[2016 Super Rugby] Kings vs. Jaguares (Round 14) 27/05/2016

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Thanks for sharing saulan
Let me use a part to emphasize what i see as part of the problem.

You know, the penalty try. After one scrum, was unusual, but what you have to understand is that throughout the game, there were so many issues the referee had to handle and the referee talked to them on a number of occasions and finally he has lost his patience. So you normally reset a scrum and reset a scrum and maybe after the third scrum you give a penalty try, he was so fed up with those guys that the moment they collapsed the scrum, he gave a penalty try.

That is not only biased but simply unacceptable and completely inconsistent with the previous argument he made. On one hand he asks for Creevy to be lead by example and then he finds it perfectly acceptable for the referee to "lose his patience". That is ridiculous, i'd say even stupid.
And one has to wonder how does Mallet reconcile the "he was so fed up with those guys" part with the fact that the kings committed more penalties than the jaguares.
Are we supposed to believe that the jaguares 12 penalties were more patience wrecking than the kings' 14? That's a very, very hard sell.

I agree to a point about our temperamental nature, but he completely loses the plot later on.
What's the saying? The fact that we are paranoid doesn't mean we are wrong. He is saying we are and evidence suggests otherwise.

 

[saulan]

Thanks for sharing saulan
Let me use a part to emphasize what i see as part of the problem.


That is not only biased but simply unacceptable and completely inconsistent with the previous argument he made. On one hand he asks for Creevy to be lead by example and then he finds it perfectly acceptable for the referee to "lose his patience". That is ridiculous, i'd say even stupid.
And one has to wonder how does Mallet reconcile the "he was so fed up with those guys" part with the fact that the kings committed more penalties than the jaguares.
Are we supposed to believe that the jaguares 12 penalties were more patience wrecking than the kings' 14? That's a very, very hard sell.

I agree to a point about our temperamental nature, but he completely loses the plot later on.
What's the saying? The fact that we are paranoid doesn't mean we are wrong. He is saying we are and evidence suggests otherwise.

I don't think he is saying the red losing his patience is a good thing, I think he is explaining more of a human nature thing. If a person loses their patience with you they are more likely going to make quicker calls against you when you do something wrong. I also think when he says so many other things dealt with he doesn't mean penalties, I think he means harassment and complaints everytime he made a decision against them.

Mallett is one to call it how it is. It would be pretty tough to accuse him of bias. He has no problem lambasting **** ref or South African team performances.

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

I don't think he is saying the red losing his patience is a good thing, I think he is explaining more of a human nature thing.

Oh come on, he is clearly sugarcoating it. He "explains" the refs behaviour in what seems to be an attempt to justify it while he criticizes creevy's behaviour. I can't help but asking why isn't he justifying creevy's and criticizing the refs. If he uses "lead by example" when referring to Creevy it is only fair for us to expect something along the lines of "he shouldn't lose his temper" when talking about the ref.
It doesn't look as if he is measuring both behaviours with the same bar.

If a person loses their patience with you they are more likely going to make quicker calls against you when you do something wrong.
I also think when he says so many other things dealt with he doesn't mean penalties, I think he means harassment and complaints everytime he made a decision against them.

That's hard to buy. And regarding the complaints, first, i do not think they were as outrageous as he makes it sound and second, judging by the non south african and non argentines posting on this thread (to eliminate bias), there appears to be some merit behind those complaints.
Yeah, i know what some will say: "you shouldn't complain". Fair enough. Refs shouldn't make mistakes either. It happens and again, i don't think this game is a good example of the jaguares losing their temper and *****ing to the ref non stop.

Another consideration i believe the ref should take into account is that there is a language barrier. They are not fluent english speakers.

And to be completely honest, out of all of our players singling Creevy out as temperamental is strange, at best.

Again, i was the one blaming our team and not the ref for our loss a page ago, but i disagree with a big chunk of what you quoted. Having said that, interesting to see what other people think.

 

[Ludders93]

Very strange refereeing performance. The Southern Kings early on were presciently offending around their own line after repeated warnings and the ref did nothing. Then the two red cards. I understand the officials have a mandate, any violent contact to the head is a red card, but I thought both, especially the first were harsh. I've seen a lot worse yellow carded or go unpunished.

Then the worst bit of refereeing came late on. The yellow card at the maul was incredibly harsh. He said he'd warned the Jaguares, but the maul wasn't even advancing when it was dragged down. Then to give a penalty try on the first scrum when the ball may have even popped out. It'll be the last time he referees a super-rugby game for a while I suspect.

As for the teams, the Southern Kings are a truly dreadful team. Had it not become 12 for the Jaguares they would've lost that game. The Jaguares are in a dark spiral at the moment, poor performances, awful discipline. They need the international break to regather themselves.

