Player 23: Burger’s brain explosion
28 Jun 2009
Should Schalk Burger have been red carded in the opening minute of the Loftus Test?
The British media certainly thinks so, including The Independent‘s highly respected sports writer James Lawton who, in an article titled ‘Authorities must blow away the stench of Schalk Burger’ laid into the Bok flank.
‘Schalk Burger happens to be an outstanding flanker, the winner of 50 caps and, no, perhaps he isn’t Hannibal Lecter, but if seeking out and gouging the eye of an opponent not much more than half your size who is lying on his back at the time is not evidence of psychopathic behaviour, not stripped of all conscience or awareness of consequences, it is hard to know what is,’ wrote Lawton.
‘The world saw Burger do this and so did a touch judge, who behaved admirably in all but the uttering of a sentence, which should haunt him and the rest of the game until another such outrage comes along, but of course won’t. The offending words of advice to the referee were: “At least a yellow card.”
‘What do you have to do to stitch on a red card? It is maybe just a little too easy to heap all the blame on the perceived moral cowardice of French referee Christophe Berdos, who settled for that least possible punishment for reasons he alone knows but at which we can only speculate, because surely there is nothing logical, or moral, to support his decision.
‘No doubt he was aware that to reduce the Springboks to 14 men so early in the Boer temple of Loftus Versfeld would have made him the least popular man on the highveld – and bring serious imbalance to a much anticipated Test match. Whatever the reason, Berdos failed both the game and himself, but then how seriously did he let down a rugby world which, like it or not, sees some degree of institutionalised violence as an integral part of the game’s appeal?’
Do you think Burger should have been red carded and was his eight-week ban sufficient punishment?
Have your say, as Vodacom’s Player 23, below.
86 Comments
29 Jun 2009, 08:30 am
Dragon YES!!!!!!!
29 Jun 2009, 08:31 am
As is said previously… should gave been banned for 6 months….where is his brain? (and i am a Schalla supporter)
29 Jun 2009, 08:31 am
This reporters can go screw himself for taking the holier than though attitude.
But yes, it deserved a red.
No place for it in rugby.
As is punching a guy in the nuts btw.
29 Jun 2009, 08:32 am
#3 PissAnt:
exactly
was amazed that sheridan wasnt even cited!!
29 Jun 2009, 08:39 am
Deserved a red/yellow, deserves a ban. Im a HUGE Schalk fan, but he clearly had a brain explosion and I just hope he comes back a wiser player after his ban.
He is too good a talent to throw to the dogs, and I think a lot of you guys who are calling for his head and attempting to disown him should take a long took at yourselves – the majority of you were singing his praises not long ago (and for good reason).
Its funny how quickly fickle supporters can turn. Bakkies on the other hand is very hard done by.
29 Jun 2009, 08:41 am
Absolutely agree he deserved a MUCH longer ban, but this idiotic Pommies article about Burger attacking a “much smaller man” doesn’t seem to translate to Sheridan’s blatant dirty play throughout the game, like punching players in the family jewels at scrum time.
I think we must give him the nickname of “Sqirrel” since he clearly likes nuts….
29 Jun 2009, 08:41 am
Should he have been red carded? Of course he should, that’s the law. He’s been let off extremely lightly with 8 weeks – I expected 12.
29 Jun 2009, 08:41 am
Problem here for most bloggers is they do not realise the tone of the game was set in the first 60 seconds.
Burger was yellow carded when it was a red, by not red carding Burger the stage was set for a very nasty encounter. The end result was a no-brainer.
I said in an earlier post yesterday… Take the win but don’t expect congratulations for it. The series is tarnished and I would not be the least bit surprised if the BILs never toured south again. NZ, OZ & now SA have done nothing to endear the goodwill of advancing Rugby or assisting the SH nations in fund raising to aid their respective unions. We in the SH are idiots if we think bashing the daylights out of a charity drive is to be commended.
We deserve the NH backlash.
29 Jun 2009, 08:45 am
#8 RugbyRulz: Is it the Southern Hemisphere’s fault that the UK can dish up nothing but complete kak? Must we let them win the odd game to drum up some support? If they choose to latch onto this 1 eye gouge incident to hide the fact that they have been nothing but ordinary all tour then more power to them…
29 Jun 2009, 08:45 am
A red would have turned the series into a shambles, ref read the situation, to red card a player after less than a minute into the 2nd test of a do or die series would effectively kill the series off right there and then, stone dead.
