• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

Bryce Lawrence

If a rugby player plays badly, they should be dropped. If a politican messes up the country, they get voted out. If a worker doesn't follow work safety rules, they get warned/fired. To an extreme, doctors/surgeons can face courts if they're negligent in their practise. So why should officiating matches be the only job in the world where no-one gives one about your performance? If you do badly in your job, what right do you have to keep it?

And I'm not saying that the result should be changed, that referees aren't allowed to make mistakes, etc. Just that if their overall performance isn't up to scratch, better referees should be appointed to officiate and people should feel hard done by if a referee makes numerous errors in officiating. It implies they haven't the ability to keep up with the game, which means they shouldn't have the job and shouldn't have been appointed to begin with.

I'm definitely not defending Bryce Lawrence, as I think his refereeing is erratic at best, so I always worry that he is going to be the deciding factor in a match, rather than the players ... but, in all fairness, he is accountable, as he hasn't been appointed to any other World Cup matches.

All referees are assessed on their performance as well ... to carry your players getting dropped, accountability in the work place, one step further ... players are only replaced if their is someone better to replace them, employees usually get reprimanded, rather than terminated, if their performance isn't up to scratch

Interesting remarks guys, but let's get one thing straight, I didn't join the petition, and i won't... I was just reading through the articles and thought I might share it with you guys, and thanks for the response!

I don't expect anything to happen to Bryce, just as nothing happened to Barnes... BUT, there is a difference... Barnes made 1 error that cost the All Blacks the match, the forward pass which had a direct impact on the outcome of the game. Bryce made continuous errors, affecting the game the whole time, and I think this is why, a petition has so many followers, as well a referee association to voice their opinion...

whether the IRB will do anything at all, is anyones guess... but like I said, I don't EXPECT anything to happen, that doesn't necessarily mean there won't...

I thing I read somewhere that Bryce was thinking of giving refereeing away anyway (I might have that wrong, as I can't find the link)

I agree with the sentiment that Facebook pages and prank calls are probably carrying dissatisfaction too far

... Interestingly enough, Wayne Barnes was at the centre of the the controversy in the pool game between South Africa and Wales, where South Africa got the benefit of a refereeing blunder ... is there a facebook page up with lots of South Africans demanding his removal?
 
Too right man, The referee's need to be dealt with. In the form of punishment, is the only thing I can think of for these guys to buck their ideas up man. Referee's are costing teams matches and it's not fair. As for the guy who went on about referee's being able to ref their own countries. Do you know how silly you sound? You're just asking for the opposition to complain when they lose and your coutrymen was the referee...

Referee's need a vast improvement.

No lets not punish our referees lets support them. We need to improve our referees and to do that we need to help them. On some occasions some referee may need to be dropped down a level but punishment of referees has no place in game. Do you really think people will want to take up the whistle if they see them treated like that? and lets face it without referees there is no game!
 
Referees have been given nothing BUT support for the worst part of the professional era. And nothing happens, they don't improve at all. The only way I believe referee's are going to get better is that they are thrown in the deep end. Especially when they are making bad calls that are the deciding factors of crucial matches. It's unfair not only on the team, but their fan base as well.
 
Referees have been given nothing BUT support for the worst part of the professional era. And nothing happens, they don't improve at all. The only way I believe referee's are going to get better is that they are thrown in the deep end. Especially when they are making bad calls that are the deciding factors of crucial matches. It's unfair not only on the team, but their fan base as well.

As a young referee I would be very disappointed if the unions believed it was acceptable to just chuck refs into games and think "oh well if they mess it up we can just get rid of them". Referees do a fine job. For some reason people think its them against the refs when that is far from reality.
 
I don't expect anything to happen to Bryce, just as nothing happened to Barnes... BUT, there is a difference... Barnes made 1 error that cost the All Blacks the match, the forward pass which had a direct impact on the outcome of the game.

I think your making a mistake due to the world focusing on Barnes' biggest error in the '07 game. He made several questionable calls and allowed the French a lot of leeway at the breakdown and in scrums. Not to mention them having the "flattest" defence I've ever seen allowed in a World Cup match for many parts of the game.

