Bitter pill to swallow for SA

2011-10-09 17:50

Wellington - Their World Cup exit was even harder to stomach in the knowledge that an era had ended, Springbok scrumhalf Fourie du Preez said on Sunday.

Click to BUY the new FIFA 12 game

WIN a pair of the new adidas rugby boots

The South Africans were eliminated from the tournament after an 11-9 defeat against Australia in their quarter-final in Wellington.

"We did all the hard work tonight, and during the World Cup, to win this game, and to come up short at the end of the day is hugely disappointing," Du Preez said.

The No 9, considered one of the best scrumhalves in the world, will join Japanese club Suntory, along with Danie Rossouw who has been at his side with both the Springboks and the Blue Bulls.

"It has been a long road for us and this is a very sad exit," Du Preez said.

Springbok coach Peter de Villiers said after the match he would call it quits, skipper John Smit was set for a move to English side Saracens, while fellow stalwarts Victor Matfield and Bakkies Botha were also likely to make way for young blood as the Boks prepared to herald a new era.

Du Preez admitted the defeat to the Wallabies was one was one of the most frustrating matches he had played.

"Any game you lose in a Springbok jersey is hugely disappointing and you don't want to lose badly either," he said.

"If you look at the way we played, we are proud of our performance tonight and that makes it so much harder to take."

Late in the second half, Du Preez had a chance to score a try, but lost the ball just metres before the try line.

The only area in which the Wallabies were superior to the Boks, according to the match statistics, was in the number of handling errors made by the respective sides.

Australia, who had the ball for 44 percent of the match, knocked it on nine times while the Springboks made 11 handling errors.

"I think that just shows that stats don't mean anything," Du Preez said.

"We felt that we were in control the whole game, even after the first half when we went to the change room at 8-3.

"We felt that we were totally in control and that's just the way rugby goes.

"We did enough to win the game, it just didn’t show on the scoreboard."

Du Preez lauded Wallaby flanker David Pocock, the Man-of-the-Match, for his performance on the night.

"When you play against one of the best openside flanks in the world, and the ref allows him to slow the ball down, he will always be very effective," Du Preez said.

"It was very tough for us, but we didn't do enough to sort him out, so credit to him, he really played well."


  • Dal68 - 2011-10-09 18:00

    Bryce won the game for the Wannabes.

      daspoort - 2011-10-09 18:54

      swg, I am always of the opinion that you cannot blame the ref, but today I say f*ck that!! If we did not take our chances and Bryce have blown the game fairly, then I will happily accept defeat. But how many attacks were spoiled because Bryce "there-is-no-such-thing-as-hands-in-the-ruck-anymore" Lawrence let Pocock illegally slow down or steal our ball. SARU must officially lay a complaint about this piece of sh*t ref.

      Grant - 2011-10-10 11:34

      Fact is: there are missed opportunities in EVERY game. No team has EVER played a perfect yes...the Boks did miss a few opportunities. But if Lawrence had blown just HALF of Aus' transgressions, and we had converted only HALF of those into points, we would have won comfortably. The only part of the game that I can give Aus credit for was their defense (in terms of tackling). They did not win because of heart (Boks had more heart than Aus did). They did not win because of luck. They won because the most basic and most common laws in rugby simply did not apply to them on the day. Bafana will beat Brazil if Bafana are allowed to use their hands in a game of soccer. Anyone want to dispute that??

      d2eguy - 2011-10-10 13:28

      get over it , the better team won and stop acting like a gang of cry babies . its always the ref or someone else when SA loses never the fact that South Africans are poor losers and poor sportmen .

      Ross - 2011-10-10 13:50

      @d2E don't complain when Pocock gets blown up for off his feet against NZ in the semi's because im telling you now that McCaw will get the same treatment Pocock got against the Springboks. McCaw also seems to get the untouchable treatment from refs worldwide. Watch the prisoners comments when that happens,

  • Johan Erasmus - 2011-10-09 18:07

    The fact that the ref was from NZ and that they(NZ) would rather face Australia in the finals than us, certainly made for total impartiality from the ref - myth or fact?

      Henk - 2011-10-09 18:08

      Blinde Sambok vir NZ!

      ccillie - 2011-10-10 11:35

      I think we should take it as a complement that NZ see us as more of a threat than the Wallabies- that being said I hope the Welsh win.