29 Jun 2009, 08:45 am
Schalk made a mistake and he will pay for it in the next 8 weeks. He will lose out finacially on the test he will miss, but more inportantly, he has given the no 6 jersey to Brussow and it will be a hard battle to get it back.
To all the morons out there saying Schalk must retire, wake up and smell the coffee, if I remember correctly, Bakkies was also pinned for gouging and biting!!!!
29 Jun 2009, 08:50 am
#9 jaimie: You can spin all the tripe you like but nothing can condone the poor sportsmanship on display in the first 60 seconds. If you don’t see this for what it is you are a lost cause. The entire tone of the game was set when Burger raked a player on the deck, the Assistant Ref recommended action and the Referee in the middle ONLY yellow carded.
If you know anything about Rugby and control of the game you would know that the game was lost here. Rugby suffered when a players foul was first committed and then not acted upon correctly by the official (Referee) at the time.
End of story mate, nothing can condone the tone of the game from that moment forward. It was destined to become and became a free for all.
No point bringing into discussion who did what from then on, it was downhill from there.
29 Jun 2009, 08:52 am
Burger is such a fckn tool and deserved red. Almost cost us the game with the late penalty too. If not red, then at least his ban should have been longer.
Don’t agree about Botha’s ban though. Only reason he got cited is because of Jones’s injury. Otherwise everyone would have been calling that a great ruck clean. No worse than both teams have been doing all tour.
Sheridan should have been cited for the most cowardly of punches that one man can inflict on another. Deliberately punching someone in the nuts is disgusting. I wonder if any of these sanctimonious English journos mentioned this at all.
29 Jun 2009, 08:52 am
#10 skopskiet: FFS Who’s fault is that? If the players can’t be disciplined they deserve to be punished appropriately. Players must take responsibility for their actions – by chickening out the referee and TJ sent the message that it is OK to eye-gouge because you only get yellow. Hell I’ve seen guys get yellow for killing the ball in the red zone, it’s hardly as bad an offence as eye-gouging! Punching, gouging, etc should be punished by red.
29 Jun 2009, 08:52 am
#12 RugbyRulz: Do you say BOD 2 head high tackles was acceptable?
29 Jun 2009, 08:53 am
#8 RugbyRulz:
dont forget the BILs also overreacted when Umaga and Mealamu accidentally drove BOD head first into the ground, breaking his collarbone and nearly killing him too remember. That was supposedly an organised hit designed to take the captain out of the series….
spin. its all spin.
29 Jun 2009, 08:54 am
#12 RugbyRulz: Stem saam. Doesn’t excuse some of the stuff, esp. Sheridan who is lucky not to be cited himself, but the tone of the game was set in the opening minute.
29 Jun 2009, 08:54 am
#9 jaimie: My thoughts exactly! Lions are a bunch of hyped up club level imposters!
29 Jun 2009, 08:56 am
#16 munkiboi: You’re kidding. Right?
29 Jun 2009, 08:56 am
#15 GP: Suggest you RE-READ my two posts # 8 & # 12. You will gain clarity and will not need to ask the question.
29 Jun 2009, 08:58 am
So 1 man does something wrong, then it means it is a free for all.
29 Jun 2009, 09:00 am
Fellow bloggers… the $hit fight that we watched may have indeed been tough and uncompromising, all we enjoy and more. But I have to say we saw far too much as a result of the first minute’ poor play and refereeing.
I love a hard fought game as much as the next guy, but gouging, nut punching, missile launch (no arm) clean outs, clothes line shots, etc., are all unnecessary. Tempers were way beyond the norm on Saturday and hopefully we shall not see another disgraceful display again.
29 Jun 2009, 09:02 am
he deserved a red because hands should not be in another players face. he has been a reckless player but i have never seen him do something to directly hurt an opponent in that way and i really have to question the intent because his head was turned the other way the whole time.
as piss ant said, sheridan punched bekker in the nuts and was not even cited.
jaques fourie complained his eye had been gouged but obviously that wasn’t seen on tv.
bod made an illegal tackle from an offside position and knocked out danie roussow and was not cited either.
