Disgraceful De Villiers
29 Jun 2009
In a surreal press conference, Peter de Villiers continued to deny Schalk Burger was guilty of eye gouging and delivered some of his most sensational rubbish ever.
De Villiers on Monday held court with a room full of journalists, the majority of those from the foreign press, and proceeded to spit the most ridiculous nonsense, and display an incredibly pompous and dismissive attitude, particularly towards the foreign contingent. For those present it was obvious that he has a very low opinion of them.
The questioning predictably centred around Burger’s eight-week ban for eye gouging Lions wing Luke Fitzgerald, an issue that the Springbok media team tried to dodge by saying that they would only comment after they had received an official report on the incident. You didn’t need an official report to know that Burger is unbelievably lucky not to receive a longer ban.
On Saturday De Villiers left the press incredulous by saying that Burger didn’t deserve a yellow card for the incident, let alone a citing. On Monday the coach had an opportunity to retract that ludicrous statement and concede that he was wrong. Yet he remained resolute in his flawed view.
‘I stand by Schalk, I’m still convinced he didn’t do it,’ he told keo.co.za. ‘When you watch the footage closely and if you know the nature of Schalk, you’ll know that he will never go to those measures to impose himself. Schalk certainly didn’t do anything on purpose. He watched the TV footage and was taken aback himself.
‘I am against anything that is against the spirit of the game. If we want to eye gouge lions, we’ll go down to the bushveld and eye gouge them there, then see if they can haul us in.’
When one of the travelling pressmen continued the line of questioning, De Villiers snapped, ‘Some of us seem to have a hearing problem. We’re waiting for the official report and we’ll see what that says. If they find him guilty of something we’ll abide by that decision.
‘I’m not ducking the issue, I’m working within a system. I’m not like you [the media] who don’t work within a system.’
De Villiers said he doesn’t condone foul play [the likes of which Burger was clearly guilty of], yet continued to inadvertently justify the incident.
‘Rugby is a contact sport and so is dancing,’ he said. ‘If you guys [the media] were clued up you’d know that there were so many incidents that we could have complained about, like the incident where a Lions player maliciously jumped into one of ours with their shoulder.
‘But we didn’t do it because this is a contact sport. If you are going to complain about every incident we might as well go to a ballet shop and all get tutus.’
Despite the series victory, there is a widely held view that the Springboks beat the Lions despite of their coach and not because of him. De Villiers’ rebuttal, ‘Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I don’t react to opinion, I react to fact,’ he said.
‘If I’m the weakest link then we are bloody strong. I’m a God-given talent. I am the best I can be. I know what I am and I don’t give a damn.’
He continued by saying he didn’t read the papers, and therefore didn’t know how he was perceived in the media.
‘I don’t care. I don’t take an interest in your job, but I’m glad you take an interest in mine.’
Any preceding Springbok coach would have been seriously taken to task by the administration, but De Villiers gives one the impression, through his attitude and unbridled hogwash that he delivered on Monday, that he believes he is a law unto himself.
The reality is that he was an embarrassment to South African rugby, as he was when he offered his racially loaded views relating to Ricky Januarie, for which he will have to answer to the president’s council.
The same president’s council who appointed him based on his skin colour and not his rugby credentials (they confirmed this themselves when announcing his appointment), are now pointing the finger at him when they should be held partly accountable for the perception he is creating of himself, and by association, the Springboks, and South Africans in general.
De Villiers considers himself to be an ambassador for South Africa. He has said so on numerous occasions. But he is doing anything but creating a favourable impression of this country.
He needs to be reined in immediately. Word from inside the Springbok camp is that he just refuses to listen to any advice offered by his media managers, and as a result he is destroying any credibility he might have left.
Today he was a disgrace and he’s single-handedly detracted from the wonderful achievement of winning a Lions series. Hopefully it’s the last time we’ll have to endure a senseless rant like this from De Villiers. Don’t hold your breath though.
By Ryan Vrede, Johannesburg
859 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 » Show All
29 Jun 2009, 21:57 pm
God I feel sorry for you guys that you have that muppit as a coach and i thought henry puts his foot in it sometimes!!
