I'd be surprised.Gumboot wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:55 amHope they throw the book at him, and the fucking bookcase too. The sooner world rugby purges itself of arrogant clowns like Erasmus, the better. There should be no place for pricks like him repeatedly bringing the game into disrepute with hysterical, self-serving antics.
When do World Rugby string up Rassie Erasmus?
Calm down Petal. Do you need a hug?Gumboot wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:55 amHope they throw the book at him, and the fucking bookcase too. The sooner world rugby purges itself of arrogant clowns like Erasmus, the better. There should be no place for pricks like him repeatedly bringing the game into disrepute with hysterical, self-serving antics.
After that performance this weekend World rugby would be doing us a favor....let Nienaber run it alone without what we saw.Chilli wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 7:35 amCalm down Petal. Do you need a hug?Gumboot wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 4:55 amHope they throw the book at him, and the fucking bookcase too. The sooner world rugby purges itself of arrogant clowns like Erasmus, the better. There should be no place for pricks like him repeatedly bringing the game into disrepute with hysterical, self-serving antics.
I think the hearing has started........
I have a feeling Rassie is going to get a slap on the wrists and asked to please act like an adult in future...and then the Saffer media and supporters are going to go apeshit saying "World rugby bows down to Lord Rassie " and turn this into a complete clustervok
12 match ban...........and a national shortage of armbands in SASards wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 10:37 amI think the hearing has started........
I have a feeling Rassie is going to get a slap on the wrists and asked to please act like an adult in future...and then the Saffer media and supporters are going to go apeshit saying "World rugby bows down to Lord Rassie " and turn this into a complete clustervok
That's by far the most likely outcome, of course. Slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket at most. Effectively giving twats like Erasmus permission to continue dragging the game into the gutter - off the field as well as on it. For shame.
If this is what the gutter looks like, it's glorious
-
OomStruisbaai
- Posts: 15454
- Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2020 12:38 pm
- Location: Longest beach in SH
According to Rassies lawyers, WR will take some time to be able to get their something to string.
He's a dead man walkingOomStruisbaai wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:52 am According to Rassies lawyers, WR will take some time to be able to get their something to string.
Rumour has it that the WR disciplinary panel will be made up of 3 representatives of NH rugby
BrilliantSaintK wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 9:38 amHe's a dead man walkingOomStruisbaai wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:52 am According to Rassies lawyers, WR will take some time to be able to get their something to string.
Rumour has it that the WR disciplinary panel will be made up of 3 representatives of NH rugby
The one thing that Ra$$is knows is how to beat NH rugby
. 
Chilli wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 10:38 amBrilliantSaintK wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 9:38 amHe's a dead man walkingOomStruisbaai wrote: ↑Sun Aug 29, 2021 7:52 am According to Rassies lawyers, WR will take some time to be able to get their something to string.
Rumour has it that the WR disciplinary panel will be made up of 3 representatives of NH rugby
The one thing that Ra$$is knows is how to beat NH rugby.
The stich up has started already.Rassiegate: Submissions due this week as stage set for unprecedented legal battle
11:08am, 29 August 2021
By Ian Cameron
Springboks director of rugby Rassie Erasmus.
INTERNATIONALS
SOUTH AFRICA
11:08am, 29 August 2021
Submissions are due this week ahead of what is building up to be an unprecedented legal battle between World Rugby and Rassie Erasmus and SA Rugby.
ADVERTISEMENT
Contrary to reports in South Africa, Erasmus and SA Rugby’s misconduct hearing has not commenced and the parties involved are yet to be given official dates. RugbyPass understands rumours that it had already begun behind closed doors were met with bemusement within World Rugby.
The Springboks revealed on Thursday that the Springboks Director of Rugby did not travel with the team to Brisbane as they bid to claim back the Rugby Championship, having opted out of the tournament last year.
Video Spacer
Pause
Unmute
Share
Fullscreen
“Rassie has decided to remain in South Africa, for now, to allow the focus around the team to remain on the Castle Lager Rugby Championship and the team itself so that they can perform to the best of their ability on the field,” said South Africa head coach Jacques Nienaber. “He will continue to play active role in our team and coaches meetings throughout the tour, and schedule permitting, he may join us later on.”
Erasmus may join the team for the latter stages, confirmed SA Rugby.
RugbyPass understands that submissions are due this week with the governing body ahead of the panel. The 48-year-old and his union faces charges relating to a breach of Regulation 18 (Misconduct and Code of Conduct) for comments made after the first Test loss to the British and Irish Lions.
