[RWC2023 QF4] France vs South Africa (15/10/2023)

[Batsumy]

What can actually happen, though, is that the ref choses an attitude towards a specific match and tries to stay consistent during the 80 minutes, even though this attitude might turn out in favor of one team of the other.
Just a quick example : BOK was the ref for the France - Uruguay match 4 weeks ago. Uruguay is obviously not the same team as South Africa, but during this match, he was quite picky, especially in scrums and rucks, and as a result, blew his whistle quite often, resulting in 15 penalties against France and 16 against Uruguay. His attitude for this match was rather strict., 31 pens in an international game is quite a lot.
4 weeks later, SA against France, very physical upfront, lots of challenging rucks and hard tackles. Surprisingly, in this environment, he adopted a very lax attitude on rucks and tackles. In the end, 6 penalties against France who had significantly more possession, and 6 penalties against the boks in spite of a lot of defending. A very small total of 12 penalties, many of them jackalling. Same ref, French team on both occasions, but a completely different attitude, from very strict to very lax in 4 weeks.
I guess the French management team did not expect such a change in a few weeks.

The french management team should not have to face such a change in 4 weeks, this does not make sense to me. A referee with such latitude in interpretation is a killer.

And honestly, chosing such an attitude for a France SA match was only going to go in favour of one team as I explained in my post, no need to be Einstein to understand this. It was playing on SA strenghts. And despite this, we did start perfectly well...but then few blunders from him and it was done...

To be frank, I was very surprised of the attitude of BOK yesterday, I had also this idea that he has been reffing fairly the frenchies in the past, I was happy with the choice of him for our match..never had anything to say about the Uruguay match, it was all down to us the near fail on this one

 

[Wichita]

The french management team should not have to face such a change in 4 weeks, this does not make sense to me. A referee with such latitude in interpretation is a killer.

And honestly, chosing such an attitude for a France SA match was only going to go in favour of one team as I explained in my post, no need to be Einstein to understand this. It was playing on SA strenghts. And despite this, we did start perfectly well...but then few blunders from him and it was done...

To be frank, I was very surprised of the attitude of BOK yesterday, I had also this idea that he has been reffing fairly the frenchies in the past, I was happy with the choice of him for our match..never had anything to say about the Uruguay match, it was all down to us the near fail on this one

He had also reffed Ireland - SA with only 3 penalties in the whole game, so his attitude might be related to his vision of the game and trying to keep some discipline when he thinks he needs it, and let the game go on if he thinks it's under control. The players have to adjust and maybe the Boks were better in this department. That does not change my opinion on whether or not he should have reviewed some sequences or spend more time discussing with the TMO. I also think having different nationalities in the ref team is a bonus, because the guys are less familiar with one another and tend to discuss more.

 

[OldSchoolRugga]

Good gracious. What a game. End to end stuff from start to finish. I thought Ben 'O Keefe did a good job in charge of the game.
France lacked that killer blow, and South Africa showed their mental strength. What Faf de Klerk is doing in that team, heaven knows. Kwagga Smith is a beast. Bench proved again to be the strength of the Springboks.

 

[Horacito]

I'm now rewatching the game and the more I progress into the game, the more all this ref talk looks repulsive and diminutive of the effort both teams did yesterday. I'll ellaborate further.