  • Muffdiver - 2011-10-09 18:09

    Bribery has finally found its way from cricket to rugby......that ref should get a life ban from the game.......what a disgrace

      d2eguy - 2011-10-11 09:24

      I thought Hansie was dead but I suppose most SA sportmen are corrupt and poor losers so its more than possible that another one is connected to bribery

  • clark - 2011-10-09 18:09

    - And there will be many more bitter pills, unless the Boks can learn to use possession and territory to full advantage. There simply is no point in build up and control if it does'nt lead to scoring tries. The back line just does'nt have the ability to penetrate opposition defences. Fly half problem - not sure, but that backline just is'nt cracking it.

      Grant - 2011-10-10 12:11

      No matter how much you build up, scoring tries comes from holes in defensive lines. Holes in defensive lines comes from quick recycling. Quick recycling has more to do with the ref than anybody else on the field. Quick ball to our backline, and they would have "cracked it" just fine. How many tries do you think NZ would score against us if we were allowed to organise our defensive lines properly each time before they were allowed to run at us? Come on guy - the rules of rugby are there for a reason. Ignoring the fact that this game quite simply WAS NOT PLAYED WITHIN THE RULES is just being rediculous!

  • Kudubul - 2011-10-09 18:10

    Even if you had a open tryline you would have either been blown for running to fast for a green jersey or you would have knocked the ball. Sadest of all is to see 4 years of wasting young tallent because of some PLAN div had. he had been warned and the only ones seeming to be suppriesd by the loss is div and his golden oldies.

  • paul.maarman - 2011-10-09 18:11

    ...was good, while it lasted, but no hope was there for 2011 WC champs, sorry to say, PDiv was entertaining, but no new vision he brought to our SA game....alas, sad as we are now, just you wait and see, 2015,kom dia Webb Ellis the new generation take up the world and knock them down...Pat Lambie, not only will be a full back of all ages, but the next Bok captain...Always Bok supporter!

  • call a spade - 2011-10-09 18:15

    Netball have two refs, Hockey have two refs, tennis and cricket players can appeal decisions to rechnology for ruling. Rugby have four refs, two to watch touchlines and point out dirty play and one who can only rule beyond goal lines if he is asked to. And then one guy who try all over the fiels and watch 30 guys and anly ref what he see or want to see. Totally to much power in the hands on one person. Lawrence cost SA the game. THIS CANNOT GO ON PLEASE USE THE TECHNOLOGY. cAPTAINS SHOULD BE ABLE TO REFER DECISIONS TO THE TMO AND THE PUBLIC CAN SEE ON THEIR SCREENS AND EVERYBODY WILL BE SATISFIED.

      Taurus 11 - 2011-10-10 12:24

      Get your facts right. Rugby has one Referee, two touch judges and one TMO. Only the referee has a whistle, nobody else. As far as using technology is concerned lets go the whole hog 6(SIX) REFEREES 3 down each side, if they THINK that there was an infringement blow the whistle, go upstairs to a panel of 5(FIVE) REFEREES who watch all the angles and replays and then make a decision which has to be 5 out of 5 if the decision takes 15 minutes then so what the correct decision is made. only one problem game could take up to 5 hours to play but then you have the correct decision and cannot blame one person. you guys always Bitch and moan when we loose but never when we win. If you guys can do tbetteras referees why don't you guys become referees or you Sh?i scared that people will call you cheats and other things.

  • Taetjo - 2011-10-09 18:16

    Great heart you showed today... NICE game.

  • Bill - 2011-10-09 18:24

    Reality check: A bunch of rather old players took on the world's best teams with a somewhat incompetent coaching team in charge. Many of the old men struggled to stay fit: Bakkies, Victor, Brian; Some played below the immense standards they set in the past: John Smit, Brian, Fourie du P, Bakkies, Victor, Pierre Spies. And then our backline had no structure, no plans, no flyhalf taking charge, simply no direction - thanks "Thick" Muir. We just did not measure up to the requirements of a world title.

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 18:41

      how did we completely dominate the young team then if the age was the problem ?