5 lions had to go to hospital and suddenly the boks are dirty thugs.
rog did what schalk did in the world cup – competing for the ball and was not cited. granted he cost his team the game and the series in the end.
the media is annoying by calling the boks dirty thugs, i wonder what tune they would be singing if the game was drawn and there was a chance of a drawn series?
29 Jun 2009, 09:02 am
Schalk Burger surely had the all time worst 50th test played in World Rugby…BTW, the yellow that should have been a red, that late off side penalty that nearly cost the Boks the test, not even have to go further, rather enjoy the Boks series victory…
29 Jun 2009, 09:04 am
#16 munkiboi: BOD was illegally injured in NZ as was O’Gara by McRae in OZ… now we’ve got Burger icing the cake. Not good lads and we are all to blame. Down south we’re all definitely hard enough we just need to wake up. Rugby is a great game and doesn’t need these 3 incidents.
29 Jun 2009, 09:05 am
#12 RugbyRulz: Totally agree that the ref’s inaction caused the game to turn into a bit of a brawl. Burger should have been red-carded, but I also hope that the review of the game results in this ref being demoted. Poor refereeing does no good for rugby.
The reality is that SA always play better when they have doscipline. When they overdo the aggression, they struggle. We’re our own worst enemy sometimes…
29 Jun 2009, 09:05 am
#14 jonnymain:
So you would have preferred to have won that test playing 14 men like you did at Twickenham in 2002 – a non contest, would have set the entire tour into a no contest nobody wins situation.
They still going to have the hearing, not sure just yet how premeditated his actions were, if he set out to gouge from first play then it is despicable and a lengthy ban is required, if not, well then lets see what the commissioner comes up with.
29 Jun 2009, 09:06 am
Anyway let’s all take a deep breath. In 12 years for the next series, all anoyne will remember is the result.
29 Jun 2009, 09:09 am
Yes – should have been a red card…
29 Jun 2009, 09:11 am
Bakkies got done in AGAIN. Schalk should go touch up his wine-making skills at their farm. Enter Daniesorous Pakslae Rossouw – hopefully.
29 Jun 2009, 09:23 am
This is what should’ve happened if the IRB were consistent
Schalk Burger – Red card and to be cited
Bakkies Botha – NOTHING – not even a penalty – the biggest injustice to date!!
Sheridan on Bekker – Red Card and to be cited
BOD on Rossouw – Yellow card and to be cited
Paul O Connell on Juan Smith (strangeling) – Yellow to be cited
Was it croft that pushed JP after he touched down? Penalty
Who fell on habana after he touched down? Penalty
Shaw offside the whole time – penalty
BOD constantly off the ball stuff – penalty and to be spoken to. Should’ve received a yellow for continuing to start off the ball stuff. Then this would’ve been his 2nd yellow which means it turned into a RED!
O Gara on Du preez – Yellow
Mike Phillips – to be fined for his comments after the game about the ref. Hell, if Eddie Jones got nailed, who does this no name brand pommie trash thinks he is to get away with such words against the ref????
McGeecan – to be fired for being a sore looser!!!!
29 Jun 2009, 09:25 am
A Lions player gouged J. Fourie’s in the ruck before his try…
Sheridan punched Bekker in the nuts..
BOD knocked Danie out with a off side high tackle without arms..
The Lion’s #8 slid into Habana’s head after Hanbana scored.
JPP was pushed into the advertising boards after he scored..
The Lions made numerous shoulder charges on the Boks @ ruck time..
THAT IS RUGBY – As a Bok supporter I don’t care about it. It is only ***** Brits who ***** and moan about these things…
But me thinks it is a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black.
GET A LIFE you BRIT faggots. LOOK AT THE SCORE BOARD.
29 Jun 2009, 09:26 am
#31 mellowyellow: We shall leave you to dear old Tackles.
We all know for what.
29 Jun 2009, 09:29 am
I got a feeling this next test will be one long Brawl! Payback, revenge, for queen and country stuff – Cant wait.
29 Jun 2009, 09:36 am
No defending what Schalk did.
Bakkies very unlucky imo.
But why Shaw not carded for numerous high tackles?
Why was O’Driscoll not carded?
And also one of the Lions backs for running in from miles away to get involved in pushing and shoving.
Why was Sheridan not carde for punching Bekker in the balls?
Why was O’Gara not carded for taking out a player in the air with a shoulder charge?
