In the realm of international rugby, few matches hold as much tension and anticipation as those between rugby giants, Wales and South Africa. However, their recent clash has made headlines, not just for the sheer competitiveness exhibited on the field but for the controversial decisions that called into question the consistency of World Rugby’s laws. This description aims to delve deeper into these instances and evaluate why many feel World Rugby’s rules, in this context, simply “don’t add up.”
The crux of the controversy hinges on two pivotal moments during the match: a contentious penalty try awarded to South Africa and a tackle that has reignited debates on player safety.
Penalty Try Controversy:
Late in the first half, with the tension palpable, South Africa secured a penalty advantage and quickly sought to capitalize. A clever kick was aimed wide for Canan Moodie to latch onto and, hopefully, touch down for a try. However, the kick didn’t perfectly meet its mark. As the ball made its unpredictable bounce, Moodie and Wales’ Rio Dyer both reached for it. Dyer’s hand made a clear, forceful contact, batting the ball into touch. The immediate question was clear: did Dyer’s action prevent a probable try, warranting a penalty try as per law 8.3?
But the situation was far more nuanced than it initially appeared. Replays revealed the extent to which Moodie had to stretch and contort his body to even come close to the ball. More crucially, it appeared Moodie may have brushed the ball forward, hinting at a possible knock-on even before Dyer’s intervention. The TMO review seemed narrowly focused on Dyer’s act, seemingly overlooking the sequence of events leading up to it. The decision seemed ambiguous, raising more questions than answers and leaving fans and pundits alike divided and perplexed.
The Tackle Debate:
Another incident that has since set social media and rugby forums alight with debate revolves around Damian Willemse’s attempt to tackle Rio Dyer. A change in Dyer’s direction, primarily due to Marco van Staden’s intervening tackle, led to a head-on collision between Willemse and Dyer. The core of the debate here isn’t merely the unexpected change in direction but the height of Willemse’s attempted tackle. Given the unwavering stance of World Rugby on high tackles and player safety, the immediate verdict for many was clear – a red card. Yet, it opened up discussions on whether all factors were adequately considered or if World Rugby’s rules are too rigid, sidelining crucial contextual factors.
The Larger Implication:
These controversial moments aren’t merely isolated incidents. They highlight a growing concern amongst the rugby community about the clarity, consistency, and application of World Rugby’s rules. For the casual viewer, these TMO deliberations might seem like a mystery as many opine. Even seasoned players, pundits, and fans are often left scratching their heads, trying to reconcile what they see with the final decisions made.
In the Farrell-Basham incident referenced in Nigel Owens’ column, we witness another perplexing application of the “mitigation” rule. Farrell’s tackle, which many deemed illegal from the onset, sparked discussions on whether mitigating factors were relevant or even applicable. The core debate revolved around the very essence of what constitutes foul play and how the rules of the game interpret and adjudicate such instances.
Conclusion:
The recent Wales vs. South Africa match serves as a microcosm of the broader challenges rugby faces today. As the game evolves and as technology becomes increasingly integrated into decision-making, there’s a pressing need for clearer rules and more consistent applications. It’s essential to strike a balance – ensuring player safety without compromising the spirit and dynamism of the game. For now, fans, players, and officials alike will continue to grapple with these complexities, hoping for clarity and fairness in future encounters.
Lastly, I would also like to thank VHA Accounting Solutions for their partnership during this 2023 Rugby Championship. This video was sponsored by them. We look forward to a great partnership during this Rugby Championship
For this Video I used CoachPaint from TRACAB, they’re the best in the industry with regards to telestration software:
For a 14-day Trial you can use this link: https://bit.ly/coach-paint-tasanalytics
Check them out on:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/tracab
Twitter: https://twitter.com/TRACAB_
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/tracab.ok
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tracab_
#CoachPaint
#Tracab
21 Comments
So many big decisions went against Wales in that match! The Dher yellow and penalty try is disgraceful, the only way the SA winger had to score a try there was if he could somehow stop on a 6 pence while at full tilt and take a step backwards a voiding Dyer at the same time add to that le roux should of been carded for his actions! Later in the game Colby took a Welsh winger out in the air blatant yellow and more a pen try than Dyers! Plus numerous other 50/50s that went the way of the SAs! Until dyers yellow Wales were well in the game that was a massive turning point! How Joy Neville continues to be a TMO with her inadequacies is beyond me!