      Bill - 2011-10-09 18:52

      Became a little leaden footed towards the end - methinks. Also played without any of the speed, surprise, or space that this domination should have engendered. Some tried, Derek Hougaard, Jean de V, Lambie, but the rest? We may have dominated the formal phases, but the score says it all?

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 19:08

      c'mon not that simple , some bad judgement ( not taking the penalty kick and DRs lineout mess ) , a better informed ref ( Lambie's try , the pass was not forward ) , Schalk's slip up that resulted in an Ozz try , FdP spilling the ball when he was all but in for a try ...had any one of those things gone our way the score would have read different . The score is not always a true reflection of what happens in the game I've never seen a more dominant SB performance against OZ and I think the players and the coaching staff deserve credit for that.

      Bill - 2011-10-09 19:38

      Right, I will stick whatever where the sun never shines, if that suits the intellectual level of your contribution, but the reality is that we lost this tournament some 3 years ago when we did not start building a team for the future - we had no succession plan to build youngsters into the team, just a haphazard selection process that nurtured nobody. We tried numerous people and discarded them after one or two chances on the field. Nope, we relied upon the old men to carry the team time and again. Some of the old guys were the very best in the world --- in their prime. Sadly, Dad's Army failed. Now I will go and attempt the contortions suggest by some brainless idiot called Ruggerman.

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 19:51

      That just doesn't add up bill . .. If what you say is true we would not have dominated them like we did . we would not have had the line breaks and the scoring opportunities they would have had them with their younger team .. You just say they're old but fail to mention how their old age was a factor in the loss .

      Morne - 2011-10-09 20:02

      @Bill-Derek Hougaard? WTF? You still stuck in 2003? Me for one think that the ''old'' boys did extremely well on the day (actually the whole tournament). It is just hugely dissapointing to step out now because of some blundering excuse of a whistle-blower (aka maaifoedie) I would have loved to see us thump the AB's on their home soil! They must be extremely relieved to avoid the wrath of the Sringboks! Very sad indeed...

      Bill - 2011-10-09 20:11

      Very basic principle of rugby: the 3 S's - speed, space, surprise - we did not have it today. An extra yard of pace on the linebreak, an extra yard of pace to the breakdown, playing into space with speed... That is where we failed and where we lost. I am certainly not stuck in 2003, but perhaps further back in 1995 when two of my players won WC winners medals. The game played today was predictable and lacked the pace that you will find in the AB backline! (I do not insult those with whom I am having a discussion for that shows the level to which my contribution has sunk.)

      ObieKonobie - 2011-10-09 20:16

      Derek Hougaard wasn't even on the field you tonsil. Try Francois Hougaard

      nzbro - 2011-10-09 21:50

      @ Bill. Good comment there Bill and accurate analysis too on the old men strategy relied upon for this rwc. Iv been telling my nervous kiwi mates all this time that that very thing will be the achilles heel of the boks. Age cannot give you the 3 S's - speed, space, surprise against a more youthful team regardless of your experience. Add to that the total lack of developing the depth for all key positions over 4 yrs and you have a disaster in the making.Not surprised with result and its not the refs fault. It was a poorly thought out strategy that failed period.Before this loss everyone thought it was a brilliant idea and supported it, relied upon it and believed in it. Now they are in deep shock. The boks tried to play a running type of rugby (not their style against oz/ab) and had little experience with that style to beat Oz.I can understand why cause Oz/AB are dangerous running with ball in hand (Oz style) Was that the "new" things they were planning to try at this rwc? running rugby?the boks? perhaps the boks thought that because running rugby produced such great results against namibia ,fiji etc it will do the same here.End of the day, the boks squad came to this rwc with a poorly thought out plan and added a poorly thought out excecution to produce an inevitable poor result. Was that the refs fault? Pleasure reading your honest no insults /blame the ref added comments Bill. Good on ya

      Bill - 2011-10-09 22:11

      Regrettably our coaching team just did not have the nous to develop a style, strategy, or a team. Dick Muir - as our backline guru - has used players out of position more often than not. Steyn at fullback or centre, on the wing even (2 x SA schools flyhalf) Ruan Pienaar as a fullback, wing, centre, flyhalf and sometime scrumhalf (2x SA schools scrum half) Lambie at fullback and centre, Morne Steyn at fullback (?????) Jean de Villiers on the wing. FRANCOIS Hougaard on the wing, and more.There have been others too - Kirchner, Wynand Olivier, Aplon, de Jongh, etc etc. How do you build a backline like that? My apologies to those that focussed on the Derek vs Francois error - but then you were probably missing the point of what I was saying.