Such a strange game, and I'm slightly annoyed because the Kings were 16/1 on Sky Bet and I seriously nearly bet on them. Having said that, I doubt they'll win another game this year. Not a great advert for Super Rugby after two great matches this morning. Hopefully tomorrow will be better.

 

[saulan]

From my perspective, I actually have been really impressed with Creevey this season and think this Super rugby season has done great things for him as a captain, and he has definitely grown as a player. I don't think he has played in poor discipline and was unlucky that his tackle got cited because, although it was dangerous, there was no malice intent from him.

just for context though, the Creevey question was put on him, he had no interest in answering it (lead by example when you have been cited was the question from the panelist, I think Mallet thought it was **** and continued his previous thought path) and generally wanted to carry on his discussion he was having about Arguntinian rugby in general. On TV in context it didn't come across as Creevey criticism.

and again, from my perspective, Creevey has done an excellent job of referee management and keeping calm when interacting with the ref. I have said that in previous threads as well (think it was the Sharks game). The problem lies with other players in the squad.

 

[Dark Horse]

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or cry after watching this game. The referee, the lack of a crowd, the stadium and, most of all, BOTH teams would make me embarrassed to show this to any non rugby supporter. This was a circus act. The ref was crap, the teams were crap and in Hernandez' performance we saw the sad finish to the career of one of the Argentine greats. The Kings should be ashamed of themselves for vigorously celebrating a narrow victory over a team with 20% of its players off the field. That was sickening. The Jaguares should be ashamed of themselves because if they happened to be wearing blue and white, they would have dragged through the mud the reputation of a proud rugby and sporting nation. Save the arguments of travel, a new level of rugby, a new team (which they are not). Not one of those arguments is valid. A few weeks ago I enquired with our Argentine friends here how the local media were judging the subpar performances of the Jaguares team. I was reliably informed that the rugby media was too incestuous and/or too apologetic to criticise the team's play. I hope that changes soon and that pressure is placed on the UAR to send out a competitive team next season. I'm not sure at this point if that involves a new coach or different players but this team is on figurative life support. As for the Kings, may they be dissolved and their players find contracts elsewhere. No more to say about them.

 

[argie]

Remember the match Chiefs-Jaguares when Sam Cane put knock out with his shoulder to Tetaz-Chaparro?. No red card, no yellow card. Even I think he was congratulated by the referee, and then by the Sanzaar tribunal.... :lol:

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

I honestly don't know whether to laugh or cry after watching this game. The referee, the lack of a crowd, the stadium and, most of all, BOTH teams would make me embarrassed to show this to any non rugby supporter. This was a circus act. The ref was crap, the teams were crap and in Hernandez' performance we saw the sad finish to the career of one of the Argentine greats. The Kings should be ashamed of themselves for vigorously celebrating a narrow victory over a team with 20% of its players off the field. That was sickening. The Jaguares should be ashamed of themselves because if they happened to be wearing blue and white, they would have dragged through the mud the reputation of a proud rugby and sporting nation. Save the arguments of travel, a new level of rugby, a new team (which they are not). Not one of those arguments is valid. A few weeks ago I enquired with our Argentine friends here how the local media were judging the subpar performances of the Jaguares team. I was reliably informed that the rugby media was too incestuous and/or too apologetic to criticise the team's play. I hope that changes soon and that pressure is placed on the UAR to send out a competitive team next season. I'm not sure at this point if that involves a new coach or different players but this team is on figurative life support. As for the Kings, may they be dissolved and their players find contracts elsewhere. No more to say about them.

Agreed on all points but I wanted to ask what you meant with 'the stadium'? Its a world class facility asfar as I know and I've only heard good things about it though never having been there I can't give y own opinion.

The thing about the Kings- and here I'm trying to be positive and hopeful of them long term and I'm not defendig their inclusion- is they have the player pool the local economy and facilities to be highly competitive. Port Elizabeth is SA's 6th largest city (Soweto the only bigger city not represented in SR) while Bloemfontein (where the Cheetahs are based) is not even top 10. Players that are active now who hail from the provence off the top of my head;

2 Scarra Ntubeni
4 Jacques Potgieter
7 Siya Kolisi
8 Dewald Potgieter
9 Jano Vermaak
10 Elton Jantjies
12 Jan Serfontein
13 Lionel Mapoe
14 Sergeal Petersen
15 Johan Goosen

Their problem has been poor and corrupt management and finances. They have just, like a few days ago gotten rid of their CEO, have secured a reliable sponsor and I'm sure now with being in the light of SR rather than the rther oscure CC tier 2 and with SARU on board directly they will be managed more properly. I might be being naive but they have the resources.