It was probably the peak of the McCaw's a cheat campaign and he really caught a lot of Barnes' attention at the tackle area. When he was first man there he was getting pinged for going for the ball when a ruck had plainly not formed. From memory there was another French forward pass which didn't get them a try, but got them further down field.

In order to make the point about Barnes' nearly everyone focused on the try from the forward pass, the most obvious example in a poor game.

Bryce Lawrence was worse obviously, but this was not a "one mistake by Barnes versus 10 by Bryce". We're all over it over here now, but the '07 reffing was still enough to cost us a huge chance to win the game.

In '07 France played extremely intensely and defended like champs despite infringing a lot. Same with Aussie this year, but obviously an even bigger example.
 
As a young referee I would be very disappointed if the unions believed it was acceptable to just chuck refs into games and think "oh well if they mess it up we can just get rid of them". Referees do a fine job. For some reason people think its them against the refs when that is far from reality.

Who's insisting that unions believe it acceptable to "just chuck refs into games and think oh well if they mess it up we can just get rid of them"?? After re reading my comment I realised it was me, But I didn't mean it like that lol. Maybe I should have worded my comment better :D. What I meant was, give the ref's a tune up, throw them on the burner and take action. A fine or suspension for so long type of thing.

No one thinks it's them against the refs. It's just that in crucial matches where games could be won either way, the referee's tend to make wrong calls or lack of. I don't know whether it's the pressure because of such an intense match or what, it doesn't matter. They have been appointed to do the job, they know the rules/laws and their job is to enforce them. It's not as if they're alone out there. They have two other officials aiding them who also need to be under fire when it comes to the crunch.

As a former referee, I am disappointed that such poor officiating has been going on in the professional leagues.
 
has any considered 2 refs? each ref is assigned a half to police. i'm sure there will be points against, but it would assist with not only the breakdown, but also chasers being in front of the kicker.

back in the early 80's AFL had 1 field umpire and as the game got faster, they upped it to 2 field umpires and now 3. it seems to work well despite negative publicity at the time and I believe the same thing could be applied to rugby.
each ref stays in the same half at half time so each team gets 40 minutes policing their own half.
 
it was a crap performance from Lawrence, the good thing is now the bokke people know how us Kiwi's feel about 07 and Wane Barnes, I think the situations are very similar. boils down to Refs that shy away from giving penalties in very important games and when that happens the team that pushes the limits most gets an advantage. In this case the work of Pocock at the breakdown in particular. I honestly don't understand how such a massive game can be played and only 10 penalties be called? If anything the players push the limits more than a normal game. Compare to 07 and Barnes not penalizing france at all for the entire 2nd half. Very similar situation.

At one stage in the game Lawrence blew the game up to set a scrum when what was happening was Pocock who to be only got his hands on the ball well after a ruck had formed had his hands on the ball and was pulling it onto the tackled player who was also partly holding the ball because of that. Any way you look at it it has to be a penalty but Lawrence called a scrum. I think overall those calls and the slowing of the ball that Pocock got away with hurt the boks badly.

Nothing will come of it, in 07 paddy came out and publically said that Barnes got calls wrong. though he also said that it didn't affect the outcome of the game to try and save some face even though that was bulldust.

I think NZ's top ref is Glen Jackson, he's been fantastic. Should see him do test footy next year I hope.
 
I've thought for some time there should be two refs, one to focus on the breakdowns and the other to worry about offsides etc (although I guess touchies do a bit of this now too). With rugby being as it is, there is so many things to look at for a ref, should simplify it for them a bit.
 
I've thought for some time there should be two refs, one to focus on the breakdowns and the other to worry about offsides etc (although I guess touchies do a bit of this now too). With rugby being as it is, there is so many things to look at for a ref, should simplify it for them a bit.

Well, not sure about two refs myself, but totally agree that the "assistant refs" (if you can call them that half the time), should be policing the offside rule, the most under-watched rule in Rugby right now and I'm talking about every side and their pressing defence.
 
