Rugby Union

8° London Hi 11°C / Lo 6°C

Burger's gouge is a gauge of South African disarray

By Peter Bills in pretoria

The Springboks snatched a fantastic Test to take the series, but Morne Steyn's stunning last-minute penalty dragged his dismal side out of jail. They never deserved their win.

Once the tourists lost their props and their centres, the match turned. Two mistakes in the final six minutes by the substitute Ronan O'Gara cost the Lions the series. The Irishman missed Jaque Fourie as he smashed his way over for a try after 74 minutes. Then, in the last minute, O'Gara ran out of his 22, launched a high kick and tackled Fourie du Preez while he was in the air. It was a ghastly double blunder.

For most of the game, the Springboks were second best. One of the shoddiest first-half performances by any world champion side handed the Lions a life raft. For almost an hour, they seemed good enough to use it. From the first minute, when the South Africa flanker Schalk Burger attacked the eyes of the Lions wing Luke Fitzgerald, the skids were under the Springboks. Their rugby during the first 40 minutes was a joke.

They were all over the place, as wobbly as a blancmange. "A tough call on Schalk but you are not allowed to do that," was how the former Springbok No 10 Naas Botha called the incident on television. How one-eyed was that? Burger has now been cited and if he is found guilty he will surely be banned from at least the first half of the Tri-Nations. He deserves it.

Burger's offence has no place in the game. For a player at this level to stoop so low was unforgivable. What a way to celebrate your 50th cap. What was more, while Burger was in the sin-bin the Springboks were all over the place. They conceded 10 points but the psychological damage was the real cost of Burger's folly.

Even when he returned, booed and jeered by the Lions fans, the Boks could not get hold of the game. Their confidence was shot, that 50 minutes of complete ascendancy in Durban last week a distant memory.

You knew the Springboks were rattled as much by their off-the-ball antics as anything else. Bakkies Botha got involved more in the verbals and pushing and shoving than the game, John Smit complained constantly to the referee, Christophe Berdos, and there was indiscipline all over the field. No one seemed to be in charge.

Only when the Lions lost their props, causing a move to uncontested scrums, did the balance of the game shift. The Springboks began to win more ball, although they were still inferior at the breakdown, where Tom Croft and David Wallace were superb. So too was the English lock Simon Shaw, whose power was instrumental in several turnovers. He won the man of the match award. The Lions' tight-five were superb for an hour, their physicality immense.

So the series goes to the Springboks, as expected, and they must be odds-on to make it 3-0 next week in Johannesburg, especially with the Lions now hammered by injuries. Yet this was no classic display by South Africa. They lacked control, authority and much precision for an hour. It was all a far cry from the standards that are demanded of world champions.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

What game wasBills watching
[info]jonbrayshaw wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 08:41 am (UTC)
Peter Bills accuses Naas Botha of one-eyed banditry, yet he himself was obviously watching another game. Both Morne Steyn and Heinrich Brussouw's substitutions were pivotal, earlier both Pienaar (1 missed conversion, 2 missed penalties) and Frans Steyn (1 missed penalty) would have swung the game well into South Africa's favour early on. The Lions, once again, with all their possesion, could not convert it into tries and were later punished for it. The Boks were clinical, outscoring the Lions 3 tries to 1. In my book and many other scribes, that's deserved winners!
[info]guy_harder wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 08:54 am (UTC)
Hold on - what are we all whining about?! Yes, Burger should've been red-carded but the rest is utter nonsense... Poor little pussycats - were the big, nasty Springboks horrible to you? This is the difference between us (the British) and them (the Boks) - we complain about the injustice of it all and feel heartened by a good twenty minutes last week and a rousing performance yesterday and dream of what 'could' have been. The Boks wrap up the series and bemoan two sub-par (by their standards) performances. We went on endlessly last week about scoring more tries than them and the fact that Jones missed 6 points through the boot - this week, the Boks outscored us in try terms and missed 8 points through the boot... are they banging on about it? We got beaten by a superior team who are still annoyed at their performance - we lost, but are banging on about refs, tries that should've been and dark-tactics. C'mon guys - show some class!
[info]rymlia wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 09:09 am (UTC)
Another display of poor one eyed journalism and lack of understanding of the beautiful game of rugby.

Any team that loses a key player within seconds of kick off is going to be disorientated until they settle down. Congrats to the Lions who fronted up at every turn and got into the boks faces.

The british journo's called it cheating and rough house tactics last week however when the shoe is on the other foot players are referred to as 'superb'.

Don't get me wrong Burgers actions have no place in rugby and will no doubt be dealt with appropriately but Peter rugby has no place for such sensational drivel.