-all the reff stuff happens in the first 6 min of the game, and at the time it gets nasty looks by Dupont, but Ben O'Keefe explains his criteria and that's all there is to it, including Etzebeth's slap and all that
-SA gets the earlier advantage by scoring super soft tries clearly targeted by strategy, French air game super poor all over the match
-SA's managment of the card is truly magnificent: they just speed up their defense and slow the rucks, they get half the penalties. Kristhof the redhead prop is a monument to fat bois' dirty work. France just didn't use this huge advantage, their game was sloppy af from minute 41 to 50
-then you get the replacements from SA and hunting season starts: the backline switches to another gear and France becomes twice as sloppy, even dupont looses a ball
-the domination in the breakdown after that is just absolutely massive: france becomes more sloppy, SA scores a try, then a penalty, and France hasn't scored nothing, almost nothing in the first 25 min of the second half
-at some point, the frenchies looking at the ref simultaneously and asking for the penalties and all becomes irritating. They all do it and I am really repulsed by it. If only Dupont did it, it would be fine. But being a prop myself, just shut up and hold the ruck you mouthy ****.
-the measure of physical abuse Pieter Steph puts on the frenchies is just ridiculous.
-Yesterday I was confused by the changes, but now I see Vermeulan needed to get a check, which the saffas used to bring Kwagga in, and then made the change for PS du Toit . Then the same thing.
-the amount of penalties SA gets from their strenghts never stops: they always milk their scrums, the breakdown etc. Always a source of points. That's how they get the Pollard penalty.
-I am ambivalent towards Monambi's performance. He screws up again and again, and then he chooses to do that stupid tap and go with the penalty. Just bonkers stuff. I like it in terms of myself loving to get smashed against another pack, but it was really stupid. Even if it ends in a try.
-After Etzebeth's try, the french look very much defeated. Kwagga gets like three penalties straight and it's just crazy.
-Kolbe's drop is just funny hahahahaha
-the way they replace the players using the concussion procidure is just mind bogging, truly creative stuff.
-5 min away and Ramos makes that unforced error, which goes to show the psychological state of the frenchies.

Overall, I have to say I prefer France's style and I think their rugby is more atractive than SA's. They were defeated by strategy, by their own faults and by some unlucky calls by Doug DeMuro, but mostly by South Africa's excellence at match managment. They just fought better than France. Maybe in the future, this french team will get that WC they yearn, but honestly, they can't beat the AB's team I just saw this weekend. They are just not clinical enough, they have the skills, the talent and the physical strenght, but they can't sustain an effort long enough, otherwise they would have scored more tries when the saffas had one player left. Only Ireland could fight the blacks and this french team is not there -yet.
About the ref, I just think that the dynamic of the match wouldn't really change all that match with +1 try for France. South Africa looked like they could have reacted the way the did in any case, and catch up by either penalties, more tries or whatever. They could have forced many penalties with their scrum and taken Pollard to the posts much more than they did, instead they dominated territory and contact, which allowed them to creep up on France and seal the game, mostly because the last 10 min happen mostly in the french 22 or 10.

I will watch the match again this week tho, this is just pure rugby of the best kind. Thanks for the match!

 

[ncurd]

.
About the ref, I just think that the dynamic of the match wouldn't really change all that match with +1 try for France.

Sorry just no, 14-0 is dramatically diffrent from 7-7 in any game of rugby nobody can predict what might of happened. You might be right but basing on how the rest of the game was played. Sorry its merely guesswork and nothing more. I could say SA wouldn't score another point all match as France runs riot and I'd have a equal chance of being right.

 

[Horacito]

Sorry just no, 14-0 is dramatically diffrent from 7-7 in any game of rugby nobody can predict what might of happened. You might be right but basing on how the rest of the game was played. Sorry its merely guesswork and nothing more. I could say SA wouldn't score another point all match as France runs riot and I'd have a equal chance of being right.

Yeah that's a fair point, but to me if the ref explains his decision (he does), that's pretty much all there is to it. It's the social pact we all sign before coming into a rugby pitch and if you try to break it, sterile discussion unfolds. I'm sorry for the french and it must be terrible to have to deal with it, but that's the sport for you. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see two ways about it

 

[ncurd]

Yeah that's a fair point, but to me if the ref explains his decision (he does), that's pretty much all there is to it. It's the social pact we all sign before coming into a rugby pitch and if you try to break it, sterile discussion unfolds. I'm sorry for the french and it must be terrible to have to deal with it, but that's the sport for you. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see two ways about it

He absolutely does, by shouting down the TMO who's suggesting he takes another look. That's the argument here not if he made the right or wrong on field call. The fact that at a pivotal moment that would of dramatically changed the course of the game he couldn't do basic due diligence.

 

[Jer1cho]

Yeah that's a fair point, but to me if the ref explains his decision (he does), that's pretty much all there is to it. It's the social pact we all sign before coming into a rugby pitch and if you try to break it, sterile discussion unfolds. I'm sorry for the french and it must be terrible to have to deal with it, but that's the sport for you. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't see two ways about it

I'm sure they dealt with it fine after the 2007 quarter final.