Interesting remarks guys, but let's get one thing straight, I didn't join the petition, and i won't... I was just reading through the articles and thought I might share it with you guys, and thanks for the response!

I don't expect anything to happen to Bryce, just as nothing happened to Barnes... BUT, there is a difference... Barnes made 1 error that cost the All Blacks the match, the forward pass which had a direct impact on the outcome of the game. Bryce made continuous errors, affecting the game the whole time, and I think this is why, a petition has so many followers, as well a referee association to voice their opinion...

whether the IRB will do anything at all, is anyones guess... but like I said, I don't EXPECT anything to happen, that doesn't necessarily mean there won't...

That is factually incorrect. I don't really want to go into this again but I could not care less about the forward pass. I mean sure, Barnes was in a good position to see it and the pass was blatantly forward but every referee makes mistakes. It is easy to be looking the other way at the right moment and miss something crucial. What was really frustrating was that we could not get a penalty in the entire second half and is interpretation of the scrum was terrible. What was more frustrating was the lack of leadership shown by senior players and the injuries.

Obviously Lawrence did not have a good game. That is especially noted when watching the replay. However, just like us in 2007 they should have won regardless of the ref based on the opportunities they had. South Africa knocked on at terrible times and gave away simple turnovers. They deserved to win and basically dominated the whole match and they would have won if they took their opportunities.
 
I think your making a mistake due to the world focusing on Barnes' biggest error in the '07 game. He made several questionable calls and allowed the French a lot of leeway at the breakdown and in scrums. Not to mention them having the "flattest" defence I've ever seen allowed in a World Cup match for many parts of the game.

It was probably the peak of the McCaw's a cheat campaign and he really caught a lot of Barnes' attention at the tackle area. When he was first man there he was getting pinged for going for the ball when a ruck had plainly not formed. From memory there was another French forward pass which didn't get them a try, but got them further down field.

In order to make the point about Barnes' nearly everyone focused on the try from the forward pass, the most obvious example in a poor game.

Bryce Lawrence was worse obviously, but this was not a "one mistake by Barnes versus 10 by Bryce". We're all over it over here now, but the '07 reffing was still enough to cost us a huge chance to win the game.

In '07 France played extremely intensely and defended like champs despite infringing a lot. Same with Aussie this year, but obviously an even bigger example.

Yeah, fair enough, and on hindsight the yellow card on Mccalister was also a bad call...

Last night PDV was on Boots and All rugby show here in South Africa, and they asked plenty questions about the match, the ref, as well as the other games in the World Cup. PDV said that what made him, John Smit and Victor furious was the fact that they had a meeting with Bryce before the match as it happens now most games, and Bryce told them how he was going to handle the breakdowns, and then in the match he did a full 180 degrees turn and did the exact opposite...

PDV admitted that some of the steals by Aus was legal and that they had no problem with that, but he said the amount of illegal turnovers, overshadowed the legal turnovers. And that is why the boks in the second half did that sealing off where they sort of go all foetal position over the ball. and that helped to a certain extent.

They showed the clip of Aus try and where pocock kicked the ball through which was then picked up and scored, and PDV said, the positioning of Lawrence was wrong, as he was behind the ruck at Aus side, and not horizontal with the ruck, so Bryce's bad positioning prevented him from making a call, but PDV said in that movement, the touch judges was also at fault, as they didn't look at the offside line as Pocock and another Aussie were offside at the ruck.

Another interesting thing PDV pointed out was when Pocock went into the ruck, he immediately goes off his feet, to be as flat as possible to get the ball, and then he relies on the boks who tries to clean him out, to get him back to his feet, they showed a clip where Pocock was second at the ruck by the aussies, went in, then grabbed the ball while basically lying flat over the tackled player, then Danie Rossouw came in to make the clean out, and as Danie hit Pocock, Pocock went backwards and was on his feet again...

PDV admitted that, that was a brilliant ploy by Pocock, but nonetheless still Illegal, and also because he was the second aussie player at the ruck, he's not allowed to play the ball in the first place...