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 22:22

      Sorry bill still doesn't add . 'Very basic principle of rugby: the 3 S's - speed, space, surprise - we did not have it today. An extra yard of pace on the linebreak, an extra yard of pace to the breakdown, playing into space with speed." We scored what I'm confident is a try we did all the attacking and running with the ball . The reason why we didn't break them open more was because they were allowed to break the rules at will and slow the ball down giving their defense the time they needed to regroup . Still by your logic Oz should have opened us up and should have done all the playing .. they had 0 plays with 5+ phases .. that's right 0. We *completely* dominated them with our old slow team

  • Ruan - 2011-10-09 18:25

    ........lads, relax- it's only a game- that's why they call it "Sports". Al least the Provincial-franchises will have their Springboks back for the remainder of the Currie Cup !!

  • marco - 2011-10-09 18:27

    If anyone ever wanted prove how pathetic Bryce Lawrence truly is as Ref outside today's quarter-final in Wellington just watch the Super 15 final again!! Funny though how Paddy O'Brien call this man Lawrence the "best ref in the tournament",for ****sakes!!! The Boks will never stand a chance when either Bryce Lawrence or Steve Walsh officiates at their games.

      Bill - 2011-10-09 18:38

      I would take Steve Walsh any day.

      Rod - 2011-10-09 18:45

      Agreed. Lice lawrence was a disgrace and has brought the game into more disrepute.One wonders how much lower new zealnd rugby can stoop in their desperate bid to win this thing now so that they can boycott the next event and avoid having to defend it honourably.

      Nasdaq7 - 2011-10-10 00:45

      Rod that is why I want New Zealand to win this World Cup so badly. So that we can get out of the Rugby politics of Christchurch New Zealand and into the real neutral WC games that will be held in the UK 2015 and Japan in 2019. NZ broke their word when SA bid for the Soccer World Cup 2006. They will do anything, stoop to any low level to win the Rugby WC after so many WC defeats and years of playing the best Rugby outside of the WC. It is a disgrace actually. The Aussies and NZ linesmen and referees are working together to keep the World Cups there.

      Shistirrer - 2011-10-10 13:33

      IMO the 2011 RWC has lost all legitimacy after yesterday's fiasco. Never mind who emerges as so-called "champions", did they win the competition fair and square? I'm afraid the answer is a resounding NO. If a team is so blatantly cheated out of the quarter-finals, all other results after that mean nothing, zilch, zip, nada. Bryce Lawrence managed to screw up four years of preparation for twenty teams in eighty minutes of blatant dishonesty. The 2011 RWC should be known as the "Cup of Shame". I used to respect NZ and their rugby, but after yesterday, I regard the whole country as despicable cheats.

  • FairnessToAl - 2011-10-09 18:35

    Its true that the springboks had their chances. Lady luck just was not on their side to day and the 50/50 incidents went 100% against them. Well done on a hard and good display of rugby. It is weird how the best team does not win in the new rules. Maybe we need to go back to the drawing board.

  • Cullid - 2011-10-09 18:38

    I didn"t watch the game but, from what I heard, the boks played fairly well. And they were leading during most of the game. I bet they were tough compitition for all teams playing for the cup.

      MBossenger - 2011-10-09 21:06

      They only led for about 10 minutes in total

  • marco - 2011-10-09 18:48

    Latest Scrum Five Poll Who should coach South Africa over the next four years? Peter de Villiers 61 Allister Coetzee 75 Heyneke Meyer 215 Nick Mallett 441 Rassie Erasmus 207 AN Other 106 .

  • Mukiwa - 2011-10-09 18:54

    Bryce Lawrence - Plonker of the Tournament, should be relegated to U13 rugby

      Bill - 2011-10-09 19:01

      Why inflict him on the poor little U/13s? Spoil their rugby careers forever?

