Did Steve Walsh rob the Sharks?

[fivelza]

Dude, I think you must take a few days off to calm down. We (Sharks) played the better rugby for 80 minutes. Unfortunatly the whistle didn't go for 83 minutes. Such is rugby. (Ask the Crusaders) All season we had the ball bouncing our way, the whistle going our way and the scoreboard going our way and some of us had nothing but scorn for our opposition.

We all had big mouths before the event (intensionally so), now we must suck it up. It's the nature of sport. To now insult our oppositions fans is unsporting behavior and I for one distance myself from it.

I was at the game. In case you don't think I'm passionate about the Sharks. I almost had tears in my eyes twice during the game. Once when we "won" and three minutes later when we lost.

Unfortunately for you, it is only the scoreboard that counts at the final whistle no matter who you think won. I suggest you check the record books in a year, ten years and one hundred years time and let me know if it's changed. I'll party hard for for the one I missed on 19/5/2007.

Well said Omac......we could all learn a lot from your response.

 

[James]

It's about time that teams are given the opportunity to appeal against wrongful conduct by match officials. Walsh should be stripped of his IRB membership because what he allowed to happen on Saturday is not what we expect from professionals.

Tana Umanga has it right, southern hemisphere refs are lacking, the only one who is any good is Kaplan. Refs need to be accountable for their errors. If a player does not perform he is dropped, Walsh (NZ's top ref) needs to be dropped and his poor decisions explained. With the WC coming up we don't need any more spoilt matches.

 

[fivelza]

First off, let's explain the rules to those Bulls fans who can't tell the difference between a double movement and placing the ball:

A double movement is when the player scoring moves his entire body to score whilst still being held in a tackle. Placing the ball when held in a tackle is perfectly legal and that's how Albert scored the try.

Second off, let's examine the last two minutes so that the Bulls supporters (who we all know are not the sharpest crayons in the box) can understand why we do indeed have sour grapes about what I can only call highway robbery:

Yes, yes....your placing the ball is a matter of perspective..isn't it???

I haven't been called a blunt crayon by anyone in my life...but thanks...this crayon is going to celebrate the FACT that the Super 14 trophy is where......IN PRETORIA

 

[Pixual]

Dude, I think you must take a few days off to calm down. We (Sharks) played the better rugby for 80 minutes. Unfortunatly the whistle didn't go for 83 minutes. Such is rugby. (Ask the Crusaders) All season we had the ball bouncing our way, the whistle going our way and the scoreboard going our way and some of us had nothing but scorn for our opposition.

We all had big mouths before the event (intensionally so), now we must suck it up. It's the nature of sport. To now insult our oppositions fans is unsporting behavior and I for one distance myself from it.

I was at the game. In case you don't think I'm passionate about the Sharks. I almost had tears in my eyes twice during the game. Once when we "won" and three minutes later when we lost.

Unfortunately for you, it is only the scoreboard that counts at the final whistle no matter who you think won. I suggest you check the record books in a year, ten years and one hundred years time and let me know if it's changed. I'll party hard for for the one I missed on 19/5/2007.

I'll never calm down about it because it all came down to a series of gaffes from the ref and the ref is what we're discussing here. Walsh needs to be held accountable for this.

What rugby really needs is a series of flag throwers on the side lines who can look for stuff that the ref doesn't see. If they see an error they throw a flag, just like they do in gridiron.

The game against the Crusaders was not spoiled by a referee. this was the most important match of the year and it got spoiled by Walsh.

Walsh must DIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!

 

[fivelza]

I'll never calm down about it because it all came down to a series of gaffes from the ref and the ref is what we're discussing here. Walsh needs to be held accountable for this.

What rugby really needs is a series of flag throwers on the side lines who can look for stuff that the ref doesn't see. If they see an error they throw a flag, just like they do in gridiron.

The game against the Crusaders was not spoiled by a referee. this was the most important match of the year and it got spoiled by Walsh.

Walsh must DIEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!

LOL.....you seem to forget that there are 30 players on the field also responsible to the outcome...what about not kicking the ball out, or not making a tackle.

 

[Pixual]

Yes, the Sharks players (Steyn in particular) didn't think about hoofing it off the park when it mattered most, but if you watch the final movement its almost as if they stopped playing when that ball went to ground in the ruck that wasn't called a ruck. I believe many of them thought Walsh had blown the whistle.

He should have blown the whistle. He didn't and it affected the outcome of the match.

I hope he's dropped forever.

 

[James]

LOL.....you seem to forget that there are 30 players on the field also responsible to the outcome...what about not kicking the ball out, or not making a tackle.