World Rugby have said they are concerned with the ‘extensive and direct nature’ of his comments in the now-infamous 62-minute long video that released on social media in July, which criticised the performance of matchday referee Nic Berry and his officials.
ADVERTISEMENT
The list of punishments for Erasmus and SA Rugby if the World Rugby misconduct charge is upheld are extensive, ranging from forfeiture of a match, fines, reprimands and more.
It is expected that Erasmus will challenge the World Rugby in what could be a Test case for how senior rugby staff behave in relation to contentious on-field decisions. Erasmus and SA Rugby – who are also charged with misconduct – have been offered significant legal assistance in the form of Marco Masotti, who heads up MVM Holdings, the company that has owned a 51 per cent stake in the Sharks since January 2021, took to social media earlier this month to announce back Erasmus and co: “I have a team of New York lawyers ready to take care of Rassie and SA Rugby. Let us put World Rugby on trial…”, tweeted Masotti on August 4th.
Erasmus has however engaged legal representation from Frikkie Erasmus, who told South African media outlet Rapport recently that the charges brought against his client are “broad” and “comprehensive.”
For their part, it is understood that World Rugby are eager to throw the book at Erasmus, whose actions were heavily criticized across the sport.
ADVERTISEMENT
And there’s pressure on them to do so.
According to reports in South Africa Rugby Australia have joined England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales in lobbying the sport’s governing body ahead of the hearing.
Critics feel Erasmus cleaning rugby’s dirty laundry on social media was a step too far and could potentially open the door to further public rebukes of referees by coaches.
“You think ‘the mark has been over-stepped here’ and worry that it becomes not just about sporting decision-making but something that might have an impact on people’s lives and potentially cause wider issues,” former Galllagher Premiership referee David Rose told RugbyPass. “There has been an erosion in the acceptance that mistakes will happen; if you have human beings involved, you’re going to have human error and being professional in any walk of life doesn’t mean you make no mistakes.”
Others have praised the maverick South African. Ex-Springboks boss Ian McIntosh praised him for confronting World Rugby with their failings.
Speaking in an interview published on iol.co.za, McIntosh claimed: “It is not for me to say whether Rassie used the correct channels but I do feel that something had to be done to gain the attention of the officials because the game has become far too complicated and a stop-start affair.
“It has been spoilt for players, coaches and the spectators. The game has become over-officiated because of too many ‘provisions’ being added each year to the laws. Instead of World Rugby disciplining Rassie, he should be commended and a committee established to revise the laws which are too many, contradictory, and in some cases, nonsensical
It's not a stitch-up, it's WR getting their shit together about 15 years too late. Rassie may well become an escape goat here, but it is high time WR sorted out coach /ref interactions in the press and lately on social media.
When you say sort it out... what do you think should change?
Fewer Kiwi refs.
Seriously, I'm not sure. In Rugby we always were taught that the ref's decision is sacred....but now we have 4K replays, TMO's and fans who are much better informed. Plus Laws which make scrums, rucks & collisions a lottery.
Perhaps if refs could be made to submit a written report within 24 hours explaining their "Top 5 big decisions" in the match it might give us all an insight into their thought process & performance? BUT we should pay them much more if we're going to go down that road too.
Coaches also need muzzling in the press, with yellow and red cards handed out for violations.
Also no French refs.
Don't they do a report already and there is some sort of meeting between the ref and coaches on the Tuesday after a Saturday game? Though this isn't a public meeting. It's just between the ref and the coaches. Are you saying this should be made public for transparency?Sandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:39 amFewer Kiwi refs.
Seriously, I'm not sure. In Rugby we always were taught that the ref's decision is sacred....but now we have 4K replays, TMO's and fans who are much better informed. Plus Laws which make scrums, rucks & collisions a lottery.
Perhaps if refs could be made to submit a written report within 24 hours explaining their "Top 5 big decisions" in the match it might give us all an insight into their thought process & performance? BUT we should pay them much more if we're going to go down that road too.
Coaches also need muzzling in the press, with yellow and red cards handed out for violations.
Also no French refs.
Interesting that Hansen doesn't think world rugby should change the sub laws.. but rather that refs enforce the current laws better, particularly around the breakdown and players going off their feet etc.. rather than complicating laws even further. less is more?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/rugby- ... 6XMVHUU24/
"If you look at the rulebook, it talks about a ruck and it never talks about the breakdown. Breakdown is a word used more often than any other word in the game - there's not even a rule for a breakdown and we have an old, antiquated law that says two people will bond over the ball and that'll be a ruck. Well that never happens in the game."