Playing the ref
[info]pete_s wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 10:24 am (UTC)

The IRB are far too complacent, the practice of 'playing the ref', especially by SA and NZ should have been stamped out years ago. I am for the RL stricter approach, clean up the laws and penailise the constant transgressors out of the game. Burger is a classic example, if Fitzgerald had not rolled it would have not been seen. The clock stopped at 30secs, this was Burgers first contact, he therefore had made a cynical decision to deliberately gouge an oppositions eye at the very first opportunity. LIFE BAN!
Re: Playing the ref
[info]pete_s wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 11:44 pm (UTC)

Botha 2 weeks, Burger 8 weeks. What a bunch of cowards the IRB are, this spineless money grabbing organisation will allow the thugs to play so as not to upset the paying public.
Oh Peter!! - I never Expected This From You
[info]normalan51 wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 12:45 pm (UTC)
This kind of talk is the refuge of sore losers. The Lions pledged before the game they would up their physicality and the end result was five players visiting hospital. Blame the ref, injuries or whatever. The Boks took their chances in the last 20 minutes and won. It's pointless focusing on their first 50 minutes when it was the last 20 minutes that counted. I'm tired of hearing all this negativity. It really demeans what you rightly describe as a "fantastic Test".
[info]mwreid wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 04:16 pm (UTC)
It is deeply depressing to see great athletes cheating.

It ruins all sport.

The eye gouging was clearly deliberate and should get a very long ban.

It does here.

As for the idiot coach (well he isn't really is he ?) sayiog eye gouging is OK - he too should be banned.

The ref bottled it. You cannot give a yellow for eye gouging. Its red or nothing.
[info]chris0203 wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 06:51 pm (UTC)
This is one of the worst cases of biased journalism I have ever read. I can't believe this article even made it into the newspaper. The coaching staff were banging on about how they were going to "front up" physically to the Springboks and then they blame injuries for the loss. You say that the Springbok performance was "a joke" and they did not deserve their win. When did deserving to win have anything to do with sport, the Springboks score three tries to one and missed countless kicks at goal, you Peter Bills, have a massive chip on your shoulder and refuse to give credit where it is due. It is a game of eighty minutes, you cant expect to play for sixty minutes and expect to win a test match. When the emotion of the day wares off you will be embarrassed by your remarks.
shame peter
[info]charliek2009 wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 09:39 pm (UTC)
Peter

What a shameful article. It's quite laughable really. Could have, should have, would have etc etc etc blah blah blah. It's BORING, it's USELESS, it's futile, it's typical.

It's 2-0 to the Springboks. Get. Over. It. You. Lost!!!
[info]ruggabugga75 wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 10:08 pm (UTC)
Peter can you remember writing the below article in International Rugby News ???

South African physicality will pose massive problems for the Lions
February 24th, 2009

Let me remind you " The tourists will be shaken by the physical hammering they can expect at the breakdown. "

"There is no equivalent in the northern hemisphere to Bakkies Botha hitting the breakdown at pace. The man is enormous and his height and weight make him a wrecking machine"

I can go on and on, but I doubt it will stop your whinging... If the Springboks were so dismal why then could the Lions only go into half time with slender 8pts lead ?? Why have you not mentioned BOD and Sheridan's thugery ??? All we have been seeing on tv is the 1974 replays and the 99 call(to fight...) but what happened. Lions had 6 boys in hospital last night ??? It is the likes of your journalistic bias that will make the 3 nil reasult all the more sweeter !! Lick your wounds and take it like a man ..... Schalk is going to have to !!!
Burger & De Villiers.
[info]marcusus wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 11:37 pm (UTC)
An obscene act by Burger no 'right-minded' fan would condone such a terrible & very obviously wilful attempt to injure an opponent. This CHEAT should receive the maximum 2 year ban for this cowardly pre-meditated act.
De Villiers should be censured for for his comments regarding this incident.
An example should be made of Burger.
Burger & De Villiers.
[info]marcusus wrote:
Sunday, 28 June 2009 at 11:38 pm (UTC)
An obscene act by Burger no 'right-minded' fan would condone such a terrible & very obviously wilful attempt to injure an opponent. This CHEAT should receive the maximum 2 year ban for this cowardly pre-meditated act.
De Villiers should be censured for for his comments regarding this incident.
Nice to see De Villiers set the tone for the South Africans!
Writing for an audience
[info]everton2009 wrote:
Monday, 29 June 2009 at 12:13 pm (UTC)
Peter, I can only hope this article is a case of writing for an audience (ie the UK market) and not a gauge of your ability as a rugby correspondant.

Because if it is the latter, you are hoodwinking The Independent and fleecing them of cash!

One of the worst pieces of rugby journalism I have ever read ...

Free gym pass

Get fit for summer with Fitness First gyms in London

Download a free gym pass from Fitness First today