The issue (thread topic) is not about player preformances although even Victor admits that Sharks played better for 79 minutes of the match but about Steve Walsh robbing the sharks with poor refing.

[ot answering your question]Dick Muir has told us not to blame poor ol' Frans but I am affraid it is on your shoulders lad. Don't step up to the plate and ask to kick a ball over the posts to become a hero if you are having posibly the worst game I have seen him play with the boot. Poor captaincy to allow him to do this.[/ot]

 

[fivelza]

The issue (thread topic) is not about player preformances although even Victor admits that Sharks played better for 79 minutes of the match but about Steve Walsh robbing the sharks with poor refing.

I know James, and as a Bulls supporter I agree that we were pretty much outplayed....but if all you guys do is whinge about Walsh's decisions you almost devalue the Shark's performance as it appears thats all that stood between winning and losing.

Fair enough....if you feel that's off topic..../

Back to the ref's performance

 

[James]

By TONY SMITH in South Africa
With the inexperienced Australian Matt Goddard appointed to the Crusaders-Bulls semi, is it time to wonder why referees remain protected from criticism when everybody else isn't?

Rugby referees must be made more accountable or the controversy currently simmering over Tana Umaga's outburst will continue to haunt the sport.

Players and coaches have to front the television cameras soon after a glorious victory or an ignominious defeat. It's part of their contractual obligations to the television paymasters who fund the professional game.

They have to endure press conference questions where journalists query their strengths, expose their weaknesses and contradict their tactical calls.

Why then do referees remain such an endangered species.? It's not as if they're still devoted amateurs making a contribution to the game outside the dreary dullness of their day jobs.The Super 14 panel are full-time pros. Top referees allegedly earn six-figure sums.

Andrew Mehrtens once claimed, to the chagrin of Canterbury refereeing officials, that referees operated like some sort of secret freemasonry, immune from criticism.

But that was the late 90s. A lot has changed since then - the freemasons have started to go public.

Yet referees still collectively function as if they were an antediluvian outfit steeped in the amateur ways.

Rugby is a complex game compared with other football sports. Officials' interpretations can make or break a match.

Why then do they not have a television microphone thrust under the chin soon after the full-time whistle? Couldn't the relevant match referees be required to front on a specialist television show, like Sky's ReUnion and explain the rationale behind critical decisions? Wouldn't it enhance the understanding of players, coaches and fans?

Heck, referees might even be seen as human by a super-critical but forgiving viewing public if they admitted making a wrong call.

The accountability issue was raised at the last Sanzar coaches' conference late last year. It's understood the referees representatives were not averse to the idea, which was referred to the Sanzar board. Yet nothing's happened yet.

Referees are interviewed after matches in South Africa's Currie Cup. And South Africa's azure blue sky hasn't fallen in yet. Coaches are sacked and players are dropped on performance and results. But not so referees. (Actually, players aren't dropped... they're rested, rotated or reconditioned).

When was the last time a rugby ref was demoted after a stinker? Steve Walsh had to cool his heels for a while over disciplinary issues.

But that was an exception, not the rule. A referee who had a nightmare one week is likely to find himself doing another big game the next.

Yet Australian rugby league referees are regularly dropped by their own organisational body for below-par displays. Even seasoned NRL whistleblowers have done their penance in reserve grade.

English football referee Graham Poll was dropped and became a public whipping boy laughing stock when he issued three cards to Croatian midfielder Josip Simunic at the World Cup last year. Poll had been tipped as a candidate to referee the final. Instead, he was sent home early in football's version of a Poll tax.

Rugby league makes merit-based refereeing appointments. Bill Harrigan - the undisputed best in the code - often officiated in matches involving Australia. He was so far ahead of the rest, past or present.

Robbie Deans was right to raise the spectre of the best referees being appointed to Super 14 play-offs, irrespective of their place of domicile. Best refs aren't necessarily neutrals.[James-I wish Kaplan had reffed this one ]

Most Crusaders and Bulls fans would surely prefer Jonathan Kaplan or Steve Walsh to be in charge of Sunday's Super 14 semi-final than Australia's relatively unproven Matt Goddard.

Umaga?s argument, however, was a lot less subtle than Deans?s. Southern hemisphere refs were worse than their northern hemisphere counterparts, Umaga opined last week.

What the dreadlocked daddy-oh of the Hurricanes was saying was: "it ain't tiddly winks, ref."

A player's last game is a bit like the Avon River in duck-shooting season - a relative refuge. The departing one leaves with a lump in his throat, the crowd's cheers ringing in his ears as he warbles on about all that's good in the game. Even the referees, the press and the blind bloke who dropped him from the under-9 under-six stone reps are exempt from criticism.

