Bulls have Kaplan to blame

2011-06-21 10:45

Gary Boshoff

Regaining your best form in a match most pundits expected you to lose is exactly how the Sharks upstaged the Bulls at fortress Loftus on Saturday! What a match! What a performance by the men in black!

I recall Victor Matfield stating on more than one occasion that the Bulls will continue with what works for them – expressing confidence in the Bulls game plan. 

I am sure he will concede that this time around John Plumtree’s Sharks’ ball-in-hand strategy, applied with a tad of extra wit in the midfield, got the better of the Bulls. I last saw the Sharks play like this (especially in the second half) during last year’s Currie Cup campaign: the unmatched ball retention, patience, continuity and skilled, swift handling (all rolled into one) was too much for the gallant Bulls side. The better team won on the night.

However, before we look at the Sharks' chances in Nelson, New Zealand this coming Saturday, I have to state the obvious about the officiating in this classic match we saw on Saturday. 

On three occasions the Sharks got done in by what seemed like pretty straight-forward decisions by assistant referee, Christy du Preez. On another occasion referee Jonathan Kaplan ruled a 22m restart after a Bulls player pushed the ball into his own in-goal area and over the dead-ball line. 

On all three occasions the Sharks would have had attacking possession within five metres of the Bulls line - pretty telling mistakes I would say. 

Nevertheless, despite these “setbacks” they remained focused on the task at hand and never flinched once during that whole second half. The Bulls, playing catch-up throughout, fumbled under pressure and just could not put enough pressure or create meaningful gaps and space to penetrate the Sharks’ defensive wall - which incidentally was much improved for this game.

The final straw came when Kaplan put an end to this classic contest in the most absurd manner. I for one, and I believe the majority of the spectators in the stadium, still felt that the Bulls could pull a draw out of the bag during those last moments, especially after they were awarded a penalty and kicked for touch almost immediately - clearly showing their intention and still having the self-belief that they could do it. 

One of the scenarios that played out in my mind was the Bulls driving the ball up to the Sharks’ 22m line from where Morne Steyn would launch a final drop goal to draw level and grab the final playoff spot from the Sharks. 

The contest was far from over at that stage and the match definitely not won yet. Into the limelight stepped Kaplan, penalising the Bulls for obstruction in the lineout - effectively ending this closely contested match in what can only be described as a damp squib. 

The penalty was highly technical and most probably correct. But may I ask: how many similar penalties are awarded in the whole of the Super Rugby competition? How many similar transgressions are just left without even a mention?

Not many if you ask me, in fact, I am sure one could probably count them on one hand. To reserve one of those for this close contest was inappropriate and downright unnecessary - it detracted from the intense contest that played itself out for 80 minutes prior to that moment.

Now I know this sounds controversial and somewhat off the mark. However, I firmly believe that Kaplan should have let the match play itself out and should not have ended it in the anti-climactic fashion he did. I do understand the referee perspective of applying the laws of the game without exception and that it is the accepted and right thing to do. Perhaps this was one occasion where it didn’t apply? 

Do the Sharks stand a chance of beating the Crusaders in New Zealand? Sure they do. I didn’t think they’d be in Nelson this coming weekend; now they are and this means they have a fighting chance to win. If they can keep the momentum of their last 40 minutes of Super Rugby they will be as good a bet as the Crusaders. 

Gary Boshoff is a former SARU player and current Afrikaans rugby commentator on SuperSport.

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.


  • gooinat - 2011-06-21 10:52

    Sour grapes Gary????

      Mike@CapeT - 2011-06-21 11:52

      Yes, it is sour grapes. Why should a team benefit form an infringement (even if it is just technical) just because many teams have got away with it in the past!?

      Mad Hatter - 2011-06-21 12:09

      Probably one of the best matches to watch so far in the S15 , i think freddy did make the difference and added the little bit of creativity the Sharks needed . There were definately i few missed calls but i think the result reflected the match, sharks played the tactical game better keeping the bulls away from attacking positions and getting them to kick pocession back to them and not letting the bulls play their rolling game . Lets get behind the sharks for the play offs !

      Grayman - 2011-06-21 12:19

      As a born and bred Natalian I naturally support Natal/KZN/Sharks in every sport code. And it is because of articles like this that I am anti any Gauteng based team, be it Joburg or Prehistoria based. I am sick and tired of biased articles in the national media because all the reporters and commentators hail from Gauteng.