The boks have the making of a good team and this years tri nations is anyones to be had, however sadly with this guy in charge it could be another last place. The team would actually play better with no coaching staff or management.
29 Jun 2009, 21:57 pm
#589 BULLET: Nope, Saffa living in the queens country, how about you?
I can’t read the papers this side anymore. Makes me want to scream. Schalk Burger is the biggest villan in the world according to them, but they forget how they pleaded Quinlann’s case, coz he was selected for the Lions. Keo and fellow writers are not a patch to those poison pens.
29 Jun 2009, 21:57 pm
#593 BULLET: Lord Chancellor, Sir Charlie Nappie….Irish gentry.
29 Jun 2009, 21:58 pm
JEAN-JACQUES,
What instances are you referring to? General play being questionable, or have you found him to be guilty of repeated dirty play?
29 Jun 2009, 21:58 pm
#588 Sir_Charles_Napier: you kmow thousands of english speaking south africans?
thousands?
btw, 3 tries to 1 in the last test mate.
suck on it.
29 Jun 2009, 21:58 pm
Tackler – what time is it in NZ? lunchtime for the plumbers would be my guess
29 Jun 2009, 21:59 pm
#597 goyougoodthing2: Who’s going to win?
29 Jun 2009, 21:59 pm
#596 jean-jacques: huh?? Do you actually watch any rugby
29 Jun 2009, 22:00 pm
#605 Slappes: You think he wash up before he digs in??
29 Jun 2009, 22:00 pm
#600 hawkes: ja, the AB’s seem quite capable of putting italy away too.
good on them.
29 Jun 2009, 22:01 pm
All NH rugby teams got a good hiding the last couple of weeks
29 Jun 2009, 22:02 pm
#596 jean-jacques: anyone would think Schalla had murdered someone people are quick to forget what a brilliant player he has been, i still think he has some brilliance in him just out of form like habana was, c’mon rugby is rugby, I’ve seen the reruns over and over his finger was not in the eye but on the cheek. Lots of rugby players have done worse ffs.
29 Jun 2009, 22:03 pm
#609 rangerman: True i am not saying we will win it i was discussing PDV??
29 Jun 2009, 22:03 pm
LOSERER,
Queen’s country myself.
At work today, I was cornered by a few locals who sought delight in pointing out the Schalk Burger incident. I questioned weather or not they thought that Sheridan’s punch warranted a penalty, yellow or red, and none of them could even recall the incident.
I found it amusing that they all felt that BOD was just playing hard, yet Bakkies was just plain dirty.
Apparently, when all the Lions players ran into each altercation, it was preventative instead of instigative.
The irony is that Gatland mentioned at the start of the week that the Lions will “take it to them” and “rough it up”
McGeechan is famously known for telling his players never to stand back and be intimidated, and that you need to take the game to the Boks.
They did that, they lost, and now they claim that they were injusticed.
29 Jun 2009, 22:03 pm
#596 jean-jacques: I don’t know of consistent dirty tactics, in fact the super 14 for Schalk was quite quiet, not one yellow. Maybe you just don’t like him? It’s fair enough, there’s some players I just see the negative, coz I don’t like them
29 Jun 2009, 22:03 pm
#591 BULLET: cheers
29 Jun 2009, 22:03 pm
#606 Loserer: buggar. How can you ask this so early.
I will stick with the Sharks!
29 Jun 2009, 22:04 pm
Rangerman – i got a feeling saturday will be one big slugfest?
29 Jun 2009, 22:05 pm
Schalk was hard done.
8 weeks a tough call.
29 Jun 2009, 22:06 pm
#597 goyougoodthing2: Then goget your swineflu Injections like the Rest of your Troop.
29 Jun 2009, 22:06 pm
#616 goyougoodthing2: Nooo, it has to be WP. We got the best prop in all the land
29 Jun 2009, 22:07 pm
#445 Big Hit:
***** Big Hit.
You really have gone native.
See American_Rugga’s post for a fair objective view of the game as a whole. He says in terms, amongst other things, that the Bokke’s were going for the Lions with underhand off the ball stuff from the start, but that on occassion, the Lions seemed to give as good as they got.
The eye gouging was just part and parcel of the illegal roughing up process and is shorthand for their deliberate rough house style.