  • Marcdupreez - 2011-10-09 18:58

    NIce of you to say Fourie but Peacock was hands in and over the ball throughout the match ! Thats illegal !! Not one penalty the whole game for this offence by the Australians . BShit mate!

  • Taboe - 2011-10-09 19:13

    ABSA = Anybody But SA!

  • Chris Holtshausen - 2011-10-09 19:17

    PLEASE!!!! Just stop whinning about the ref! Boks had more than enough opportunities to win the match.

  • Elwin - 2011-10-09 19:17

  • Kevin - 2011-10-09 19:22


  • markusjoe - 2011-10-09 19:28

    South Africans must the biggest cry babies in sport. Yes we lost , and we were desperately unlucky not to win , but the fact remains that we had many opportunities to put points, but couldn't. Sh1t happens. deal with it. We have also won games that we should have lost. Against Wales for example. How about giving the Aussies some credit for an incredible defensive effort?.

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 20:12

      Really how should we have lost the Welsh game exactly ?

      nzbro - 2011-10-09 21:56

      simple RandomDude. Wales did play a better game than the boks at that game. Was it the ref there too you think?

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 22:34

      no nzbro because the ref had no reason to favor one team over the other . Nice try though enjoy your hollow victory if you do win the final just don't expect respect from us . That SB team would have given you guys some real competition. I don't see any of the remaining teams in the competition matching you. Oz won't make it past their next game based on what I've seen from them. Wales I think have an outside chance but it's a bit of a long one , I don't think they're quite there yet.. They're going to be a force in world rugby for the next 5-6 yrs though if they can keep it together.

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 23:18

      "Wales did play a better game than the boks" no we can claim *legit* credit for a good defensive performance and having scored two tries. Oz cannot because if you're allowed to slow the ball down at will then your defensive boasts are as hollow as your victory .

      Peter Duval - 2011-10-10 19:08

      Wales plays a similar game in the breakdowns to Australia. The ref was also too lenient on them. This is not sour grapes. We won. We should have won much further. But give credit where due. Wales is a far better team than either the Wannabies or the All Brats - and they are still improving. Australia's defense was superb - typically South African, I dare say. But their defense only became an issue because the penalties due to us wasn't forthcoming. We would not have needed to run the ball if we received the penalties rightfully due to us.

  • Louis - 2011-10-09 19:34

    There is no excuse for out pathetic play. With all the ball we had we should have won by far. I personally blame some of the forwards specifically Schalk Burger as one huge reason for our loss. I cannot understand why Schalk Burger need to be the fly-half or center in more than half the match. What do any forward want in the back-line? The purpose when you win the ball is to get it to your wings a.s.a.p. and with slow forwards passing the ball slowly, breaking the rhythm what do you expect. By the time the fly-half or center receive the ball the whole Aussie back-line is already onto us not giving us an inch movement.

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 22:42

      Not pathetic play , they played fantastic rugby and absolutely mugged Oz. "Aussie back-line is already onto us" because they are allowed to slow the ball at the contact that gives their defense time to regroup so all our phases has no impact because their defense is as set at phase 10 as it were at phase 1 Saying there is no excuse is simply not accurate .

      piet.strydom - 2011-10-10 00:18

      Actually Louis, if they did that (swing the ball to the wings the whole time), you would just complain that "they are so predictable". They did a brilliant job of switching things around, sometimes running, sometimes kicking, sometimes running the ball down to the wings. They were desperately unlucky, which happens from time to time.

  • mengelbrecht1 - 2011-10-09 19:35

    Like Naas once said, A good team will always overcome a bad ref. We had plenty of chances but never took them. The Aussies had one and took it.

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 20:03

      Thought terminating cliche .

      Hennie Lewis - 2011-10-10 13:21

      The whole World Cup is a bit "Fishy"

  • Jack Turner - 2011-10-09 19:39

    Can I

  • kevin.maharaj - 2011-10-09 19:48

    Bryce Lawrence should be fired! Check this detailed story:

  • kiwimania - 2011-10-09 20:05


      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 20:07

      say it all you want , doesn't change the fact that they were the better team . 'JUSTICE HAS A GREAT WAY OF DEALING WITH ASSES" .. let's hope it's true

      Christiaan Roos - 2011-10-09 20:15

      Bugger off you cheating loser - kiwi's are obviously sunken so low they will stop at nothing to cheat their way out of the humiliation of losing to the Boks in a WC semi-final!