Hansen suggests a simplified and clearly-officiated breakdown would increase the pace of the game; meaning there would be fewer players in any given defensive line and therefore a reduced amount of physicality in the tackle and fewer head knocks.
"A lot of the injuries we're getting are actually friendly fire, so you and I make the tackle and I knock my head against your elbow or your head.
"So we'd create a game where there's a clear picture at the breakdown that yes, ball is quicker, the defensive lines won't be able to set as quick; so attacking lines will be attacking against destabilised defences more often and there'll be more space.
"I think the opportunity to be really brutal will dissipate."
Hansen says this particular issue is a symptom of an even wider problem in the sport: that few people understand how it is actually played.
"I think the biggest issue is it's too complicated. When players don't understand it, when people watching the game don't understand it, when coaches don't understand it, when referees can't be consistent, we've got an issue and we've got to address that issue."
The way Hansen believes World Rugby needs to approach that problem is by instilling simplicity into the rulebook, so referees can manage a safe and entertaining game.
I believe referee performances are already subject to review post-match. The process is relatively comprehensive and transparent, but it takes some time as the panel and officiating team needs to convene for the assessment. Not sure if they are always conducted the week after a test match, or once a couple of tests have been played and done in a batch.Sandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:39 amFewer Kiwi refs.
Seriously, I'm not sure. In Rugby we always were taught that the ref's decision is sacred....but now we have 4K replays, TMO's and fans who are much better informed. Plus Laws which make scrums, rucks & collisions a lottery.
Perhaps if refs could be made to submit a written report within 24 hours explaining their "Top 5 big decisions" in the match it might give us all an insight into their thought process & performance? BUT we should pay them much more if we're going to go down that road too.
Coaches also need muzzling in the press, with yellow and red cards handed out for violations.
Also no French refs.
I don't think anybody has an issue with this process and it works well, unless you have one of the officials assigned to your next test match and his assessment from his last match hasn't been published yet...which was one of the reasons why Rassie was throwing his little tantrum.
An outcome I'd like to see:
a. Penalties for players / coaches / administrators being critical of officials in the press.
b. Clearer guidelines on timeframes for referee performance assessments. Something like for pro tier 1 and tier 2 teams all efforts should be made for the Referee assessment to be published by the Tuesday after the test. I'm sure coaches would like to have it for the Monday technical session with the team already, but maybe a Tuesday can be a compromise.
In bold... This is already the case isn't it?Blake wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:13 amI believe referee performances are already subject to review post-match. The process is relatively comprehensive and transparent, but it takes some time as the panel and officiating team needs to convene for the assessment. Not sure if they are always conducted the week after a test match, or once a couple of tests have been played and done in a batch.Sandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:39 amFewer Kiwi refs.
Seriously, I'm not sure. In Rugby we always were taught that the ref's decision is sacred....but now we have 4K replays, TMO's and fans who are much better informed. Plus Laws which make scrums, rucks & collisions a lottery.
Perhaps if refs could be made to submit a written report within 24 hours explaining their "Top 5 big decisions" in the match it might give us all an insight into their thought process & performance? BUT we should pay them much more if we're going to go down that road too.
Coaches also need muzzling in the press, with yellow and red cards handed out for violations.
Also no French refs.
I don't think anybody has an issue with this process and it works well, unless you have one of the officials assigned to your next test match and his assessment from his last match hasn't been published yet...which was one of the reasons why Rassie was throwing his little tantrum.
An outcome I'd like to see:
a. Penalties for players / coaches / administrators being critical of officials in the press.
b. Clearer guidelines on timeframes for referee performance assessments. Something like for pro tier 1 and tier 2 teams all efforts should be made for the Referee assessment to be published by the Tuesday after the test. I'm sure coaches would like to have it for the Monday technical session with the team already, but maybe a Tuesday can be a compromise.
-
frankstero
- Posts: 104
- Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2020 1:09 pm
- Location: Glasnevin
- Contact:
Grandpa wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:05 am "If you look at the rulebook, it talks about a ruck and it never talks about the breakdown. Breakdown is a word used more often than any other word in the game - there's not even a rule for a breakdown and we have an old, antiquated law that says two people will bond over the ball and that'll be a ruck. Well that never happens in the game."
Hansen suggests a simplified and clearly-officiated breakdown would increase the pace of the game; meaning there would be fewer players in any given defensive line and therefore a reduced amount of physicality in the tackle and fewer head knocks.
"A lot of the injuries we're getting are actually friendly fire, so you and I make the tackle and I knock my head against your elbow or your head.