29 Jun 2009, 09:39 am
And whilst on the subject of Burger, surely they could have made a better effort with his jersey. That ’50th test match’ accross the chest is a bit over the top. Surely they could have done something much more discreet.
29 Jun 2009, 09:39 am
As bad as what Schalk did, the Lions player did not have to go off the field and could play the whole game. The ref was consistent I thought. Bekker and Shaw got similar ‘high tackle’ penalties, no one was allowed to tackle the player in the air.
Inexcusable what Schalk did, but Lions did not suffer on the field because of it!
29 Jun 2009, 09:46 am
SAFFA Guys ,
remember something. We will for ever be the scum of the rugby world. Dont worry about it, as long as Afrikaners dominate Rugby and will for ever to eternity I HOPE ,rule the enforcer roll on the International playing field we will be gunned by journos around the world, no sorry only British, Ozzies and Kiwi journos.
Schalk need to be banned for at leats 12 mths.Yes it was a red card offence.
I read the threads on different web pages , STUPID ********, THE DUMB BOERS.
Let me tell you something if its not for the Afrikaner playing sport in this country we will not feature in Rugby or Cricket, o JA pse remember Afrikaners in those sport are not all white!!!!!
Ons boere raak gatvol vir sulke kak statements!!!!!!!!
Ons gaan en sal niemand onverskoning vra omdat ons Afrikaanses is nie!!!!!
Stop this absolute rubbish especially by Tackler, about anglo boer war and concentration camps. I have family that died of hunger in those camps in the Karoo. So tackler keep your mouth shut you are a racist and a Afrikaner basher!!!!!.
My point is , we must win even with 14 men or with refs against us , to show the world we are the world champs no matter what.
GO BOKKE!!!!!!!
PROUDLY SOUTH AFRICAN!!!!!!
29 Jun 2009, 09:47 am
#35 Dantalian: Irony in your comment no?
29 Jun 2009, 09:48 am
#37 RugbyRulz:
29 Jun 2009, 09:54 am
I think yellow was sufficient since it was not clearly seen and aledged. Also the 8 wk ban in contrast shows that he did not gouge. Gouging is a strong word – he didn’t scoop or dig out at Fitzgeralds eye. He got the ban because his hand was over his eye and not his shoulder or nuts. Even Fitzgerald stopped short of saying his eye was gouged and instead complimented Schalk as a brilliant player. Quinal got 3 wks because his hand (fist) rolled “near” the eye area.
All these articles about Schalk are only to create stories, sell news. There is nothing else the Lions can put there finger on for loosing the test. It did not set the tone either, as it was always going to be a tough test – McBride going on about bossing the boks and Gatland continuously talking on the physical challenge. While the boks pretty much said nothing except a playfull Bakkies saying nobody bosses us. Instead we complimented the lions (both boks and coaches) for them being a really good team. And still nothing from them. Very ungracious I say.
It was a tough test, the best team won, and pity Schalks incident is unfairly and unnecessarily ruining it.
29 Jun 2009, 09:56 am
The Nazi’s PR Machine has nothing on the complete BS puke they are dishing up over here in the media. Every injured Kitten (Lions they are NOT)listed , but not how they got their injury. I am not excusing Schalk, far from it, but to whine like babies with with a nappy full is just pathetic. If I recall correctly they whined all the way through the last Lions tour. They like to dish it out but when it comes back twice as hard, they resort to holier than though pontificating.
If this is how they are going to be every Lions tour, lets end this farce.
29 Jun 2009, 09:58 am
#40 Londonbokshark: Real smart thinking. Economically challenged SA could really do with your pearls of wisdom.
29 Jun 2009, 10:00 am
#25 RugbyRulz:
The big flaw in your “argument” is that Fitzgerald was not injured to any serious extent and continued to play with a problem. Yes gouging is one of the worst kinds of transgression but seriously don’t compare it to the accidental upending of BOD. You are way too negative.
29 Jun 2009, 10:01 am
The Lions tours are purely to raise the profile of Rugby and to assist the home nation to raise their coffers. The visiting hordes of BIL tourists does wonders for an economy and to scoff at that is ridiculous.
But you living in good old London would know how good you have it… bugger the folk back home huh.