      Theuns - 2011-06-21 13:10

      @Grayman...stop smoking that Dagga of yours and get over it...

      Howzitekse - 2011-06-21 13:34

      Very poor journalism.

      rugby_guru - 2011-06-21 14:08

      I hate reading this okes arguments, did the forward pass earlier for bason to score a try also cost us another 7 points we never got, or the 3 kicks lambie missed which would have been an extra 16 points + the 3 we won by that is 19 points, please.. we where the better team and that is all there is to it..

      kyktweekeer - 2011-06-21 15:41

      @Grayman-what is wrong with the article? Gary wrote as he saw the game-and so did Kaplan-blow the game as he saw it, that is. If we all rattle our cots (like you do) when we disagree and then-typical of your bahviour, blame "any Gauteng based team", the fault is not with us, or Gary or Kaplan. It's with you.If they disagree with you, its got nothing to do where they reside. Get it?

      Grayman - 2011-06-21 16:28

      @kyktweekeer: I hear you. But you don't seem to be hearing me. Gary admits that the refs missed four attacking opportunities for the Sharks, but all he does is winge about the last call of Kaplan and how things could have changed. A little one sided don't you think? As for supporting a team ... all's fair in love and war. I relish a good battle of two evenly matched teams going blow for blow. All the better if it is a fair match and anyone will always back one side over the other. I have given my reasons for backing the Sharks over Gautengalengs, it's a pity that some Bulls supporters are just anti every other team on the planet with a pithy distaste and no valid reason for it.

      JakesP - 2011-06-22 14:17

      Well while we're on sour grapes and all that, this little tiff can be blamed on boy Butch, sharksies really needed a little help to even get in that game :D

      kungfupanda - 2011-06-22 16:20

      I just wasted 10 minutes of my precious time reading this inconsequential garbage. Reminds me of the last time I read an article of Gary's.

  • M.C. - 2011-06-21 10:53

    Die Bulls kan nog eindstryd toe gaan, hulle moet net kaartjies koop!

      Ace Ventura - 2011-06-21 11:22

      Dit was 2 dae terug snaaks gewees.

      BLOODY AGENT - 2011-06-21 11:49

      Ace dit was toe nie eers snaaks gewees nie

      frans.visserdsb - 2011-06-21 13:10

      ja... dit sal hopelik die Stormers teen die sharks wees in Kaapstad... Jammer Bulle, dit was n goeie run, maar dis nou oor.

      Capso - 2011-06-23 13:07

      Ace, jy al die een gehoor oor die Bulls wat nog die final kan haal??

  • sonnyg - 2011-06-21 10:53

    Dam Mate, another shocker of a article. Rules are Rules, you cant blow them according to siutations of the game. You sound like the aussie commentators who dont want the refs to blow for Skew lineout throws just because the other team did not contest the lineout. Ridiculous, the game must be blown by the rule book so there is consitency.

      Dan Steel - 2011-06-21 11:50

      So you mean the refs have to ensure that the ball is put into the scrum straight, eh sonnyg? You see them doing that? Do you complain about it? Kaplan could just as well have penalised any of the scrumhalves at any scrum, allowing it in virtually all games before and all scrums in this game, and decding when to apply it in an ad-hoc fashion? And according to you, that would have been the right thing to do?

      sonnyg - 2011-06-21 11:56

      @Dan Steel, Actually it would, I cant stand scrumhalves putting the ball in skew. The only way you get consitency is blowing according to the rule book that is why sports have rules. So I am not sure what your point is?

      Schweet - 2011-06-21 12:01

      Rules are rules when they don't affect your side, we saw that in the sharks lucy draw thanks once again to a referee's incompatance, when the lions was ataacking the sharks line 5 min before the final whistle the ref aloud a sharks player of his feet to steal the ball and then less than a minute later penilsed the lions for doing a replay of what the sharks did thus handing them the win! so no the sharks don't desereve to be there and will lose badly to the crusdares. the fact remains Kaplan and Lawrence are two of the most one sided refs in sa.... understand this any player does not mind loosing when he is out played by a better team not by a better ref!