We had to deal with being reffed out of a game over an entire 80 minutes in 2011. It happens. If people give hypotheticals so much weight, then they are honestly just wasting their energy. Any 'what if' you come up with will have an equal 'what if' to retort it.

France 14-0 up changes the game? Yeah, maybe it does, and then SA would have changed some things as well, and thinking a team as good as us is incapable of overturning a 14 point margin is just hypothetical on top of hypothetical. Argentina were down 13. What happened there? It's just so stupid.

Just high doses of copium.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Rewatched the game last night and i do think Eben did slap the ball backwards before PSDT Pounces on it.

 

[Hankstrom]

Awwww. I needed a couple of days to accept the loss this time! Reminds me of the 7-8 loss against NZ during the 2011 final.
We all watch rugby all year long and this happens all the time, close games, debatable ref decisions, etc.
I think as a player you want to win the game scoring tries and showing determination versus winning a game because the ref decision was challenged and overturned.
Something they do in the NFL, but not sure you want to see this in rugby.

It was a pure rugby game to watch really.
The Boks were better in the key moments of the second half and France was definitely there, almost winning this, it's a 1 point game!

More generally speaking I feel France could be a massive team if they made small changes.
I'm no expert but maybe rely less on the Toulouse gang and open up the squad to more mindsets and profiles throughout the French Top 14 and ProD2 to strenghten the minds.

Hats off to both teams, another classic game added to my collection!

 

[Batsumy]

I'm now rewatching the game and the more I progress into the game, the more all this ref talk looks repulsive and diminutive of the effort both teams did yesterday. I'll ellaborate further.

-all the reff stuff happens in the first 6 min of the game, and at the time it gets nasty looks by Dupont, but Ben O'Keefe explains his criteria and that's all there is to it, including Etzebeth's slap and all that

Nope wrong, all the ref stuff hapened all along the match, this match has been reffed to the advantage of SA, letting a free for all ruck game was clearly giving the right to the heavy and slow saffies to dictate the game and to slow down the french game. Another referee would have penalised the saffies massively on the ruck phases but not BOK (I think that is what Dupont and other french players have explained between the lines, we got ****** by a refereee who has reffed the match at our disadvantages). This is a bit sad that a whole lot of discussion et quite few evidences shared already are finishing in a box "all the ref stuff hapened in the first 6 minutes". Forget the controversy about Etzebeth (to be honest, on the moment, I did not even noticed it - what really made my blood boiled is the reffing of the ruck all along the match) . If the french are finishing with less juice than the saffies, it is because BOK has let the saffies get away with murder on the ruck phase. I cannot beleive one minute that he did not know what he was doing. As said yesterday, I do understand that reffing a rugby match is a matter of interpretation but when the ref autorises "to play football instead of rugby and throw the ruck rules through the windows", it does not makes sense, it is not adaptation anymore. Though I do understand your point of view, you are possibly a neutral (?) and you do not care, you have seen a good match of rugby, thats it

 

[Jer1cho]

 

[Batsumy]

View attachment 18200

if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

 

[Jer1cho]

if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Kolbe > Penaud

#slap

 

[Atmavictu]

It is also true that Etzebeth pushes so early that the French should have read better the play and exploit the space he left instead he chose to pass it.

 

[Batsumy]

It is also true that Etzebeth pushes so early that the French should have read better the play and exploit the space he left instead he chose to pass it.

On hindsight and seeing the video, it would have been less risky to give the ball to Alldritt and be more patient. but easy to say after. Also Penaud chickens out on trying to grab the ball from Du toit as Mostert is coming to defend Du toit

Du Toit could have been penalised for offside on the action as he crossed the line before Dupont ejects the ball

 

[TRF_stormer2010]

Wanted to highlight a few performances. For SA, Etzebeth was a man possessed. Kwagga had tired legs to compete with but boy did he take advantage. Same with Nche. Kolbe close to my motm but... Kriel.

Kriel is going to keep Am out of this RWC he is playing with everything he ever had. Moodie is a talent but played himself out of it against the minnows with poor decision making. Or is it a case of rotation in the semi and use it as a game to bring Am back in but with Kriel on the bench in place of Le Roux? You want to rest players if you can but it'd be a huge mistake to think that the semi is in the bag.

