penalised them at will at the breakdowns against the Stormers.
Now I know some commentators will say that the Sharks were at the short end of the referee's stick earlier in the competition as well and that this kind of thing is just part of the game.
Nevertheless, it leaves a very bad taste in the mouth when you dominate a match like the Crusaders did on Friday evening and then get fall foul of poor officiating.
For those of you who are now reaching for your keyboards to spew venom at me, just one moment before you start.
I did not write this because I am a Stormers, Bulls or closet All Blacks supporter as many of you seem to think at different times of the year. I wrote this out of disappointment at the fact that the much anticipated North v South rumble at Newlands will now just be a damp squib.
The Crusaders v Brumbies clash seems so much more enticing now.
Gary Boshoff is a former Saru player and well-known rugby administrator.
Disclaimer: Sport24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on Sport24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Sport24.
We could have had a much more exciting final weekend of the league phase of the Super 14 to look forward to if it wasn’t for that "no forward pass" call made in the dying seconds of the Bulls v Crusaders match last Friday evening.
What was clearly a forward pass was controversially ruled to be fair by the match officials and as a direct result thereof, the Bulls won the match. But more about the "forward pass" later.
If the Bulls had lost, Saturday’s clash at Newlands would have been a battle royal between the giants of South African rugby.
But I’m afraid that salivating prospect is now off the table since the Bulls have already clinched a home semi-final and if they win that, a home final.
Reports from Loftus Versfeld seem to suggest that the Bulls’ brains trust is seriously considering resting key players like Victor Matfield, Pierre Spies, Zane Kirchner, Wynand Olivier and a few others in anticipation of the semi-final. While this makes perfect sense from a player fatigue perspective, I’m not so sure if strategically it would be the wisest move.
Let me explain.
Looking at the three other possible semi-finalists, it could be anyone of the Waratahs, Hurricanes, Brumbies, Crusaders and off course the Stormers. Looking at the form of all these potential opponents from a Bulls perspective, the Stormers (based on performances this season and recent form) would definitely be rated the top of the crop by many experts.
Put differently, the Stormers should then logically be the team that, if you were the Bulls, you would least like to face in a final or semi-final. I would therefore argue that strategically it would be in the Bulls’ best interests to try and eliminate their strongest opponents, the Stormers, from the competition as soon as possible. On Saturday the Bulls have a golden opportunity to do just that because if the Stormers lose and don’t get a bonus point they could well be eliminated from the competition.
Why on earth would I want to see a South African team eliminated, you might ask? I don’t. I just think that sometimes this thing of player fatigue is exaggerated to the disadvantage of the fans and paying public.
The Stormers v Bulls game I understand has been sold out for a number of weeks now as it was widely billed to be a decider (that was if the Stormers beat the Sharks and the Bulls beat the Crusaders) on who would host the final (if both managed to get through).
Unfortunately, thanks to the Sharks, it did not pan out that way. The fans were looking forward to the two best Super 14 sides battle for supremacy in a spectacle of rugby at Newlands. Now all they will witness is the Bulls' second stringers in a training run against the Stormers. A travesty if you ask me.
All of this could have been avoided if referee Marius Jonker and assistant referee Jaco Peyper followed their own prescribed protocol when judging whether a pass is forward or lateral (and also if the Stormers had beaten the Sharks).
In the past, Andre Watson, the boss of South African referees, went to great lengths to explain what exactly referees consider when they decide whether a pass went forward or not. According to Watson the deciding factor is not the trajectory of the pass (because players are in forward motion - sometimes at top speed - when passing) as this can be deceiving and create the impression that a pass was forward when in fact it wasn’t.
The key aspect referees are instructed to consider is “how the ball leaves the hands of the passer”, meaning, they must check whether the ball left the passer’s hands in the direction of the opponents tryline - or not.
As far as I could tell, the big deciding factor in Friday night’s controversial instance was the fact that the ball went “forward” from an opposition player’s hand, which was factually correct off course. This was used as “proof” that the pass wasn’t forward, but that it was knocked back by an opponent.
However, if Jonker had applied his protocol correctly he should have looked at Bulls replacement hooker Bandise Maku’s hands and then he would have seen that he (Maku) passed the ball forward to get it past Ben Franks (the Crusaders’ prop) who was between him and Bulls wing Francois Hougaard.
Crusaders captain Richie McCaw was beside himself - and rightly so, as his team was on the short end of referees’ decisions yet again, just like the previous week when Stuart Dickinson penalised them at will at the breakdowns against the Stormers.
Now I know some commentators will say that the Sharks were at the short end of the referee's stick earlier in the competition as well and that this kind of thing is just part of the game.
Nevertheless, it leaves a very bad taste in the mouth when you dominate a match like the Crusaders did on Friday evening and then get fall foul of poor officiating.
For those of you who are now reaching for your keyboards to spew venom at me, just one moment before you start.
I did not write this because I am a Stormers, Bulls or closet All Blacks supporter as many of you seem to think at different times of the year. I wrote this out of disappointment at the fact that the much anticipated North v South rumble at Newlands will now just be a damp squib.
The Crusaders v Brumbies clash seems so much more enticing now.
Gary Boshoff is a former Saru player and well-known rugby administrator.
Disclaimer: Sport24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of columnists published on Sport24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Sport24.