      frans.visserdsb - 2011-06-21 13:12

      I also think the refs need a lesson about what is 90 degrees - they only ever seem to blow the scrum when it goes 180 degrees..

      biscuit - 2011-06-21 13:41

      @schweet. tell me this ... who played better rugby at loftus on sat? regardless of decisions that went either way. start enjoying rugby not complaining about

      Sapientia - 2011-06-21 15:55

      While the words "rule" and "law" are synonymous, I look forward to the day the armchair experts on this site understand that rugby is governed by LAWS and it is usual practice to discuss the LAWS of the game. Call me pedantic (I prefer "Sapientia" though), but it's an irritation to see the word "rules" bandied about in discussions as though we were talking about the round-ball game.

      GSXA - 2011-06-21 16:04

      @Schweet. The same applies when no advantage was played in the Stormers vs Bulls game. When Habana was tackled just before the final whistle and the Bulls player knocked the ball on, where was the advantage? Did you see Schalk asking Kaplan about this or were your eyes closed? If advantage had been played the Bulls may have been out of their misery then already. In this instance the same ref you are complaining about, advantaged the Bulls. At the end of the day it is only a game and life goes on, so get over it. Find it very hard to understand how a sports game can affect the rest of your life and lead you to get so blinded that you cannot see when your side gets the advantage. Take the rough with the smooth.

      Schweet - 2011-06-21 16:11

      @ biscuit - that is excatly my point why did the sharks need kaplans help they played well enough on there own to win and desreve to win, it's not about sour grapes mate rather lets be honest the standard of refs in the S15 is not up to standard!

      sonnyg - 2011-06-21 16:15

      @Schweet please give an example of how the Sharks needed Kaplans help? Because the bulls were still far scoring.

      sonnyg - 2011-06-21 16:23

      @Sapientia, I look forward to the day, pedantic language experts piss off from sports blogs.

  • BLOODY AGENT - 2011-06-21 10:54

    Gary,we lost because we played crap,We must be honest never looked like team that wanted to retain the Trophy,You dont wait for the last game to put you in with a chance,Kick and chase did not work for us this season finish and klaar,stop looking for excuses and accept it..Bulls supporter forever!!!!!!!

      sparkies - 2011-06-21 11:04

      Alwyn, i respect you for saying what you did.You still an idiot!!!

      SAFFA-CAT - 2011-06-21 11:05

      @Alwyn - you are in fact a pretty decent chap. Seriously, I get the feeling that you are indeed a TRUE rugby supporter/lover. And yes, I will fight with you come Currie Cup, and next years Super 15 etc, but I reckon many so-called rugby lovers could learn something from you.

      René Müller - 2011-06-21 11:18

      The Bulls did not play with vigour, and that's the end of it really!! Besides the players did not even look 'sad' after the game! Why should I be sad? That 'hunger' to win was not there! All the refs suck at this point also the clown that had the whistle in Bloem. I don't know why our refs are so poor lately, its a bit embarrassing. As a Bull supporter, I am still extremely proud of them for achieving what they did over the last couple of years. It might take a year or so to get to the top, but they will be up there again. Gary our supporters don't blame the ref, why should you? We have moved on already!

      Ace Ventura - 2011-06-21 11:21

      Agree AGENT, the Sharks were better on the day. End of story.

      gooinat - 2011-06-21 11:22

      Alwyn I salute you even though I am not quite convinced about your sudden change of heart.Saffa and Sparky,Alwyn is now a stormers supporter till the end of the S15!!!!!!!!

      nhs - 2011-06-21 11:28

      Respect bra for saying that...One of the few bulls supporters who would actually admit that their team played crap..

      GHT - 2011-06-21 11:37

      I was a neutral and I have to say. What a game. It was very enjoyable and hope the remaining SA teams can make SA proud! I have to say that I think the Bulls would have had a better shot at beating the Crusaders than the sharks... But at the end of the day the Sharks did play some awesome rugby. Go Stormers and Sharks!. And in 4 weeks time. Go Bokke!!

      watalife - 2011-06-21 11:41

      @Rene How about you read the bulls supporters (Bloody Agent& Co) comments about the kicking game that let them down before you call me an idiot? You are blind when it comes to the actual problem in the North from School,Club,Varsity and Senior Rugby. The game has changed and the bulls are falling behind hence my comments yesterday about ALL RUGBY in the North. If you dont understand then rather stick to the shopping @ Wollies or painting your nails.