You did see the game and read the Lion’s players comments about all the off the ball stuff didn’t you? Also, do you really think Burger should have stayed on the pitch for that deliberate gouging? Fitszy was incredibly fortunate he was able to get Burgers hands off his eyes or he could very well have been blinded. It is as serious as that. I can’t believe you are making light of it.
29 Jun 2009, 22:07 pm
LOSERER
29 Jun 2009, 22:08 pm
Loserer – I doubted
29 Jun 2009, 22:09 pm
#621 Sir_Charles_Napier: Cry baby……
29 Jun 2009, 22:09 pm
bullet, he’ been penalised since those days, it’s always been limit to brutality, can you imagine eye-gouging somebody during a game.what sort of mentality is that.it’s sad he could have been a great player.he obviously does not have it upstairs, that the problem, confirmed villian.
29 Jun 2009, 22:09 pm
SIR_CHARLES_NAPIER,
Are these your thoughts? Do you believe that the Boks were trying to use dirty underhand tactics from the start?
29 Jun 2009, 22:10 pm
#613 BULLET: Yup, it all started when O’Driscoll started flapping about like a silly little girl, shouting bring it on. Did they honestly think it would unsettle the boks?
Motormouth Gatland drilled them into playing a style that is very physical and not very familiar to them. That’s why they started dropping off like flies. The body is not used to that. On the udder hand you got the boks playing the kiwis and aussies week in week out, so no big deal.
29 Jun 2009, 22:10 pm
ok i’m off to watch the rerun of our sweet victory, the way the poms have been behaving on and off the field I hope we fk them up on Sat good and proper. cheers people
29 Jun 2009, 22:12 pm
JEAN-JACQUES,
From my memory, Schalk Burger has been guilty of swinging arm high tackles, nothing more really. I totally agree that his tackles in the past have warranted a few yellow’s. His overzealous tackling needed to be curtailed. That said, I have never thought of him as dirty.
I also only see internationals, hardly get provincial games televised here, so you may probably have more exposure than me.
I hardly think that he should have the book thrown at him with a life ban as you suggest, but a 6 month ban would not have been too harsh, or too lenient.
29 Jun 2009, 22:12 pm
#621 Sir_Charles_Napier:
LOL
“native”
cracker.
29 Jun 2009, 22:12 pm
#625 jean-jacques: you honesty think Burger decided to celebrate his 50th with an eye gouge and a 8 week ban??
29 Jun 2009, 22:12 pm
#613 BULLET: Sounds like all the Pomms here
29 Jun 2009, 22:13 pm
#621 Sir_Charles_Napier: Just read American rugga’s post. He says both sides were doing it and he is correct. Apart from that first minute, nothing serious went on. Burger should’ve walked but that was a mistake by the officials.
29 Jun 2009, 22:14 pm
#621 Sir_Charles_Napier:
Thats because he has three items he can never back down on
1 The world domination of rugby by england
2 To grease up every south african he can on this site.
3 To hate anything NZ.
29 Jun 2009, 22:14 pm
#629 BULLET:
Has anyone seen what Fitzgerald looks like?
Sounds like he has been mauled to death.
29 Jun 2009, 22:15 pm
Sir Charlie big ears – rather concern yourself with Camilla. As a wise man once said – This is rugby, not Ballet.
29 Jun 2009, 22:15 pm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/8125090.stm
HELIUM TELLS IT LIKE IT IS !!!!
fnally someone speaks up for schalla when the whole world is against him including some bokke fans
29 Jun 2009, 22:15 pm
#633 Big Hit: Hi Big, you enjoying the heat wave??
29 Jun 2009, 22:16 pm
#478 carol:
Hi Carol, A fantastic story, which of the players did you speak to? and which apologised to you?
29 Jun 2009, 22:16 pm
LOSERER,
I thought it started a little earlier than that, I was under the impression that we were in for an interresting afternoon in the 3rd minute, when Matfield held a Lions player, whistle went, Matfield then released and pushed the player. The player turned around and pushed Matfield back. (Perfectly fair). BOD then ran in from the side, pushed at Matfield’s face. Thereafter, another 2 Lions joined before the Boks joined in.