As much as i dislike PDV, he explained it pretty well and even I sat there in pure amazement of what he had to say... like they say, there's a first time for everything... First time amazed at PDV saying something that wasn't total BS.. LOL
 
PDV admitted that, that was a brilliant ploy by Pocock, but nonetheless still Illegal, and also because he was the second aussie player at the ruck, he's not allowed to play the ball in the first place...

Was he 2nd to the ruck? Or 2nd to the tackle? If he is entering a ruck, yes it is illegal for anyone to touch the ball. But any player entering the tackle arena can grab the ball if the ruck hasn't formed, and this is what Pocock does the majority of the time. (Pocock did puts his hands in the ruck a few times, but i'm talking here about the ball pilfering)

It is valid to question is whether these pilfers, are (as you say) going off their feet once they have retained the ball (legally).
 
Was he 2nd to the ruck? Or 2nd to the tackle? If he is entering a ruck, yes it is illegal for anyone to touch the ball. But any player entering the tackle arena can grab the ball if the ruck hasn't formed, and this is what Pocock does the majority of the time. (Pocock did puts his hands in the ruck a few times, but i'm talking here about the ball pilfering)

It is valid to question is whether these pilfers, are (as you say) going off their feet once they have retained the ball (legally).

What Pocock does well is grabs the guy on the ground and basically lies on top of him, but because he has a real wide stance and is short anyway it looks like he is sort of on his feet when he has all his weight on top of the tackled player; he is super hard to move once he is in that position and gets a lot of penalties/turnovers from it.
 
I know what he does. I'm just saying that him, and all other opensides (including Brussow, Richie, O'Brien) usually get the ball legally. The 2nd man to a tackle can grab the ball.
 
Obviously Lawrence did not have a good game. That is especially noted when watching the replay. However, just like us in 2007 they should have won regardless of the ref based on the opportunities they had. South Africa knocked on at terrible times and gave away simple turnovers. They deserved to win and basically dominated the whole match and they would have won if they took their opportunities.

I agree. Even though I was furious after the game, after I cooled down and had a relook at the game, the Boks didn't use their opportunities well and didn't adapt to what was happening on the field.
Bryce Lawrence was pathetic, he aided in us losing the game. It was obvious to the rest of the world what Oz were doing at the breakdown, but he couldn't see it even though he was 2 meters from the action. I've never liked him. He always seems to be snorty towards players and he tends to communicate with impatience.

With that said the Boks just didn't adapt. It f**cking tough playing a game when you feel the ref is against you but you have to see what's happening and adapt!
The Boks ball retention at ruck time has been pants for a few seasons now. I've flogged that horse many a time. So is our support play. So many times a player would get over the advantage line and would have no support to either pass to or form the ruck. We continually don't commit enough numbers to the ruck and we don't play to the ball. WE DON'T PLAY THE BALL. I've said this since forever! We are to busy smashing players to even know where the ball is in the ruck. Please tell me someone else sees this?!
 

For a scientist he doesn't seem to understand the burden of proof very well. (Actually I'm sure he does, but when he puts on his blinkers he refuses to think straight)

It is up to him to prove SA couldn't win that game even if they tried. I assume he thinks the forward pass ruling is evidence on match fixing. But Bryce was actually consistent when ruling forward passes in the game so that point doesn't apply. Other than that I don't see much reason to believe the game was fixed, and this man doesn't offer us any.

I'm sure he gets annoyed when non-scientists call biologists and climate scientists corrupt government liars. So I'm sure he'll understand when people tell him to gain a bit of perspective before trying to imply Bryce is a match-fixer.
 
Last edited:
Ah the match was fixed, erm no it was not and and for Noakes to even suggest that is crazy. Love the line I am not suggesting there was match fixing, but is up to the IRB to prove there was not.

That fly's in the face of justice as a whole, he is telling the IRB that they need to prove the match was not fixed. How about Noakes provides evidence and then the allegation can be defended.
Innocent until proven otherwise, go get some evidence and then come back.

Love the comments saying RWC 2011 is rigged by a number of fans.
 

Latest posts

Top