      BLOODY AGENT - 2011-06-21 11:49

      Sparky ,again i have to repeat myself ,nobody gives a sh-t what you think Saffa,thanks Ace ,Next year maybe,still have 3 Super trophies to feel proud about Gooinat ,no from here i will be supporting the Boks and the Blue Bulls

      sparkies - 2011-06-21 11:51

      Alwyn, chill my buddy. Well done for saying what you said.Stormers are true champs

      gooinat - 2011-06-21 12:00

      Alwyn if you mourn like this cause the Bulls got knocked out imagine how you gonna be over the next years when they win nothing,if this is any consolation to you,you will still our friend!!!!!!

      René Müller - 2011-06-21 12:11

      Watalife, get a life.... I really don't know what you're on about! I have never called anyone an idiot, or insult anyone on the blog, you've got that covered by yourself! Wollies? Really sunshine, all the excitement that your team are in the play-offs are affecting you, and not in a good way either!!!

      Grayman - 2011-06-21 12:14

      @Agent: Spoken like a gentleman, sir.

      sparkies - 2011-06-21 12:17

      put the brakes on,Alwyn is no gentlemen

      watalife - 2011-06-21 12:22

      Rene, Fantastic life thanks for the concern but dont really need it. Short memory at your young and tender age? yesterday you had so much to say about my comments about bulls rugby and now you silent? If you had any rugby brain or played for that matter then you would understand what I was saying. Anyway have a lekker day and enjoy the rugby saturday.

      BLOODY AGENT - 2011-06-21 12:25

      I did not comment to please The Stormers trio,i merely stated the facts,and couldnt care less if you call me names.The Stormes are not the Champs as you Sparky claims,dont get ahead of yourselves,and Gooinat i am not in mourning,The Bulls deserved to lose and they did,just hope for your sake that we will not say the same about the Stormers in two weeks time

      BLOODY AGENT - 2011-06-21 12:32

      Wattie,may i call you an idiot?

      watalife - 2011-06-21 12:49

      @BLOODY me what you smaak

      René Müller - 2011-06-21 12:49

      Watalife, still don't know what you're on about, however cannot stay to entertain you, lunch with friends - maybe you should get some. Please give the heading/time of my 'so-called insult' to refresh my memory! Because you are the 'delusional' one!

      watalife - 2011-06-21 12:58

      Ok Rene go and enjoy lunch now...

      Howzitekse - 2011-06-21 13:40

      The Bulls played very well, but the Sharks played better.

      Maarten - 2011-06-21 14:27

      While we where playing with ball in hand, the bulls looked pretty decent. But once the mindless kicking started it was game over(Fourie kicked about 80 percent of our ball away). That and the fact that we lost the line outs on our OWN throw once Gary came on so yeah, the Shark knew exactly how to come beat us at home. No excuses.

  • Mark - 2011-06-21 11:00

    It's easy to see which pair of glasses you were watching the match through...

  • Devon - 2011-06-21 11:00

    You can't say that the decision was correct and that he shouldn't have made the call in the same breath!!! That's like saying Steve Walsh was right in the 2007 final to allow play to continue after the knock on and hands in the ruck because it made for a more exciting finish. PATHETIC!!!!

  • Mark - 2011-06-21 11:01

    I don't know why you get paid to write articles...

  • SAFFA-CAT - 2011-06-21 11:03

    Gary old chap - why did you not pen an article about how Kaplan could have given the Stormers a penalty advantage 2 weeks ago (in the last move of the game) which would also have led to a BETTER outcome for the Cape team? I just find the 'timing' of your article very fact it tastes pretty much like those sour worms the kiddies eat. Cheese with your whine Gary? Simonsberg brie or Zevenwacht Mature cheddar?

      gooinat - 2011-06-21 11:24

      Hey Saffa,Gary's article reminds me of that vrot cheese,I think they call it Rockerford(excuse the spelling)

      watalife - 2011-06-21 11:31

      Just another suurgat, blame evrything & evrybody besides themself. They need not look any further than the old game plan they play with, they will never learn that the GAME in general has changed. Rugby in the north has not been up to the usual standard for a while and now they are paying. When will those thick planks learn that change is needed and very soon if they want to win again.