Props I'd keep as is. I think they should be fresh enough because they never play more than 50 at a time. Perhaps bring in Nyakane though? Mbonambi for me needs a rest but you don't dare not have him on the bench IMO? But then you might as well start him? Mostert got subbed early looked very hungry and almost angry he got pulled. You want that vs England. Duane out with Wiese coming in or Smith starting with Van Staden on the bench for me is the one no brainer. Vermeulen did what was required of him but I believe we can spare him and be better for it.

Reinach and Libbok for my money. If the goal kicking is better and it does look it I'm happy sticking to Libbok. DDA does not need rest but tempting to look at Esterhuizen just because of the familiarity he would bring. But then we are disrupting combinations and I don't want to see Moodie in the knock outs. It's fantastic that he is there and he got exposure but he is learning still and Kriel is in the form of his life with Am on the fringes. Back three as is. Just not Le Roux on the bench for me. Either Am or Van Staden or Kleyn.

But I'm stepping away from what I intend to do. France have to highlight Dupont and Mauvaka. Think the rest were there or thereabouts but those two stood out for me. Baile, yes. You have to be there. I get confused between the French backrowers but as a unit thought they played well but can't single anyone out. Penaud was good but I'd prefer Kolbe. Still fair to highlight Penaud though. For a combined xv I'd drop Arendse for Penaud out of position even if he didn't put a foot wrong.

 

[bapean]

Hello all,

First of all, what a game !

I'm still shattered for France, well done South Africa. SA's bench add so much when thrown on to the field. You guys have a strong and talented team. Les Bleus lacked a few details in key moment to win this game.

Regarding BOK, his assistants and TMO, I do think they are not bias, they made mistakes (for both France and South Africa sides).

Kolbe on Ramos conversion's :
Law 8-14 (in English and French), available on World Rugby's website:

Eng: "All players retire to their goal line and do not overstep that line until the kicker moves in any direction to begin their approach 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."

Fra: "Tous les joueurs de l'équipe adverse doivent se replier en arrière de leur ligne de but et ne pas franchir cette ligne avant que le botteur ne se déplace dans quelque direction que ce soit pour commencer son élan pour botter. Quand le botteur commence sa course, les adversaires peuvent charger ou sauter pour empêcher un but mais ne doivent pas être physiquement soulevés par d'autres
joueurs dans le cadre de ces actions."

According to me, the only thing which could be discussed is the fact that Kolbe and the other SA player are already on the line and not behind the line when Ramos starts to move. Anyway, what a pace from Cheslin !


Etzebeth on potential French try:
Law 11-3 and 11-4

Eng:
"3 - A player must not intentionally knock the ball forward with hand or arm. Sanction : Penalty.
4 - It is not an intentional knock-on if, in the act of trying to catch the ball, the player knocks on provided that there was a reasonable expectation that the player could gain possession."

Fra:
"3 - Un joueur ne doit pas intentionnellement projeter le ballon en avant avec la main ou le bras. Sanction : Pénalité.
4 - Un joueur ne commet pas d'en-avant volontaire s'il fait un en-avant en tentant d'attraper le ballon, à condition que ses chances d'obtenir la possession du ballon étaient raisonnables."

Hard to call. Some say the ball goes backward, other say the ball goes foreward.
If it goes backward, then perfect move from Etzebeth, if it goes foreward, then penalty (with potential penalty try + yellow). The refs should have discussed about it as it seems they didn't agree all.

France could also have better play this action.



Pieter-Steph du Toit on Danty at 16'

We don't have a lot of footage of this, but it clearly seems he destroyed Danty's face again, one year after. It could have been a red one if reviewed by the refs.



I do hope he will be reported and will not be able to play again in this World Cup.

Kwagga Smith at 69'
While contesting the ball on the ground to Cameron Woki, Kwagga Smith definitely placed a hand on the ground, which is normally punishable since he must put them on the ball, while maintaining his support.


Again, congrats Boks, wish you the best.

 

[BrokenWing]

According to me, the only thing which could be discussed is the fact that Kolbe and the other SA player are already on the line and not behind the line when Ramos starts to move. Anyway, what a pace from Cheslin !

I thought this, but the law does say "must not overstep" so being ON the line must be OK.

 

[Jer1cho]