Spiro Zavos - Rugby Heaven columnist

Victor Matfield, the Springboks' lineout genius, had the word "Justice" written across the front of his headgear, and along with the rest of the side that played a memorable third Test against the British and Irish Lions, on an armband, as well.

I wondered who or what cause the protest might be supporting until the commentator told us that it was a sign of solidarity for Bakkies Botha over his two-week suspension for foul play during the second Test. The Springboks wanted to highlight their contention that Botha should have been cleared of the charge against him.

If we ever needed further proof of the arrogance and obsessive belief in the divine right of the Springboks to get their way on and off the field, this gesture has provided it. Botha had charged the Lions prop Adam Jones off the ball and had dislocated his shoulder. He was given a two-week suspension. It is unprecedented in rugby that the integrity of an IRB ruling has been challenged so blatantly and provocatively in this way.

When the Springboks captain, John Smit, was asked if his team might get into trouble with the IRB over its armband protest, he replied: "We'll have to see."

The case of Botha needs to be looked at in tandem with that of Schalk Burger. In the opening seconds of the second Test against the Lions, Luke Fitzgerald's eyes somehow attracted the groping fingers of Burger. The Canadian IRB official, Alan Hudson, ruled that the action was reckless but not intentional: that there was some short-lived tearing and blurred vision, and that there was no eye-gouging "in the sense of a ripping or aggressive intrusion of the eye area".

Even a layman can see there is an inherent contradiction in this finding. Burger's fingers were in Fitzgerald's eye for some time. Some damage was done to the eyes. Given that eye-gouging is a "serious matter," the eight-week ban imposed on Burger was totally inadequate and an injustice to the injured player.

Burger and Botha play the part of the hitmen of the Springboks pack, the enforcers. They launch themselves, illegally, like missiles into the rucks and mauls. They constantly provoke opponents off the ball. They are persistent offenders in the rucks and mauls, Burger going off his feet to kill the ball and Botha coming in from the side and invariably lying on the opponents' side of the ruck. They tackle around the head constantly.

If the referee tolerates this mayhem, which often happens, the opposition get intimidated and overwhelmed. This tolerance gives a decided edge to the Springboks, as the first two Tests against the Lions indicated. But on Saturday in the third Test, the Lions trounced the Springboks 28-9. Australian referee Stu Dickinson penalised the Springboks early on for killing the ball at the tackle. This excellent refereeing and the absence of the thuggish play of Burger and Botha meant that the Springboks forwards struggled to stop the Lions recycling ball.

With this front-foot ball, the Lions backs made breaks time and again. Forced to play with shape and discipline, the Springboks were, according to Peter Bills of The Independent, "as clueless as their coach Peter de Villiers".

After the debacle at Johannesburg and the bizarre defence of Botha, things might have changed for the Springboks. The Lions revealed that without their hitmen, the Springboks struggled to make an impact. This might be the true justice in this matter.