 

[JohnKA]

Life is not fair , all the teams in super rugby have had bad refs in some games ( not sure about crusaders , normally get away with murder ) nothing we can do need to adapt to the ref and move on

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Life is not fair , all the teams in super rugby have had bad refs in some games ( not sure about crusaders , normally get away with murder ) nothing we can do need to adapt to the ref and move on

Very true. Not shocking but the Reds were a tad lucky to beat the Crusaders in the 2011 final. So, even the Crusaders can complain.

 

[Dark Horse]

Agreed on all points but I wanted to ask what you meant with 'the stadium'? Its a world class facility asfar as I know and I've only heard good things about it though never having been there I can't give y own opinion.

The thing about the Kings- and here I'm trying to be positive and hopeful of them long term and I'm not defendig their inclusion- is they have the player pool the local economy and facilities to be highly competitive. Port Elizabeth is SA's 6th largest city (Soweto the only bigger city not represented in SR) while Bloemfontein (where the Cheetahs are based) is not even top 10. Players that are active now who hail from the provence off the top of my head;

2 Scarra Ntubeni
4 Jacques Potgieter
7 Siya Kolisi
8 Dewald Potgieter
9 Jano Vermaak
10 Elton Jantjies
12 Jan Serfontein
13 Lionel Mapoe
14 Sergeal Petersen
15 Johan Goosen

Their problem has been poor and corrupt management and finances. They have just, like a few days ago gotten rid of their CEO, have secured a reliable sponsor and I'm sure now with being in the light of SR rather than the rther oscure CC tier 2 and with SARU on board directly they will be managed more properly. I might be being naive but they have the resources.

You are correct. I realise the stadium itself is a good facility and I was referring more to the lack of an atmosphere than the actual facility itself which is obviously of very high quality.

 

[saulan]

You are correct. I realise the stadium itself is a good facility and I was referring more to the lack of an atmosphere than the actual facility itself which is obviously of very high quality.

Apparently it was about 3300 people. It says a lot about what the South African public thinks of you when you can only muster just over 3000 people in your home town.

 

[TooEasyCampese]

Apparently it was about 3300 people. It says a lot about what the South African public thinks of you when you can only muster just over 3000 people in your home town.

At least they're not like the force getting 10k+ but no atmosphere

 

[Groundhog]

Very true. Not shocking but the Reds were a tad lucky to beat the Crusaders in the 2011 final. So, even the Crusaders can complain.

Not that relevant but reminds me of this

 

[Cruz_del_Sur]

Life is not fair ,

Careful. There is so much added value in comments like that that the tax authorities might come after you for VAT avoidance.

 

[Five Meters Out]

Such a strange game, and I'm slightly annoyed because the Kings were 16/1 on Sky Bet and I seriously nearly bet on them. Having said that, I doubt they'll win another game this year. Not a great advert for Super Rugby after two great matches this morning. Hopefully tomorrow will be better.

What??? You considered betting on the Kings, found them at 16/1 in a two horse race and didn't have a crack. C'mon Ludders, harden up.

 

[Dark Horse]

What??? You considered betting on the Kings, found them at 16/1 in a two horse race and didn't have a crack. C'mon Ludders, harden up.

To be fair, hindsight is 20:20. Given that there is something clearly wrong in the camp, the majority of teams will fancy taking 5 points off the Jags this year and maybe next but the Kings aren't one of them. How else can you explain their wild, and shameful, celebration of a victory over a 12 man team? The Kings have no respect for themselves and the 16/1 price suggests that the bookies don't either.

 

[Pampas]

Remember the match Chiefs-Jaguares when Sam Cane put knock out with his shoulder to Tetaz-Chaparro?. No red card, no yellow card. Even I think he was congratulated by the referee, and then by the Sanzaar tribunal.... :lol:

The ref could have missed it, even the TMO could have missed it, but Cane was cited and went away with murder. Lets wait and see whats the decision for Lavanini and Herrera.

 

[WaterboySA]

I never rated the Kings to win. My comment last week was that the Jaguares should have easy win. I think the two reds were justified, those players are idiots. It was SUCH a bad game I did not watch the 2nd half.

I think the Jaguares captain should be relieved of his duties. He could not control his team, time for someone else.

 

[TRF_heineken]

I honestly can't see why there is even anger or frustration with regard to the 2 red cards. Both of those events were off the ball shoulder clear-outs to the head or spine of the opponent. It's a straight red card, and if those thugs can't understand what they did wrong, then they should be educated. No point in blaming the ref. He followed the laws, and even got the TMO involved who specifically check for foul play, which both instances were.

During this whole Super Rugby tournament we've seen how strict the referees are with foul play, and actions which could harm the opponent in a career ending way. These clearouts are way worse than the contests in the air, where players also got red cards for.

Keep perspective.