  • Christiaan Roos - 2011-10-09 20:13

    Ref was abominable - kiwi cheat probably on the take from Oz as well. That said the Boks could have overcome all this and won IF we did not have PdV insisting on playing JS (disgrace to you for not retiring before WC) in stead of Bismarck. Why would this alone have made the difference? Simple, Oz scrum was under pressure from the get go. Had we Bismarck in there the pressure would have turned into scrum penalties so obvious that not even Lawrence could pretend not to see. Those were then penalty kicks of which Steyn woul have slotted at least two more - game won! Add to that Bismarcks ability to break the defensive line and more likely than not the momentum would have secured a try. So the REAL culprits are PdV and JS - Lawrence is just a tag along albeit a vry influential one.

  • assan - 2011-10-09 20:22

    As I have said before, Fourie, Morne and Fat John will the reason that we loose the world cup. Skop die donnerse bal weg !!!!!

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 20:29

      did you watch the game ? .. we messed up on our line, we didn't take 3 points when we had the opportunity , we.. many other reasons . Fourie , Morne and Fat John was NOT the problem

  • Orca - 2011-10-09 20:24

    Stop blaming the ref. Anyone who knows the rules would realise that his calls were correct . The Proteas had their chances and where not skilled enough to convert them to points. Brawn alone does not win rugby matches but SA has yet to work that one out. It's as simple as that. Maybe look at the SA coaching staff too. The coaches of three of the four remaining teams in the competition are New Zealanders.

  • CPII - 2011-10-09 20:25

    The God of Rugby wins again. Bunch of chokers with De Villiers in charge.

      CPII - 2011-10-09 22:06

      This "God" is also very powerful. Wife actually sat and cried in front of the TV. Pathetic. But they all claim to be "Christians" of note.

  • White Knight - 2011-10-09 20:35

    The fact that we lost this match shows just how poorly the coach and the captain are versed in reading the way the Aussies play the game. They should have sorted out PoCock and should have not made the handling errors unforced errors that prevented them from scoring the points they should have had, when the line was open and the game was their's for the y taking. A new captain, and a new coach, both more savvy, will be the answer to the Boks problems. Take note when appointing these two new positions, Orrible Oskens

  • Angelo - 2011-10-09 20:51

    KANGAROOS WERE OUTPLAYED anyone that knows a bit about the game will admit to that. The ref well shame ? where did learn to blow?

      Cliff - 2011-10-09 21:25

      Hi All, I just wanted to tell you that I had to change my profile due to the wrongful hijacking of it by an individual. My girlfriend, Bella, the merino and I are still happily living together in the Eastern Cape.

  • chris.swanepoel1 - 2011-10-09 21:33

    Its funny how some ppl say on here that yes the ref wasn't good but how did we not win with the amount of possession we had. It must be ppl who truly do not understand the game of rugby. Everytime the aussies infringed at the ruck time we were getting slow ball so that the aussies could regroup their defense. Also more than once were the ball stolen against the rules since the players were allowed a free for all on the ball when they weren't on their feet. This would happen when we had momentum and were close to their try line. The first try that was scored was also very suspicious how the ball popped out on the aussies side of the ruck and they caught the boks off guard. Anyone with half a brain would know the ref was way to inconsistent. I don't normally blame the ref but I would say its safe to say this time he costed us.

      nzbro - 2011-10-09 22:04

      chris.swanepoel1 read your comment again mate. you contradict yourself. [Its funny how some ppl say on here that yes the ref wasn't good but how did we not win with the amount of possession we had. It must be ppl who truly do not understand the game of rugby.] and then you finish with: [I don't normally blame the ref but I would say its safe to say this time he costed us.] My reply to you then is: "It must be ppl who truly do not understand the game of rugby." ???

      RandomDude - 2011-10-09 22:54

      Exactly right chris ...

      Mafaka - 2011-10-10 16:01

      nzbro - FU!!