      Hayden - 2011-06-21 11:45

      Heehee Saffa i was thinking the same thing. Had Kaplan given the Stormers the advantage the Bulls bags would of been packed in the Cape already but now its seems to me he had (according to the article) given them a lifeline to be eaten up by a hungry Shark on "Fortress Loftus' Bwaaahaahaa

      watalife - 2011-06-21 11:52

      @Hayden I could have not written it better.

      Rampage15 - 2011-06-21 12:48

      Gary Boshoff go write lyrics 4 Steve Hofmeyer because u suck writing articles.

      Laure - 2011-06-21 13:10

      Hi all Just review the highlights again and you will see Burger diving over the top of the ruck and shouldering van den Heever. In my opinion, it should have been penalty to the Bulls, and some refs even view this as a yellow card offense. Burger was lucky to get away with it. After that, Basson tried to play the ball, having already released the tackled player. This is where he knocked it on, and the rules state that after the final hooter, any stoppage that would result in line out or scrum means an end to the game. I am not to clear on the advantage law, and if he could have let play continue to give the Stormers advantage. However, the first point I made still stands and I have to say that refereeing standard does not impress me right now.

  • sparkies - 2011-06-21 11:05

    Garry, you starting to sound like an Aussie.Move on

      gooinat - 2011-06-21 11:25

      Marcell is looking for a roomie!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      BLOODY AGENT - 2011-06-21 12:56

      Sparky you sound like a no brainer give it a rest

  • Mkhetheka - 2011-06-21 11:19

    Come on now. If a player spear-tackles another in the 77th minute, he shouldn't be yellow carded because it will spoil the agem. Rules are rules. they are there for a reason. If Kaplan had let the game play it self out, with the Bulls on teh charge and they win, he would still be blamed for the bad called against the Sharks.

  • Ryan - 2011-06-21 11:19

    Typical bulls supporter. It was obstruction, blew it according to the law. Everyone always moans about refs getting it wrong. Now that he got it right you are also moaning???

      Ace Ventura - 2011-06-21 11:43

      Rather say 'typical supporter'.

      Maarten - 2011-06-21 14:33

      Rayn, why don't YOU explain to us how and why it was obstruction? I bet you that you cannot quote the appropriate law. So don't try to be clever ok. And yes, I can explain it to you if I absolutely have to. (from a SERIAS Bulls supporter)

      Ryan - 2011-06-22 08:23

      Go watch the incident again and read the rule book. Danie Rossouw ended up before Matfield before the maul started. Which means he got in the way of the tackler.If it happened during the maul he would have been ok.

      molefeP - 2011-06-22 12:36

      Ryan, FAIL! Before you comment on rules at least make sure that you know what they are.

  • CBos - 2011-06-21 11:21

    Gary, that's the story of the Sharks - Without the South African Ref's they would be 10th on the log.(And i'm not a Bull supporter)

      Marcell - 2011-06-21 13:28

      Almal het Plonker se vertoning vergeet.

      Leonard - 2011-06-21 14:12

      You got the same mentality as one.Shallow

      Wovenivy - 2011-06-21 15:18

      @CBos. What a pathetic, brainless comment... did you read the first part of the article where he said the Sharks were done in 3 times? (and I'm not a Sharks supporter)

  • qwikchek - 2011-06-21 11:33

    Gary... I have a whole dictionary of abusive words for you on your article and your attitude, but one sentence says it all : "The penalty was highly technical and most probably correct" All I can say further to you is "SUURGAT"

  • Luke Peters - 2011-06-21 11:38

    You said it in you line..."was it correct..probably"....end of debate

  • Hendrik - 2011-06-21 11:44

    Gary, why were your mouth shut wen Jonker won, o sorry, i mean the sharks won the cheetahs? And I am not talking about technically correct or wrong, I just talking about rubbish reffering. For example the two infringements in that lineout that jonker pointed out, and just said take it over. WHAT???? I thought you said there were two infringements! jonker must be banned forever!

  • Andre Liebenberg - 2011-06-21 11:49

    So Gary criticizes Kaplan for correct refereeing and shrugs off the actual errors that he (Gary) himself listed. That sounds objective and informed (not). I'll be sure not to listen to your commentary in future, Gary.

      sonnyg - 2011-06-21 12:49

      LOL... I think this is the most ridiculous article I have ever read. On top of it all he makes the headline “Bulls have Kaplan to blame”.

