Known for being amazingly innovative with his coaching, this arguably wasn’t Erasmus’s best attempt at trying something different. The 62-minute leaked video of the Springbok director of rugby pointing out 36 errors by the Australia ref and the touch judges was the subject of a World Rugby disciplinary process that has seen Erasmus banned for 10 months. Think of it like a whistleblower pointing out how unethical a big company is – only to be persecuted for it.
Poor Nic Berry, who complained that his reputation has been sullied. Amazingly, he isn’t mortified that he made those 36 errors, the most egregious of which was the insulting way he gave Springbok captain Siya Kolisi short shrift, clearly disrespecting the country’s first black rugby captain, while practically fawning on (admittedly legendary) player Alun Wyn Jones. Did Berry apologise for that?
Both World Rugby and Berry have missed the point of the real outrage: that the referee in a crucial game of rugby – in a series that only happens every four years – made 36 mistakes, some of which arguably changed the course of the game; and might have changed the outcome of the entire series.
Instead, World Rugby has shot the messenger. It’s a disgrace. DM168 sports editor Craig Ray has pointed out all the ironies and travesties of this shameful demonstration of a sports organisation refusing to deal with the real issues.
This is supposed to be a technology column, so before my editors step in, let’s discuss how technology can change a sport.
Rugby is pretty advanced among the top-tier sports for its willingness to try new technology. The television match official (TMO) was a breakthrough that allowed slow-motion footage to help with disputed tries and knock-ons.
Football, which employs would-be Hollywood actors who have perfected “diving” for a penalty, has reluctantly started using video footage.
I am no fan of the mindless dullness of soccer, and my irritation with the supposedly beautiful game has intensified over the years watching players milking penalties, hobbling around or being stretchered off the pitch. Then, after the penalty is awarded, they make a miraculous recovery.
Some football leagues stopped putting the video replays up on the stadium’s big screen because it showed the angry fans just how blatant the offending player’s offensive dive was.
Eventually, however, the football establishment seemed to notice that the game was becoming more of a staged wrestling match than a game of skill and finesse. Now the replays can be seen on the screen, but the practice still happens – just watch any high-level game of soccer.
Rugby is now in the same position. On the big screen, the world can see the mistakes that the ref is making but World Rugby is up in arms because Rassie Erasmus has pointed out these obvious mistakes.
Do they rectify the obvious errors in the applications of the rules of rugby? Or do they shoot the messenger?
It’s all there, up on the big stadium screen called the internet. All World Rugby has to do is look for it. DM168
This story first appeared in our weekly Daily Maverick 168 newspaper which is available for R25 at Pick n Pay, Exclusive Books and airport bookstores. For your nearest stockist, please click here.
Comments (5)
Jeez, it sounds a bit like Oh Schucks, here comes war.
Time for a new competing Rugby organisation?
Thank you Coen & Mally. You have confirmed for me that since the day Rassie’s video went viral that no reasonable debate could follow. Your unwavering prejudice and brand SA Rugby is at an all-time low. Good Luck.
People are entitled to their opinion, absolutely no issue. They should back those opinions with some factual evidence. You claim referee Nic Berry's mistakes were 'deliberate'. Where is your evidence. What did he personally have to gain from this? You claim Rassie only made the video after a process of communication with the referee, other officials, and World Rugby. Are you sure that this statement if the truth, able to back with evidence? We have all watched the technology available on the match day 'big screen' and how many different 'angles' of the supposed infringement are available. In many instances these different angles offer 'more' or 'less' evidence of the supposed infringement!? The referee then makes a judgement call based on his interpretation, normally after some collaboration with the line judges and TMO. Depending on which team you support, starts the debate, too often 'blind with fury'. Who would want to be referee?? Anyway, you all have my opinion. I would prefer to move on.
Mr. 0549, I am not sure what your previous (10.59) diatribe is all about and what you are trying to say by quoting your earlier "rugby life". I also played representative rugby, though at a slightly higher level than you describe and well remember the days before "electronic and TV refereeing". We were happy with accepting sometimes inaccurate decisions, and laughed it off in the pub or change room afterwards. Also we were not paid such high, or any appearance money. But now that TV has given us the ability to identify would not even have been acceptable in the early days, i.e., the many mistakes identified through TV that Berry made referees must accept that their mistakes will be shown up and not cry about it. Also what about the fact that the Oz coach had similar things to say (though only verbally) as Rassie when they were beaten by Wales, but so far no no action seems to have been taken about him. Eddie Jones also said similar things about referees when England lost some years back, with a far lesser fine. All of this makes one think about impartiality, or perhaps the lack thereof.
I am South African. I am an ardent fan of the game of rugby, having played at high school and club until the age of 31. I enjoyed the camoradie and still have life long friends from those experiences. I have been fortunate to watch rugby in Europe and Australia. I watch different rugby channels and have a considerable library on the subject. Having watched Springbok players like H O de Villiers, Mannetjies Roux, Danie Gerber, the du Plessis brothers, Jacques Fourie and Jean de Villiers, and many others, I do not agree that our claimed DNA is all about 'fizzy-cality' forward play. Above all I have an open mind about the game (and life), and refrain from judging people because of where they came from, and the fact that they made mistakes in their lives. Must be nice to be perfect Coen!?
Gavin, in the world of professional sport, mistakes are very costly, and not just in terms of results. The mistakes made by individuals mentioned in my reply are not common mistakes, it were deliberate action (including that of the referee Berry). I have also condemned Hansie Cronje years ago, a mistake that might have (will we ever know) cost him his life. I have also condemned the blade runner, Pistorius, as well as several South African's that were involved in cricket match fixing. I maintain my view that Toby's article is spot on. Rassie tried alternative action before he made his video, including discussions with Berry, other match officials, and WR. , and it was ignored. Will ignore your last sentence, as it appears to be in contrast with what you said in the previous sentences.