29 Jun 2009, 10:09 am
#43 RugbyRulz:
There is no doubt the economies of the host cities were hugely boosted by the Tourists. Who’s scoffing at that? If the Lions are going to tour they A: need to stop spoiling for a fight onfield and in the build and B: When they get the fight they wanted and it doesn’t go their way, just shut the hell up and move on. It’s just embarrassing. I have yet to read anything about the South africans complaining about the dirty play the Lions were dishing out.
29 Jun 2009, 10:16 am
Of course Burger ought to have been red-carded after 30 seconds for that deliberate, despicable eye-gouge.
Of course he earned a red card. No doubt about it.
29 Jun 2009, 10:16 am
Schalla has played crapply for 2 seasons. His head is somewhere else. Brussow, Stegmann and Dewald Potgieter are light years ahead of him. This whole saga is a blessing in disguise. We are going to see without a doubt that Schalla is not and never will be an opensider. He can compete for 7 but never for 6. He’s a carthorse at 6.
29 Jun 2009, 10:17 am
#44 Londonbokshark: I shall quote you … If this is how they are going to be every Lions tour, lets end this farce. <<< your words in post 40.
Enough wasted on you… oblivious of the real word and sucking it up in the old dart. Hypocritical and of no value.
29 Jun 2009, 10:21 am
It feels like just a couple years ago that we were making jokes about S Fitzpatrick’s ear being bit off…..
That said, it does suck and puts a big damper on the win, but the lions tend to grab the moral high ground when they lose. Look at the NZ tour, they stuck to the sour note of BOD being taken out with a speer tackle. They could not recover their thoughts and lost the series 3-0.
29 Jun 2009, 10:23 am
Can anyone please explain how the citing system actually works (Keo perhaps you could do an article on this):
1. Who makes the decision to cite?
2. Who forms the citing commission?
3. In the event of “perceived” inconsitencies (ie why wasn’t Sherridan cited for the punch), does the IRB (or any other body) actually explain why a certain course of action was taken?
Apologies for the rather clumsy wording but it seems to me that rugby fans around the world are being short changed by rugby beurocrats who shown no consistency at all.
29 Jun 2009, 10:28 am
#47 RugbyRulz:
You doos. I said if they are going to whine and complain (words you can identify with) lets end Lions tours. What I am getting at is they should should just shut up and get on with it. Comprende? Now go away child and watch tennis.
29 Jun 2009, 10:29 am
M Phillips:
‘I couldn’t believe it. There was some dodgy refereeing throughout the Test, but that was the worst of it. You can’t do things like that, and it [Burger not being red carded] cost us the game.’
Was Fitzgerald injured? NO. So how could it cost you the game?
Was playing against a 14 man bok team part of their preperation?
29 Jun 2009, 10:31 am
Forcefan – its very simple ie If yourre a bok you will get cited.
29 Jun 2009, 10:33 am
Sadly I missed the test as I was at a wedding in Sweden and rugby coverage isn’t that great here, but it sounds like it was a hectic game and must have been awesome to watch that last kick go over!
I’m really bleak to hear that the was so much off the ball stuff – especially from the South Africans. You know, Jake White worked hard for us to shake off our “dirty team” mantle and it was so great to win the World Cup with a team that played hard but clean.
From the majority’s comments on Keo it seems as if Schalk should have had a red card right in the first minute – and for the most despicable of actions – the eye gouge! It seems that we have gone back to the time of Corne Krige’s team where there was tons of of the ball stuff instead of proper rugby. I believe this is due to poor leadership by the Springbok management team. Under White, the team ethic frowned upon foul play, whilst now it again seems OK..? In my book, anyone who does an eye gouge should be first be rebuked by his team, then banned for a year and have a case of assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm opened at the police station! (Incidentally, if we made doping such as at the Tour de France a criminal offence and people went to jail for it I would definitely be much less common!)
Schalk, you are an awesome player who does not need to resort to eye-gouging and I am ashamed of you. When you come back I hope that you will let your play do the talking.
29 Jun 2009, 10:36 am
#50 Londonbokshark: Yawn… Homesick tard can’t handle being dished up. You’re the moron being quoted and can’t handle the heat. Think before you type tripe.
Owned, stuffed and discarded.
29 Jun 2009, 10:37 am
Burger should have got a red and banned for a year. Buger is an overted prick. Bakkies was unfortunate as both teams were committing numerous off the ball dirties. Habana got an deliberate elbow to the head after he socred, Sheridan kept throwing jack punches and Shaw definetly high tackled to often. Mike Phillips should be fined for his comments and O’driscoll using his secret weapon, the head.