      Dowwe Duane - 2011-06-21 15:28

      Bulls robbed once again!

  • Hayden - 2011-06-21 11:49

    Vacancy available at "The Herald". Requirements: former SARU player and current Afrikaans rugby commentator on SuperSport & Bulls supporter.

      Rob van den Heuvel - 2011-06-21 14:13

      Must have one eye and wear rose tinted glasses, preferably of the Bulls kind...

  • vinchainsaw - 2011-06-21 11:52

    So the ref only refs the rules in the first 79 minutes and ignores them at the death when it really counts? Seems a slightly odd opinion to me.

  • Andre - 2011-06-21 11:52

    The ref sucks as much as this article sucks..

  • vinchainsaw - 2011-06-21 11:54

    Gary, how would you have felt if Cueto had not been called for a foot in touch in the dying moments of the 2007 WC final? Would you have also have felt the ref should've let the match play out in the interests of an exciting contest?

      Dowwe Duane - 2011-06-21 16:36

      I am copy/pasting "Stomer4eva" comment here for all to see. i HAD A BIT OF FREE TIME ON MY HANDS AND CHECKED THROUGH ALL THE HOSPITALS IN CANADA FOR A DOCTOR OF SOUTH AFRICAN HERITAGE , GUESS WHAT NONE , NOT ONE , SO I WONDER WHERE OLD EFFEL ( DOWWE DUANE) IS SITUATED - BLUE BULLS ARE CLOWNS Now this is a man who reckons he kinda knows it all and is of above average IQ: NO SA doctors in the ALL OF CANADA! Do you know how many provinces there are in Canada? Since you've searched ALL hospitals (there must be thousands) can you please name them all to us? Have you tried College of Physicians and surgeons of British Columbia or Man I knew you were never gonna transplant human brains, but holy, now you've really hit your name with a plank!!!!

      Dowwe Duane - 2011-06-21 16:40

      And the best, little SAFFA is like a foxterrier with Stome4eva, man LOTS of bark, ZERO bite, just trying to be in and denying that other people here might have 10 times his income and 40 times his IQ

  • Johann - 2011-06-21 12:00

    Jeez Gary, complaining because the ref made a correct call??? Really? Please man.

  • Obama Bin Laden - 2011-06-21 12:00

    how much are you paying media24 to let you write these `articles'? You admit the decision was ``correct'' yet you still say its Kaplans' fault they lost? PATHETIC RUBBISH. No wonder media24 is retrenching

  • Spies - 2011-06-21 12:01

    I think the Bulls have more cause to blame Marius Jonker for giving the Sharks the Cheetah game. The fact is the Bulls never looked like winning on Saturday, but if the Sharks had lost the game against the Cheetahs, as they deserved. The Bulls would have gone though.

  • JustinD - 2011-06-21 12:12

    Yes Gary for not loosing by more.

  • Chris - 2011-06-21 12:14

    Gary, your article title is a tad misleading. You have highlighted more points where the Sharks have reason to be upset in your article. The one thing you do mention where the Bulls could possibly feel cheated (believe me I did!) is a case of imagine if they DID get away from that final lineout with a successful dropkick and a place in the play-offs - how the Sharks would feel screwed right now (providing there really was a penalizable offence in the lineout). I still don't know what the penalty was for, and there were PLENTY holes in Kaplan's refereeing two consecutive weeks - most of which unfortunately went against the Bulls (although admittedly he missed a clear Bulls high tackle on the goalline). Kaplan is not the worst of them, but he definitely made it difficult for the Bulls to gain momentum two weeks in a row. The previous week against the Stormers was more blatant and obvious. Be that as it may, the Sharks were definitely more deserving of the play-off spot than the Bulls because of their more consistent season, regardless of what happened on the field on Saturday. The Bulls screwed up one too many in the early days of the season - and that's where it was lost. I'll leave you with a thought though: The Bulls would have had a much better chance against the Blues than the Sharks have against the Crusaders this coming weekend. It is a pity the Brumbies didn't help us to secure three SA play-off teams by eliminating the Waratahs! Go SHARKS!! Go STORMERS!!