It started turning into a farce. A farce that could have been avoided if the referee at that stage did his job. He should have penalised against the third party from joining the situation. That would have been against BOD.
However, the ref was a bit nervous to control the game. He should have red carded Schalk. You cannot yellow card an eye gouge, wether you saw it or not. If he agreed to give the yellow on the basis of an eye gouge, he should have had the balls to give the red within the confines of the law.
29 Jun 2009, 22:17 pm
#634 hawkes: I see NZ got blamed for Hine’s citing? You bugger can just not do anything right!
29 Jun 2009, 22:17 pm
#636 Slappes:
That line is jogging my memory.
Must of been a long time ago.
29 Jun 2009, 22:18 pm
#11 Sir_Charles_Napier: Hello Sir Charles. I hear what you saying however regarding the heavy debate you’ve had on this thread you never answered blog 51.
What about the professional transgressions of the Lions players? You have not once acknowledged this. I think it would be fair to reflect to some extent on both sides.
It really has been a tough encounter with everything in it. I know it’s hard to loose. The boks have lost really badly at times and sometimes a lot too. It’s a pity about all the slandering that goes on here, and that we cannot celebrate a successful and hard fought series on both sides.
I am sure next week will be another exhausting encounter!
29 Jun 2009, 22:20 pm
#643 williambd:
Next week, massive.
You think this is a cesspool.
Just wait.
29 Jun 2009, 22:21 pm
#633 Big Hit:
He also says in terms that it was clear that the Bokke players were instigated it and that the Lions were merely standing their ground.
You have glossed over rather a lot. Are you sure you have not moved to Snorville and changed your name to Japie?
29 Jun 2009, 22:21 pm
#640 BULLET: I had such respect for BOD and Irish rugby, but I’m sorry, I just can’t stand them anymore. The sheer arrogance and sence of entitlement is astonishing. Me thinks the Lions should just tour the home nations, nowhere else is obviously good enough for them. I was looking so forward to this tour, but it has left a bit of a yucky taste in the mouth
29 Jun 2009, 22:21 pm
Johannesburg – South African Rugby Union president Oregan Hoskins and national coach Peter de Villiers on Monday apologised for comments that followed Saturday’s Test against the British and Irish Lions at Loftus Versfeld.
De Villiers while defending Schalk Burger, who was banned for eight weeks after being found guilty of eye gouging, made comments that outraged media at home and abroad.
SARU now wants to make it clear that under no circumstance does the organisation condone eye gouging after appearing to give off that impression.
Burger was charged with making contact with Lions winger Luke Fitzgerald’s face only 32 seconds into his 50th appearance for the Springboks. He was subsequently yellow carded.
Hoskins and De Villiers jointly condemned all acts of foul play and sent out a clear message that such acts would not be tolerated in South African rugby.
“We would like to apologise to the rugby community for the erroneous impression that acts of foul play are in any way condoned by South African rugby,” said Hoskins.
“That has never been the case and is not now, and we support strong action by rugby authorities when such acts occur. Rugby is a physical game and a hard game but it is a game that rightly prides itself on good sportsmanship and we as SARU categorically condemn any such action. SARU fully supports any action that the IRB feels appropriate to stamp out eye gouging in the game.”
De Villiers added that as Springbok coach he stood against play that was not in the spirit of the game. “Eye-gouging is something that we as a team will never be part of,” he said.
“The same applies to biting, head-butting, spear tackling or any other foul play that doesn’t belong in the game.”
“My comments on Saturday were based on what I know of Schalk Burger as a player and not on what occurred. It was never my intention to suggest that I condone foul play – that is the last thing I would ever do and I apologise for creating any other impression.”
29 Jun 2009, 22:21 pm
#637 mbaxman93: Listening to that I don’t know what all the who ha is about.
Understand the context of what he is saying and it makes a lot of sense. I judged him to quickly this time.
29 Jun 2009, 22:22 pm
Chaps,
I need to go. Enjoy the rest of the evening. I am looking forward to meeting this Tackler fellow who everybody speaks so highly of.
BULLET
Pages: « 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 » Show All
Have your say
You must be logged in to post a comment.