Not Umaga, though. He went out with a double shotgun blast - and a few referees' feathers have been ruffled.

Inconsistencies riddle rugby, so it will be interesting to see how Sanzar and the NZRU handles the Umaga spray.

Remember Reds coach Eddie Jones was fined $10,000 for his withering critique of Matt Goddard just this season.

Has a precedent been set?

Shouldn't Umaga be writing out a cheque to his main adult employer? After all, his All Blacks predecessors Andrew Mehrtens and Taine Randell copped four-figure fines for airing their thoughts on referees and the South African judicial system, respectively.

A fine shouldn't make too much of a hole in Umaga's retirement fund, given the boost it received from a French benefactor last year.

But if Umaga should cop it sweet, so should the refs.

source

 

[ubberfunk]

http://www.superrugby.co.za/default.asp?id=5336&des=sportstalk

might be OT but it makes for some good reading.

 

[MielieSpoor]

Error #1: A forward pass from Bull to Bull on the far side. Touch judge doesn't see it, nor does the ref.

Error#2: A ruck forms on the near side, Sharks are in possession. The referee doesn't call a ruck when clearly there is one. Bulls hands are in the ruck and "surprise-surpise" it emerges on the Bulls side where...

Error#3: occurs and Habana (who should have been sent off in the first minute) knocks it on, unseen by our friend Walsh, and proceeds to score a try.

Error#4: Dumbass kicker from Loftus gets a second chance to kick the winning conversion when Sharks players have managed to reach him for a charge down after he moves. What does the ref do? He lets him carry on.

1: I honestly think you are the only person on this earth that can accurately say when a pass went forward when looking from a total different agle...ref and tj was inline so maybe think again before making allegations.

2: Ok so when does a ruck start Mr Expert? Looking at the video, the referee point 3 times that he can see the ball. If he was able to see the ball, and a ruck did actually form, then he would've seen the hands - so relax, there was no hands then.

3: I think you were the only person in this country to have spotted this knock! He took the ball in the air and fell on it without it leaving its hand till the ball has been legally grounded and a try scored.

4: "Rule 9.B.3(a) All players of the opposing team must retire to their goal-line and must not overstep that line untill the kicker begins the approach to kick or starts to kick. When the kicker does this, they may charge or jump to prevent a goal but must not be physically supported by other players in these actions.

Penalty : (a) - (c) If the opposing team infringes but the kick is successful, the goal stands.

If the kick is unseccessful, the kicker may take another kick and the opposing team is not allowed to charge.

When another kick is allowed, the kicker may repeat all the preparations.
The kicker ma change the type of kick.

Clearly when reading the law, you will see that the Sharks were not allowed to come up. Infact the stormed again after the ref told them to stand still behind the goal line. So if Dericked missed, he would have had another chance and he would most deffinately not missed again!!

So rather except that the Sharks lost on a honest way before you embarress yourself to much!

 

[Pixual]

1: I honestly think you are the only person on this earth that can accurately say when a pass went forward when looking from a total different agle...ref and tj was inline so maybe think again before making allegations.

Well he called a Sharks pass forward from miles away only a few minutes earlier. The Bulls pass was forward no matter which angle you look at it from.

2: Ok so when does a ruck start Mr Expert? Looking at the video, the referee point 3 times that he can see the ball. If he was able to see the ball, and a ruck did actually form, then he would've seen the hands - so relax, there was no hands then.

You don't know when a ruck is formed? Look it up (seeing as you already know how to do that). Walsh screwed up here, big time. The Sharks had the ball under control on the ground, Bulls players dived in off their feet, wrested control of the ball and it came out on their side. No whistle.

4: "Rule 9.B.3(a) All players of the opposing team must retire to their goal-line and must not overstep that line untill the kicker begins the approach to kick or starts to kick. When the kicker does this, they may charge or jump to prevent a goal but must not be physically supported by other players in these actions.

Penalty : (a) - (c) If the opposing team infringes but the kick is successful, the goal stands.

If the kick is unseccessful, the kicker may take another kick and the opposing team is not allowed to charge.

When another kick is allowed, the kicker may repeat all the preparations.
The kicker ma change the type of kick.

Clearly when reading the law, you will see that the Sharks were not allowed to come up. Infact the stormed again after the ref told them to stand still behind the goal line. So if Dericked missed, he would have had another chance and he would most deffinately not missed again!!

So rather except that the Sharks lost on a honest way before you embarress yourself to much!

Puhleeze.

And tell me, aren't you supposed to kick a conversion from the 22 meter line? Hougat went way beyond it. Even the usually befuddled Hugh Bladen picked it up.