  • tiaannel - 2011-06-21 12:36

    This is a Bulls thing to do. Even my dad said directly after the game. "Look, this is going to be the referee's fault again that the Bulls didn't win"

      Ace Ventura - 2011-06-21 13:18

      Like the doctor said to your mother at the time of your birth: ''Look, this is going to be your husband's fault again that your son looks like that"

  • Trevor Cramer - 2011-06-21 12:37

    As a former Blue Bull employee, with all due respect, this smacks of sour grapes Mr Boshoff. I am an ardent Bulls fan and I cannot honestly lay the blame on the referee's doorstep..That's much too easy !!!..Lets take defeat on the chin and build a new generation now of Bulsl stars...The few refereeing "mistakes" had no marked influence on bthe outcome of what was a classic game of rugby...

  • lenand40 - 2011-06-21 12:44

    So, if I understand you Gary, Kaplan made the right decision, but he is being slagged for not once again denying the Sharks penalties and possession they so deserved? I do not understand the logic at all. If Kaplan made the right call (technical or otherwise) then that is it, MATCH OVER. If the decision was wrong, then there is merit in this debate. Since yourself admit that the decision was technically correct, why is Kaplan blamed? What next, let a forward pass slide in order to create an atmosphere of competitiveness? What if the Bulls had scored after the infringement, and denied the Sharks a legitimate opportunity to play in Nelson?

  • Eugene - 2011-06-21 12:46

    What I don't understand, is the fact that Gary Boshoff is a former rugby player, so what does he not understand? If there was obstruction (in this case, truck-and-trailer) its a penalty and the game is finished? The bulls had a chance to win, but they gave away a penalty at the end? That's how the game of rugby works... Sorry Gary, your story does not pan out... Last thought, was Kaplan just supposed to let the Bulls win after the penalty, causing even more negativity towards him?

  • ryan.a.riley - 2011-06-21 12:49

    dumb..dumber..Gary Boshoff!!

  • Mark Scrooby - 2011-06-21 12:55

    Wow, did you get paid to write this? How can you ever think to not sanction an offence? Maybe time to hang up your "pen"!

  • Thami Fraser - 2011-06-21 12:55

    Gary, your take on the referee being to blame for the Sharks win is so jaundicely biased it smacks of geelsug!!!! Geelsug vir 'n Bloubul is darem te erg!!!!

  • Spartan - 2011-06-21 13:02

    Steve Walsh refereeing style suites Bulls game.

  • astrix1 - 2011-06-21 13:07

    Hey Gary, what makes you think the Bulls could win the game in the last 2 min if they could,nt do it in 78 min while they had the oppertunity. Oo so you think the rev should have helped them? Bottomline is the Bulls played crap and the Sharks were all over them. Tough but true

  • Gazza69 - 2011-06-21 13:19

    Bulls weren't good enough......get over it and support the Stormers and Sharks!!!

      Gazza69 - 2011-06-21 13:55

      Hey Gary, what is blue and goes.."beep, beep, beep?" The Bulls victory bus reversing back into the garage!!!!

  • Dwerg - 2011-06-21 13:24

    A whole article about the referee being wrong, for being accurate? It would help if the writers of the sport stop bemoaning aspects of matches and try to stay objective about things. The first part of this entry should be posted on a Bulls fan page.

  • LouisFLY - 2011-06-21 13:30

    dit help nie om te kla nie..die bulls is uit..en niemand gee om nie..

  • Kaapie - 2011-06-21 13:32

    Gary why is it that you dont mention the forward pass from WO that ended in Basson scoring a try and that would have meant that the scoreline would have been different. The lineout call was correct and i have seen it called in the present s15 campaign, admittedly not often enough. Oh to some of the okes responding Gary played his rugby for Tygerberg and was UWC before he left for Bulls country. I dont think he is biased to the Bull. I would imagine more of a Stormers bias here, but then again not sure.

      navarac - 2011-06-22 08:58

      Fact. S15 refs have been consistent - consistently careless. However, in mitigation, they must blow as they see it. They do not have the multiple slomo replays from all angles that we armchair critics have. On the other hand, I could argue that if a ref makes a mistake he is either incompetent or a deliberate cheat! Give them a break, please ... unless it's against my team!