But I must say thank-you to both Teams for giving it all. Thank-you for returning the passion and the fight in the trenches back again. Thank-you Lions and your wonderful supporters for making such an entertaining specatcle.
It will be hard watching the Tri-nation poofdas with the Aussie diving all the time. Its Rugby and it is contact and its war.
29 Jun 2009, 10:39 am
Oh Yeah and thank-you TACKLER FOR MAKING US REALISE WHITE KIWIS ARE TOSSERS AND SOON WILL BE BRED OUT WITH GREAT MAORI BLOOD.
29 Jun 2009, 10:40 am
Anybody with more than 1 brain cell knocking around up there knows you NEVER touch the eye area! He deserved what he got.
In all honesty if it wasn’t a Lions test I would have said red, but as I am a biased Springbok supporter the yellow and 8 weeks will suffice
29 Jun 2009, 10:46 am
The hand was in contact with the face….but doesn´t mean gouging automaticly…..same thing than touch a ladies but or a guy….doesn´mean automaticly…hehehehehe
29 Jun 2009, 10:47 am
#54 RugbyRulz:
“Owned, stuffed and discarded.” haha. you wish silly little ******. You should change your nick to “touchrugbyrulz” *****. Anyway some of us work, so I’ll come back later to read your drivel.
29 Jun 2009, 10:51 am
#45 TheTackler: So did Sione Luaki, but **** happens, and in both cases, the better side won irrespective of the decision.
29 Jun 2009, 10:53 am
#59 Londonbokshark: When you have sufficient command of English then perhaps you can come back and argue the toss. Suggest you try to baffle your countrymen with your handling of the English language and not me. English for me is my first language and not to be sullied with your mismanagement.
29 Jun 2009, 10:54 am
Toddle off arseclown.
29 Jun 2009, 11:03 am
#55 KevinRack: Perhaps SA Rugby should lead the way and fine him his match fee too … that would teach that little ******* a lesson.
29 Jun 2009, 11:11 am
#63 CharlieBrown: Schalk will lose out on the next 5 test’s match fees
#46 Jinx: You are smoking your socks!!!
29 Jun 2009, 11:13 am
sCHALK SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVED THE RED. No doubt about it…..but in all fairness, i think he has been done some injustice in the past for being spotted too easily by his big blonde mop (Given the nick: Flying squirell) and carded for just playing the game hard.
Maybe there was some justice in this call.
29 Jun 2009, 11:15 am
Schalk was trying to rip the oke’s head off, pitty his hands were in the wrong place at the wrong time!!!
29 Jun 2009, 11:18 am
#66 GP: i’ve seen his brain take a leave of absence once before when we played ireland in 2004. he got two yellows in that game….
29 Jun 2009, 11:19 am
#51 Breakdown Boy: It must have been their game plan, because BOD and Shridan tried really hard to get rid off some of the Boks
29 Jun 2009, 11:23 am
Schalk has anger issues
29 Jun 2009, 11:26 am
#67 Shark_Logie: SO has quite a few Boks as well, Bakkies, Victor (ask Kelleher), Bismack etc
29 Jun 2009, 11:36 am
I think Burger has done SA rugby a favour and given a fitting excuse to play Brussouw. Burger simply has not evolved with the ELV’s to be a true “Fetcher” and as such is now not the best number 6 in the country.
During last years 3N and on the NH tour we were lacking a fetcher with the ability to gain turnovers. Burger excelled when he started out but will come back in after these 8 weeks being the second choice 6.
29 Jun 2009, 11:47 am
i would love to hear what schalk has to say about the incident.i truly believe that he didnt know that his hands where near the guys eyes.
hes been a revelation for the boks from the first game he has played and is very highly ranked.
i believe any side is weaker without schalk starting.
sour grapes from the lions because they just cant beat us.(14 men would have been a great advantage for them.)
come schalk do some soul searching in your 8 weeks off and come back a better player.
29 Jun 2009, 11:52 am
#72 dreus:
“i would love to hear what schalk has to say about the incident.i truly believe that he didnt know that his hands where near the guys eyes”.
To quote a famous tennis player………………….”YOU HAVE GOT TO BE JOKING”.