I have no problem with the Bulls. I have a HUGE problem with the ref.

 

[|tera|]

I'm not even a rugby fan, but I do agree with the first line of posts in defense of the bulls. There were a few times where the ref made a bad call which affected the bulls negatively, watch the game again.

The Bulls won, fair and square, the last few minutes the sharks became relaxed, because they thought they had won. The crowd was just as pathetic, booing the bulls, and when they scored, silence

Nice game, nice win for the bulls

 

[|tera|]

1: I honestly think you are the only person on this earth that can accurately say when a pass went forward when looking from a total different agle...ref and tj was inline so maybe think again before making allegations.

2: Ok so when does a ruck start Mr Expert? Looking at the video, the referee point 3 times that he can see the ball. If he was able to see the ball, and a ruck did actually form, then he would've seen the hands - so relax, there was no hands then.

3: I think you were the only person in this country to have spotted this knock! He took the ball in the air and fell on it without it leaving its hand till the ball has been legally grounded and a try scored.

4: "Rule 9.B.3(a) All players of the opposing team must retire to their goal-line and must not overstep that line untill the kicker begins the approach to kick or starts to kick. When the kicker does this, they may charge or jump to prevent a goal but must not be physically supported by other players in these actions.

Penalty : (a) - (c) If the opposing team infringes but the kick is successful, the goal stands.

If the kick is unseccessful, the kicker may take another kick and the opposing team is not allowed to charge.

When another kick is allowed, the kicker may repeat all the preparations.
The kicker ma change the type of kick.

Clearly when reading the law, you will see that the Sharks were not allowed to come up. Infact the stormed again after the ref told them to stand still behind the goal line. So if Dericked missed, he would have had another chance and he would most deffinately not missed again!!

So rather except that the Sharks lost on a honest way before you embarress yourself to much!

Totally agree! I forgot about the that, the sharks charged Hougaart in his last kick, and the ref clearly said stand still

LOL!! Sharkies = kelp

 

[MielieSpoor]

You don't know when a ruck is formed? Look it up (seeing as you already know how to do that). Walsh screwed up here, big time. The Sharks had the ball under control on the ground, Bulls players dived in off their feet, wrested control of the ball and it came out on their side. No whistle.

Ok let me help you then. You have absolutely no Idea of the laws of the game...

"A Ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground. Open play has ended."
Danie Thiart to the ball in. The ball came out the side.

No ruck any more!

There are a bulls player and a sharks player over the ball. They are in no contact so no ruck.

Danie Ressouw falls on the ball to secure it - which he are allowed to do (ball is in general play).

Only now a ruck forms. The ball has already been secured by the Bulls. The referee points out on a number of times that he can see the ball.

Remember. Danie Ressouw secured the ball for the bulls and it came out on the bulls side, so what is your problem??? Where did the ref make a mistake????

And tell me, aren't you supposed to kick a conversion from the 22 meter line? Hougat went way beyond it. Even the usually befuddled Hugh Bladen picked it up.

"Law 9.B.1 (b) The kick is taken on a line through the place where the try was scored."

So now you cannot say anything about this again. I have proven you wrong on all 4 points that you brought up.

And again. Please, if you don't know your rugby law - of which you have absolutely no knowlegde about - please don't blame anything on the referee.

The Sharks has got only themselfs to blame for losing this game!!!

For the record. The ref made mistakes (as you do...), but none of them had an effect on the outcome of the game!!

 

[ubberfunk]

Amazulu you are absolute on blaming the Ref, you need closure and personally no matter what we say you will always be content on blaming the ref.

bad sportsman.....deal with it!

 

[Pixual]

Ok let me help you then. You have absolutely no Idea of the laws of the game...

Danie Ressouw falls on the ball to secure it - which he are allowed to do (ball is in general play).

As I understand the laws, no player may fall on the ball at any time. They must stay on their feet.

Only now a ruck forms. The ball has already been secured by the Bulls. The referee points out on a number of times that he can see the ball.

Remember. Danie Ressouw secured the ball for the bulls and it came out on the bulls side, so what is your problem??? Where did the ref make a mistake????

You must have been watching a different game because that's not what I saw.

"Law 9.B.1 (b) The kick is taken on a line through the place where the try was scored."

So now you cannot say anything about this again. I have proven you wrong on all 4 points that you brought up.

Er... No, but I'll entitle you to your flawed opinion.

And again. Please, if you don't know your rugby law - of which you have absolutely no knowlegde about - please don't blame anything on the referee.

The Sharks has got only themselfs to blame for losing this game!!!