"So we'd create a game where there's a clear picture at the breakdown that yes, ball is quicker, the defensive lines won't be able to set as quick; so attacking lines will be attacking against destabilised defences more often and there'll be more space.
"I think the opportunity to be really brutal will dissipate."
Hansen says this particular issue is a symptom of an even wider problem in the sport: that few people understand how it is actually played.
"I think the biggest issue is it's too complicated. When players don't understand it, when people watching the game don't understand it, when coaches don't understand it, when referees can't be consistent, we've got an issue and we've got to address that issue."
The way Hansen believes World Rugby needs to approach that problem is by instilling simplicity into the rulebook, so referees can manage a safe and entertaining game.
I think I agree with most of this I stand to be corrected but wasn't that Rassie's argument? They'd asked for the review in order to select the team taking it into account for the next test and it hadn't been supplied by Tuesday and that WR ignored requests for it?Grandpa wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:31 amIn bold... This is already the case isn't it?Blake wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:13 amI believe referee performances are already subject to review post-match. The process is relatively comprehensive and transparent, but it takes some time as the panel and officiating team needs to convene for the assessment. Not sure if they are always conducted the week after a test match, or once a couple of tests have been played and done in a batch.Sandstorm wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:39 am
Fewer Kiwi refs.
Seriously, I'm not sure. In Rugby we always were taught that the ref's decision is sacred....but now we have 4K replays, TMO's and fans who are much better informed. Plus Laws which make scrums, rucks & collisions a lottery.
Perhaps if refs could be made to submit a written report within 24 hours explaining their "Top 5 big decisions" in the match it might give us all an insight into their thought process & performance? BUT we should pay them much more if we're going to go down that road too.
Coaches also need muzzling in the press, with yellow and red cards handed out for violations.
Also no French refs.
I don't think anybody has an issue with this process and it works well, unless you have one of the officials assigned to your next test match and his assessment from his last match hasn't been published yet...which was one of the reasons why Rassie was throwing his little tantrum.
An outcome I'd like to see:
a. Penalties for players / coaches / administrators being critical of officials in the press.
b. Clearer guidelines on timeframes for referee performance assessments. Something like for pro tier 1 and tier 2 teams all efforts should be made for the Referee assessment to be published by the Tuesday after the test. I'm sure coaches would like to have it for the Monday technical session with the team already, but maybe a Tuesday can be a compromise.
That is my understanding as well.
Not sure if it was provided by Tuesday or not, but it wasn't communicated what the deadline was until Monday when the Bok Management team was informed that "The 6 Nations protocol" would be followed.
It seems like this isn't a formal thing and that the referee panel is still figuring it out.
Makes sense for the 6 Nations as there is sometimes a 2 week gap between matches; but the Lions Tour was unique in that it was the same set of officials 3 weeks in a row, so the timeframe didn't work for them.
Does that justify what Rassie did? Not at all, but it does indicate a need for a more formal and predictable timeframe for these things; especially in the top tiers of the game.
Grandpa wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 11:05 am "If you look at the rulebook, it talks about a ruck and it never talks about the breakdown. Breakdown is a word used more often than any other word in the game - there's not even a rule for a breakdown and we have an old, antiquated law that says two people will bond over the ball and that'll be a ruck. Well that never happens in the game."
Hansen suggests a simplified and clearly-officiated breakdown would increase the pace of the game; meaning there would be fewer players in any given defensive line and therefore a reduced amount of physicality in the tackle and fewer head knocks.
"A lot of the injuries we're getting are actually friendly fire, so you and I make the tackle and I knock my head against your elbow or your head.
"So we'd create a game where there's a clear picture at the breakdown that yes, ball is quicker, the defensive lines won't be able to set as quick; so attacking lines will be attacking against destabilised defences more often and there'll be more space.
"I think the opportunity to be really brutal will dissipate."
Hansen says this particular issue is a symptom of an even wider problem in the sport: that few people understand how it is actually played.
"I think the biggest issue is it's too complicated. When players don't understand it, when people watching the game don't understand it, when coaches don't understand it, when referees can't be consistent, we've got an issue and we've got to address that issue."
The way Hansen believes World Rugby needs to approach that problem is by instilling simplicity into the rulebook, so referees can manage a safe and entertaining game.
He couldn't offer some suggestions, though?
Some of the solutions, I think, are there: shoulders above hips, on feet, no hands (ref guidelines allow defender with hands on to continue to play it once attacker joins), and attacking players anchoring themselves to their tackled mate.
There's no need/incentive for more than one defender to go in when things can be slowed down by an individual or attacking players flopping/anchoring make it useless to attempt a counter ruck.