Springboks v Wallabies, Newlands, September 28 2013

[Gnostic]

Let me say right from the start I thought the yellow on Hooper was very soft. Etzbeth jumped into the tackle so his momentum was up and forward his legs were stopped in a legal tackle and Hooper made no upward thrust to spin Etzbeth. As with the Carter tackle a couple of weeks ago this was just rubbish. It certainly didn't influence the outcome as the Carter/BDP yellow did but it is still very disappointing.

As for J Du Plesis the bloke has form and as far as I am concerned should be scrubbed from the game permanently, a cheap shot scum bag. Horwill and Mowen need to take some tips from Eales and inform the referees that if such shit is allowed to continue then they will deal with it by taking their team from the field. The throw of Hooper to the ground after the whistle should also have been attended to.

 

[gel]

Here's the aftermath of the Hooper yellow card tackle on Etzebeth. Jannie du Plessis has a grab at Stephen Moore's eyes.

If I recall correctly the referee called for the TMO to look at both the offending tackles AND the "tussle" afterwards - but once the referee saw the replay of the tackle himself and made up his mind, the tussle afterwards was forgotten. Perhaps something may have been picked up or not, but there was no further review of the tussle which I found odd given the referee had asked for it specifically.

 

[louie]

With all wonderful technology why can't he have been red carded at the time? What's the TMO doing there? He should make a call to the ref. Disgraceful.

 

[louie]

If I recall correctly the referee called for the TMO to look at both the offending tackles AND the "tussle" afterwards - but once the referee saw the replay of the tackle himself and made up his mind, the tussle afterwards was forgotten. Perhaps something may have been picked up or not, but there was no further review of the tussle which I found odd given the referee had asked for it specifically.

if that's true (i don't recall) that's an example of a very very incompetent ref.

 

[cyclopath]

With all wonderful technology why can't he have been red carded at the time? What's the TMO doing there? He should make a call to the ref. Disgraceful.

The TMO can only respond to specific requests from the ref, not just wade in on other stuff he sees.
Having been asked about the melee after the tackle, he could have said "Green 3 raking eyes of Gold 2", but maybe the area of interest (they thought, at the time) was the argy-bargy part.
It seems ridiculous that he will escape any review or possible sanction.

 

[Richo]

If I recall correctly the referee called for the TMO to look at both the offending tackles AND the "tussle" afterwards - but once the referee saw the replay of the tackle himself and made up his mind, the tussle afterwards was forgotten. Perhaps something may have been picked up or not, but there was no further review of the tussle which I found odd given the referee had asked for it specifically.

Yep, that's exactly what happened. It was very odd. But I believe that once the ref asks for the replay, he's taking on the decision himself. Unless he asks the TMO to look at it as well, then that's that. It certainly seems like in this case he lost track of the multiple elements of the incident.

 

[Blue]

Where is the gouge? Or do you need x ray vision and a vivid imagination?

 

[Shiggins]

I don't think they're favourites to score 4 tries and win by >7, but that may not be what you meant.

To win. Not by how much. But at home they would be close favourites to win.

 

[Shiggins]

Where is the gouge? Or do you need x ray vision and a vivid imagination?

 

[Blue]

He fucking better be.

For what? Seriously I have screen that covers a wall and I can't see it.

 

[Blue]

Oh please. You can't be serious.

Where's the citing fellas or is a youtube video from behind being commented on a rugby forum more conclusive than the decision of Wob management?

 

[Shiggins]

Oh please. You can't be serious.

Where's the citing fellas or is a youtube video from behind being commented on a rugby forum more conclusive than the decision of Wob management?

Even the South African commentators mentioned it. Jannie is known pretty well for these things. Unfortunately if you look him up on the net only bad things show up.

Even Jean de Villiers looked like he knew it when he came in and broke it up. I feel for the guys in South African rugby that try hard to leave the past behind and just play the great rugby they can.

 

[Blue]

If Moore believes he has been gouged he would have walked straight into th dressing room and told management. Horwill was right there and would have backed it up.

Why did he not?

There would have been a citing. There wasn't.

 

[whatty]

Where is the gouge? Or do you need x ray vision and a vivid imagination?

Na just need to be on the losing team.

 

[Brisbok]

Even the South African commentators mentioned it. Jannie is known pretty well for these things. Unfortunately if you look him up on the net only bad things show up.

Even Jean de Villiers looked like he knew it when he came in and broke it up. I feel for the guys in South African rugby that try hard to leave the past behind and just play the great rugby they can.

The commentators mentioned that it looked bad, as any hand to the face does. This one is certainly no exception and it looks very bad. However, is there any actual evidence/vision that shows his fingers in Moore's eyes? A lot of screaming of "eye gouge" when none of the camera angles on the YouTube videos show the front of Moore's face.

JDV is involved in trying to break it up long before Jannie even gets involved, so stupid comment (again).

 

[terry j]

well, it would be a lot less incriminating if his fingers had not been steepled.

 

[Mank]

Van de Merve was a goose for the leading elbow but it was a carbon copy of Battleship a couple of weeks ago.

Well, not quite. Battleship stuck his forearm out to defend himself from a tackler, he was static at the time. Yellow card just about acceptable, penalty preferred. Flip was a tackler leading with a forearm and he was in motion. I just don't know why he would have done it but it did seem that he was looking to tackle the player next to the ball carrier, so I'm not sure the contact was intentional. Could be, I'm not defending him if so, and no complaints at all about a YC based on the action, and lucky not to get a red.

Etzebeth will be highly decorated by the time his career is over. Just a fantastic player for such a young age. I know De Tout gets the praise but I think the best prospect to form an awsome partnership with him in the future is De Jarger. That's just my point of view. A big improver has been Steyn. He is controlling the game well and your attack has been pretty good also.

Agree with all of this. I'm not Morne Steyn's biggest fan as a flyhalf but he has become very dependable and seldom makes errors. There is something very valuable about that.

Congratulations on a good win Bokke supporters.

Scrappy game, some good intensity from the Boks but also need to sharpen up a bit because when Oz turned it on they did lose their discipline a bit, and that won't be good enough next week.

 

[Bairdy]

well, it would be a lot less incriminating if his fingers had not been steepled.

Why would it be incriminating at all? Clearly Jannie has steepled his fingers in order to grip the indents around Moore's eyes, and restrain him from further handbags.

Why else would the good doctor pause behind the scuffle then rake one hand across Moore's face?

 

[Mank]

From my view, it's not a gouge but regardless of what he was trying to do (no idea) it ended as a rake across the face and that's bad enough. He should get 4 - 8 weeks. It's not acceptable.

I have to ask, why? What was he trying to accomplish?

 

[hughbert]

If Moore believes he has been gouged he would have walked straight into th dressing room and told management. Horwill was right there and would have backed it up.

Why did he not?

There would have been a citing. There wasn't.

How do you know he didn't? You do know that Wallabies managament can't actually "cite" people, don't you? They can ask the citing official to look at certain incidents, is all.