For the record. The ref made mistakes (as you do...), but none of them had an effect on the outcome of the game!!

I disagree my friend. Even some of the country's top rugby journalists have said that Walsh screwed up.

 

[Pixual]

Walsh admits mistake

http://www.sharksrugby.co.za/default.asp?id=215976&des=article

Very interesting analysis further down in the article shows exactly what I saw happen (unlike Mielies rather skewed account).

 

[James]

Some interesting comments in that article I however would like to see the game again (if it is showed again) and watch out for the following.

“Having had a look at it again I think I COULD have missed something there,” - UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE YEAR...MORE LIKE DID DEFINATELY!

he told keo.co.za. “But while I’m not excusing errors, referees do make them in every game. When a game is close like Saturday’s was, there’s always a spotlight on every decision you make. ” - AGIAN ADMITTING THAT HE MADE CRUCIAL ERRORS...IS ANYBODY AT SANZAR LOOKING AT THIS CONFESSION!?


30:00 – 30:01

All the SHARKS players are behind the offside line until the ball is well out of the ruck. NO PENALTY is required! Check slow motion replay. (Subtract 3 points – Thank you very much ref)

39:59- 40:11

Ryan Kankowski (8 Sharks) ball carrier tackled by Wikus van Heerden (7 Bulls), ruck is not contested and all players go to floor around the ball. Then Wynand Olivier (12 Bulls) & Bakkies Botha (4 Bulls) arrive outside the ruck on the floor and suddenly the ball appears as if by magic with the Bulls and Bryan Habana (11 Bulls).
This really makes me wonder as the Sharks where just about a meter out from the tryline? Could this be a penalty try?

59:31

Deon Carstens (1 Sharks) & Butch James (10 Sharks) tackle concurrently Wynand Olivier (12 Bulls). High tackle perceived by Steve, but on replay this was DEFINATLY NOT A HIGH TACKLE Butch had his arms around Wynand and with Deon’s first tackle Wynand slipped on the one side under Butch due to the pressure and weight of the first tackle.
Check slow motion replay. (Subtract 3 points – Thank you very much ref)

80:44 (Into extra time this should be considered the TRUE close of play time)
Check slow motion replay. (Subtract 7 points – Thank you very much ref)

Knock on by Danie Thiart (17 Bulls) in the tackle on the floor… AND THE FINAL WHISTLE… is not heard just like the SIREN that should have sounded at 80:00!? You are joking right!? No I am not.

AS if this is not enough conundrum #2
80:45

Danie Thiart (17 Bulls) is at the bottom of the ruck on the floor with his back as the linesman comes in for a closer look Danie plays the knocked ball back towards the ruck from the Sharks side.

THERE IS MORE!? NO WAY!? Oh yes way!

80:46

Danie Rossouw (18 Bulls) also scrambles on the floor and plays back the ball towards the ruck.

No where has that ball gone!? Back into the ruck… WHERE IT SHOULD BE BLOWN AS DEAD BALL, as EVERBODY is lying on the floor since 80:46; Which would close the game for a Sharks Victory…..err yeah right!

The ball stays inside from 80:46 until 81:04 when it finally reappears on the side of the BULLS players. WHAT!? A full 18 second of dead ball time with bodies on the floor.

No this is not a tale about the BIG ONE that GOT AWAY!

81:04

The Bulls get the pass out from the dead ruck and play around with the ball infield, UNTILL!


AS if this is not enough conundrum #3


81:10

Jaco Van der Westhuizen (22 Bulls) passes the ball forwards to Jaco Engels (16 Bulls) who keeps it alive for the Bulls – Check the slow motion replay and you will see that the ball leaves Vd Westhiuzen and land next to him whilst he is still running at full pace. If you still are not convinced, check where the grass lines are when the ball leaves vd Westhuizen’s hands & where Engels receives the ball….

81:36 minutes
Then a moment of magic from Bryan Habana and a moment of weakness finally arrives as the Sharks cannot believe what has happened AND NOT HAPPENED in the last 2 minutes and 52 seconds.
Check slow motion replay. (Subtract 7 points – Thank you very much ref)

A true reflection of the game would be in the following score:
Sharks 19 – Bulls 7


SANZAR NUST do something!? Must they not?

 

[James]

Apparently on Total Rugby they have the final 10mins of play and there were 5 clear infringements, they more I read and "investigate" the more this thread about Walsh robbing us the more sad I become as nothing can happen to the result, it will always be a Bulls victory and in 6 months it won't even be an in-just victory any more as people will just forget.

This is a very sad time for Sharks supporters, it is a pity sanity did not prevail and Butch take that last conversion to nullify the refs short comings.