  • Jock Strap - 2011-06-21 13:41

    i reckon these 'reporters' are paid per post-report comment i.e. the more idiotic their article, the more people respond, the more traffic this website gets, the more plonkers like this get paid...i suppose i just gave him R20-00 for my 5cent worth

  • trublu - 2011-06-21 13:56

    Presies Gary!! I said before the game that Kaplan will "see" to it that the sharks go through. He kept them in the game with his whistle. Typically south african refs....couldnt wait to get both coastal team in playoffs for a change. They wanted to get rid of the bulls so badly...well now we will see which south african team will win the super trophy again. I doubt whether the stormers or sharks have what it takes....the bulls have won THREE! So suck on that refs!

      Lloyd - 2011-06-21 14:13

      trublu before read your comment, I thought Gary, Ace Ventura and Effel were the dumbest people on the planet.

      trublu - 2011-06-21 14:14

      The S.A refs helped the sharks "winning" against the cheetahs, the Lions (A draw) and beating the bulls. It's a disgrace! Jonker even acknowledged the fact that he made 15!!!! mistakes to benefit the sharks.!! Pathetic to say the least.

  • Porra - 2011-06-21 13:57

    Gary, do you want the refs to change the rules beacause you want the Bulls to win? Like Marius Plonker Jonker did in the Cheetahs Sharks game? No wonder we dont have any officials this week end in the play offs - try are all crap! Hope your articles will improve because your Afrikaans commentary really sucks. Rather listen to the Aus and NZ commentry than yours and I hate them!

  • WineLife - 2011-06-21 14:30

    GARY YOU ARE AN A-CLASS BUFFOON! I can't believe that you actually get paid for writing this twaddle...

  • zule - 2011-06-21 14:34

    I am a BULLS supporter (for over 55 years) and would like to think that your article has merit...but...let's face it...Sharks should have been about 12 clear at this late stage of the game and were clearly the better team on the all glory to Sharks...eeesshh, it hurts to say that hee hee what will most probably be BAKKIES last game for BULLS at Loftus, the powers that be decided to pull this powerhouse off the pitch, just when he was MOST needed...that poor judgement is what cost BULLS the game, not some little technicality at the very end of the game

  • Claude - 2011-06-21 14:34

    How about when Kaplan ended the Bulls Stormers encounter at Newlands - that could also have been given advantage and longer to play. Stormers did not complain. The thing is that whether the referee is wrong or not he is the sole adjudicator and its the rules that need revision.

  • saliem - 2011-06-21 14:43

    What a load of drivel Gary. It's no secret that you are a fervent Bulls supporter... and that clearly effects your ability to be OBJECTIVE. Sorry but an offence is an offence, provided that, in any given match, there is consistency - you fail to say if Kaplain did NOT blow this offence earlier in the match; hence no credibility. As for the performance of the match officials in the last 2 games that the Sharks played - they were SHOCKING! I am not a Sharks supporter, but at least justice prevailed in the end (although it cost them a log position). Anyhow, maybe there is a job for you as media liaison officer with the Bulls Gary :P

  • AmandaWhereTo - 2011-06-21 15:00

    I think the problem is that Gary isn't very adept at writing articles. He clearly states that the Sharks won, the Bulls lost, that the Sharks got done in a few times in a big way (very good try scoring opportunities even)... but then he points out one technical penalty which he stated was probably correct, and so entitles the article "The Bulls have Kaplan to blame". The Bulls? Sounds to me from the article that the Sharks have him to blame for not winning by more... I'm confused.

  • Wovenivy - 2011-06-21 15:12

    Gary starts off by saying, correctly, that the Sharks got done in 3 times and then complains about one "technical" call against the Bulls! You lost all credibility in that moment Gary!

  • Dowwe Duane - 2011-06-21 15:15

    Thank you!! I told you so, Bulls robbed once again!!!!

  • - 2011-06-21 15:27

    geez....what game were you watching????

  • AmandaWhereTo - 2011-06-21 15:31

    I think the problem is that Gary isn't very adept at writing articles. He clearly states that the Sharks won, the Bulls lost, that the Sharks got done in a few times in a big way (very good try scoring opportunities even)... but then he points out one technical penalty which he stated was probably correct, and so entitles the article "The Bulls have Kaplan to blame". The Bulls? Sounds to me from the article that the Sharks have him to blame even more so... I'm confused