29 Jun 2009, 11:56 am
WTF RugbyRules…?? Maybe you should “toddle off” your argument hold no water!!! The opening minute set the tone of what?? Please man what kind of rugby do you play, the whole bloody build up was responsible for the tempers, they were “out-bullied” or in English they weren’t physical enough in the first test and were working to correct that in this test and according to me the Boks were having a nice dose of their own medicine in the first 30 and that is was probably “set the tone”. It was all out war from last Sunday already and the match didn’t disappoint, what happens in the first minute never reflects a game even if a try is scored because nobody changes their mind or game plan after 1 min it will be suicide.
What happened …well happened ….!! Maybe you should run along and try and predict the future, because you are not very good at accepting history .
Burger deserved his ban if they can ban Butch for nearly a year for an injury less incident he can actually thank his lucky stars for 8 weeks. The only reason a player should ever receive a red card is when he’s awarded two yellows, the rest is up to the citing commission. This is not bloody soccer after all.
29 Jun 2009, 12:15 pm
hi Cane. it just blows my mind to think that schalk with his talent,experience and stature would deliberately go out to ruin his own career.i havent yet had the opportunity to watch the game again because i was at the stadium and the view was not good even on the big screen so i may be speaking out of turn with my limited knowledge or viewing of the incident.schalk is a f*^king hard ******* but he doesnt give me the impression of a dirty cowardly player.
29 Jun 2009, 12:47 pm
#75 dreus: I agree with you – he is a hard player and has the occasional brain **** – but I really dont think he would deliberately go for an eye gouge.
They were rolling around and Fitzgerald was also messing with Schalk. It couldnt have been a cut and dried case because the touch judge even said “at least a yellow”.
But burger needs a break – he needs to think about what he is doing, and this gives Brussow the chance to make #6 his own – something that I really wouldnt mind
(and Im a Schalk fan)
29 Jun 2009, 12:48 pm
#75 dreus: And dont feel the neeed to try and justify it to a Kiwi bro. Theyve got some of the dirtiest manipulative players so they really cant comment.
What Schalk did pales next to what Thorne did last year to Smit
29 Jun 2009, 13:46 pm
#36 Lions_Soutie: What ****! The Lions suffered because he was only given yellow instead of the red it deserved. Unbelievable comment.
Some of the postings on here really take the biscuit. Mellow you are another who is suffering from some kind of eye problem!
29 Jun 2009, 14:20 pm
#61 RugbyRulz:
Argue with a tosser? I am already am.
29 Jun 2009, 14:23 pm
Rugbyrulz what the f*%k are you on about? Your arguments are terrible and backed up by nothing but a complete lack of logic and understanding of the game.
Maybe take a back seat and let the men debate the issues for a while?
29 Jun 2009, 14:30 pm
1 down and one to go.
#79 Londonbokshark: Again your English fails you. Consult an English dictionary or try researching idioms, I am sure you will probably still come up short. Toss / tosser <<< not one of the same.
Here is another anomaly doos and douche. Both sound the same and that is where the similarity ends.
2. well you don’t even rate because you have no concept of the opening 60 seconds of the game.
#74 Bakmister: all I have for you clown is simple WTF! go away fool you got nothing.
29 Jun 2009, 14:32 pm
#80 jaimie: Another idiot seeking limelight.
Opening 60 seconds of the game was a Red Cardable offense by all Laws of Rugby. Now if you are indeed intent on arguing the toss… then toss off.
3 idiots in one day.
29 Jun 2009, 16:56 pm
All this fuss about Burger’s eye gouge is fine – he got what he deserved.
BUT the most dangerous tackle of the game was let go!!! I cannot recall the Lions player but the tackle in which Burger was thrown using his neck as the fulcrum was most deserving of a red card and citing.
A move like that can result in paralysis or death if it goes only ever-so-slightly wrong. What’s a scratched eye-ball in comparison to that?!?!
Nothing has been said about that incident, probably because those commenting don’t understand the nature of it. Certainly the citing officer didn’t unless he punished Boks for political reasons (pressure from UK-loaded IRB) in the case of Botha.
30 Jun 2009, 09:04 am
The chop disgraced South Afric as a whole and if he had copped a red card we would have lost the test with all to play for this weekend.
Imagine we had lost this weekend and the series!
Would you all forgive Schalk then?
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.