#FokofWillie
Often seems like one set of rules for England one set for 'some others'. Yes Willemse is bent at the knees – BUT driving upwards. RED RED RED all day.
Go Bokke!!! Die rugby wereld en ondersteuners van wereld rugby is bang vir die Bokke!!! Hulle weet nie wat ons weet nie!!! Bring die beker weer huis toe🥇🏆
😂😂😂
I think a lot of the first thing you talk about comes from a culture of moaning and complaining about referee's because of a perceived global conspiracy.
Its a bit of a cult movement started by some bloke called Ressie Aresmus or something like that.
Stupid video bro. Don’t bring wokeness into rugby.
The ball bounced through his hand hhahahahaha just play the video at .5 speed you see it clear as day.
Tough call on the PT the SA winger has run past the ball or the bounce did him either way he’s missed it before the welsh lad slapped at it
What's the procedure if someone wants Willemse's yellow card upgraded to a red? Can England Rugby ask WR to review it?
The most stupid but about all
of this is the decision to award a penalty try. Utter madness. The ball was behind the South African winger; he’d already dropped it.
Willie is no more annoying than your average scrumhalf. Just because he doesn't wear a 9 on his back doesn't mean he should be treated differently. That said, I do think he needs to tone it down.
Regarding the Willemse tackle: It shows the absurd approach of World Rugby putting almost all the blame and responsibility on the tackled players. Isn't most head injuries incurred by the tackler, yet, according to WR a blade of grass touching a strand of hair on the attacking player constitutes dangerous or even reckless play.
Willemse was in a low enough position to tackle under the chest but the offensive player ducked and was then forced directly into Willemse's path due to Van Staden.
This is just an unfortunate contact with now malice. Cannot say the same for the Farrell incident.
14 green not touching the ball, stop crying
I disagree completely. World rugby allows the referee the prerogative and rigth to use his own discretionary rule book and then apply the law unique to the moment and not just the situation. TASanalytics you are just clickbating as usual to get views and likes. Shame on you.
Look at the 2 forward passes in the games between Fiji and France and and Ireland and England but no picks it up it pathetic
What a load of cr@p in comparing the Willemse and Farrell incidents, whoever made this video is either biased or clueless… or both
What this video and the three man Australian panel for the Farrell incident highlights is that Southern Hemisphere fans, teams and pundits don’t understand world rugby laws and are particularly slow to embrace new rules around head impact protocols. For the Willemse incident there is mitigation and mitigation is allowed because his tackle didn’t involve any forward momentum and is therefore considered passive. The protocols do allow mitigation in that case and logically so. See Nigel Owens whistle watch. Just like Porters tackle on Retallick and by contrast to Farrells tackle on Basham. The fact that Kiwi fans still can’t tell the difference between the Ta’avao red card and the Porter incident further highlights this.
Your videos would be more helpful if you actually knew all the rules. Instead, you are that guy who just knows the most in the bar! Sure, you have the basics but you get lost in your faux scientific analysis. But keep the music…. the tragic undertones lend the misguided attempt at gravitas a weird dark comedic edge…..love it….. (4:51) “So if Willemse doesn’t get cited then Owen Farrell will be very happy because his lawyer will destroy world rugby in their hearing” Ouch, that didn’t age well!
Don’t agree with your view on the moody try, whilst I think a yellow and penalty try is harsh I can’t see clear evidence that moody touched, I could guess that maybe he did but absolute clear evidence that I’d bet my house on? No. Equally mitigation is correct for willemse, at the point of contact, willemse’s knees and hips are flexed and he’s attempting to wrap, by the laws of the game, the reviewing panel are allowed to apply mitigation.
Hi TAS Anal analysis – you need to visit your optomistrist and wake up. That is a bullshit analysis!