  • Pierre - 2011-10-09 22:26

    If you understand anything about rugby you will know that what du Preez said was correct. SA dominated that game, but the referee did allow Pocock to get away with a lot, more than what most other referees would have allowed. In general it was one of the best Springbok sides we had. People would scoff at this but PDiv did a great job in keeping this team together after 2007. NZ keep their players longer and allow them to grow in their positions. SA keeps replacing players for the new young silver bullet, only to be replaced the next season with the next flavour of the month. Unfortunately it will be downhill from now on. We had the best team for 4 years, but we were not allowed to win. My honest opinion.

  • vinnie - 2011-10-09 22:38

    At least the Springboks were not beaten by a team - just lost to the ref - whoever "wins" the world cup 2011 will know they were protected from facing the TRUE WORLD CHAMPIONS by a NZ ref.

      Orca - 2011-10-10 08:16

      You are talking rubbish and you know it.

      david phillips - 2011-10-11 14:38

      you sound like you need some help orca rubbish is still a good word i think the word is bull crap that is what this dude is talking

  • LouBal - 2011-10-09 22:38

    It would have been nice to see the game being played like proper clean Rugby should be, I mean BLATANTLY allowing AUS to get away with so many infringements really should put a fowl taste in any real rugby fan's mouth - doesn't matter who they support. If you look at the game between NZ and ARG, there where maybe one or two mistakes by the ref, but not repeated blind eyes! I agree the Boks had the chances to take the game - but I would rather have had them loose because of only their mistakes than having to put up with this disgrace to refereeing.

  • vinnie - 2011-10-09 22:39

    At least the Springboks were not beaten by a team - just lost to the ref - whoever "wins" the world cup 2011 will know they were protected from facing the TRUE WORLD CHAMPIONS by a NZ ref.

  • Stephen Paul - 2011-10-09 22:57

    Nearly 80% of possession you have to win, ref or no ref. It could have been different if our supposed antidote to Pocock, Heinrich Brossouw, was still on the field but he was taken out by a Vickerman shoulder charge in a maul. Is he allowed to do that? If not why are we not citing him? All I can say is watch our Richie McCaw because this was most probably the job Vickerman has been given to do.

  • johnnylaw - 2011-10-09 23:13

    the ref's a c@nt, face it. nay intellectual arguments required. 'Blind side ref' , or should i say 'blind ref' is a newly created position for the IRB series....2011 is the inaugural contest and Wayne Barnes, Nigel Owens and that other twat (sorry, but my brain refuses to recall his name) are the main protagonists in this charade. To be frank, so bad is this trio of tossers that I don't believe that I will watch any more international rugby games that have the misfortune to to play to the tune of their whistle. Actually, I'm a little embarrassed to say that I am so glad my wife cant see me typing this because she would be horrrified by this dis[play of pure delinquency...none the less, I would just love to meet any one of these refs in a dark alley and just beat them to a pulp

  • gharri - 2011-10-09 23:18

    This makes me wonder if the game of rugby is really worth watching! Bokke, you won on the day, regardless of what the stats, the ref, the scorboard, the opposition or the 'so called' supporters have to say!!

      ozzymate - 2011-10-09 23:27

      gharri AGAIN YOU DISPLAY THE TYPICAL BOK "OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY SYNDROME" Bokke, you won on the day, regardless of what the stats, the ref, the scorboard, THE SCOREBOARD SAYS YOU LOST SO STAY IN REAL TIME.IT HELPS TO SWALLOW THE CHOKE

      gharri - 2011-10-09 23:46

      ozzymate - THIS IS MY OPINION!! whatever you percieve you believe, rugby rules are there to read and interpret, if you don't understand them, then please don't comment! Clearly you don't!! Whatever ozmate, have a good time arguing!

  • ShadowfaxUK - 2011-10-09 23:30

    Ozzymate my definition of pathetic is when another country’s referee has to sell his integrity just so his team has an easier path against YOUR TEAM.

  • Hannes Coetzee - 2011-10-10 02:12

    All passengers who is on flight AU1109 from WellintGon to OT, you may now board through gate Q4L.

  • Johan - 2011-10-10 02:53

    Yes a game with bad ref calls from start to finish. Boks outplayed the Wallabies but I have just one question: We setup camp inside the Wallabies half and had at least 10 golden opportunities to get points with dropgoals, why did we not use these, all the hard work done by the forwards, perfect position for Morne! I feel shattered but cannot help to think that we lost this game ourselves. PS. Still remember Jannie de Beer's 5 great dropgoals against England, well planned and well executed.

      Mags_24 - 2011-10-10 10:20

      maybe the players arent clever as they think they are. which is surprising since they coached themselves to tri-nations and lions series victories.

  • Shakes - 2011-10-10 08:07

    Well after reading all the comments it just proved again the two faced glory hounds who support the team when they win but ground and pound them when they lose. The team played great rugby yesterday, best in years but besides the refs crap calls, we had chances which we wasted and thats that. The team made me proud and I hope they get a great turnout to welcome them home.

  • Boikanyo Alefeng - 2011-10-10 08:09

    i feel very sad for all you soar losers.. You lost..thats that, in sport sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. nothing wrong...its just for the love of the game. come on....

  • myright2b - 2011-10-10 08:23

    I'm really trying to care about this, and not laugh my ass off, but unfortunately my " I give a crap about the effing Bokke" is busted. So, hahahahahahahahahahagahahahaha!

  • Simoné - 2011-10-10 08:25

    Random Dude is absolutely correct. Bryce Lawrence is an absolute disgrace and I expected nothing less from him (knew it would happen even prior to the game with him officiating). He is indeed the "Kiwis" inside man. Over here in New Zealand it is (hypocritically) reported that, "It defies belief", how the Boks could have lost with so much possession and all the tackles Oz had to make (The hypocracy in this place defies belief). The answer is simple it couldnt have without the ref. It was a set-up and it is a blot on the game. High tackles by the Wallabies were not called, Wallabie hands in the scrum right in front of his eyes were not called. BRYCE LAWRENCE was openly partial and it is an obvious and a disgraceful display - leaves a sour taste over rugy world cup because the results are being manipulated from the pool devisions (that gave NZ a free ride to the final) to referee Lawrence. Shame on them no integrity. I agree with Random Dude the knives should be out and there should be a huge outcry into this mans display of refereeing. Be assured if the "All Blacks" were treated in similar fashion you would never hear the end of it from the public, the coaches and players. Why are we so apathetic in the face of all of this. Ps - Dont give this cowboys dont cry stuff - that kind of attitude reinforces their belief that they can get away with it (now and in the future) and reinforces their belief that "the cowboys" are dumb for taking it lying down.

      mmakiwane - 2011-10-10 10:52

      Simone were booted out of the 2007 World Cup by a pathetic Wayne Barnes call regarding a clean forward pass, Wales had put a penalty over and barnes together with some pathetic linesmen ruled that it did not go over. They are given technology to help but they dont. In 1995 a try was scored by Emille Ntmack from France against SA and it was denied. So we must stop being one eyed. It has happened in our favour , so when things go against us lets accept that '' die wiel draai''.

      TheSteve - 2011-10-10 13:40

      mmakiwane, when a ref makes one or two bad calls, a close may go ether way, our problem is not one two, but the many that went Aus way. But we should still have put them away. But one thing is for certian , ref's Bryce Lawrence should ever ref another game.

  • Simoné - 2011-10-10 08:40

    Random dude is correct. Shameless display by Bryce Lawrence. Absoltuley crooked and deliberate set up againts the Boks. There were indeed numerouse high tackles and playing the ball on the ground during a loose scrums. Lawrence ignored all of the above deliberatly (all the time) and it leaves a sour taste in the mouth and over rugby world cup that pools appear to be manipulated (giving NZ) a free ride to the final pretty much to the one sided blowing (not by appearance but absolute fact) of referee Lawrence. No integrity and dont want to hear that cowboys dont cry stuff. In New Zealand all hell would break loose from the public to the coaches and players had they received this treatment. Why are we so apathetic in the face of this. Ps - They think the cowboys are dumb when they get away with it and the cowboys do nothing.

  • Mister - 2011-10-10 08:59

    The value of Kamp Staaldraad... finish and klaar.

  • Haydn Gawrosnky - 2011-10-10 09:12

    @OzzyMate, it's funny how you telling SA fans to shut up, I seem to recall you Aussies screaming blue murder with the way Lawrence Reffed your game against Ireland. I think you should shut up and go read aus articles. You getting this upset because it's all true, SA outplayed you and you needed the ref to save you.