Former All Blacks scrum-half Justin Marshall and former Springboks hooker Hanyani Shimange have addressed ‘the elephant in the room’ at Eden Park, referee Karl Dickson’s performance.
Much of the post-match reactions from the Round Three Rugby Championship in Auckland has centred around the official’s handling of the game, with South African fans feeling rather aggrieved.
There has been a feeling of inconsistency in his calls during the clash in Auckland, with a particular focus on the breakdown and the scrums.
Shimange, who was in the commentary box for SuperSport, has echoed the sentiments of the fans in both facets of the game, but while he believed that Dickson was somewhat inconsistent and didn’t have a perfect match, he believed that South Africa weren’t good enough to end New Zealand’s unbeaten run at their spiritual home.
The elephant in the room
He was asked about the performance of Dickson during his guest appearance on the GBR AUNZ podcast with Marshall and show host Andy Rowe.
“The elephant in the room… I thought there were a couple of wrong calls, but it became a free-for-all at times at the breakdown. That’s not the reason the Springboks lost, to be honest with you, but there are a lot of calls there,” he began.
“Particularly as a former forward, you look at one or two of those first couple of scrum collapses – no decisions made then, he made decisions at the end. But for me, the breakdown felt like it was a free-for-all.”
Marshall, who was also at the game in a commentary capacity but for Sky Sport NZ, agreed that the official’s performance wasn’t perfect. However, he said that it wasn’t an easy game to referee, and the errors were emphasised because of the close nature of the clash and how both teams approached the match.
He also admitted that it’s easy to say that the referee had a good game when your team has won.
“When you have a game that’s so tense and so tight, it’s really easy to point to the referee because decisions when it’s a really tight game are going to be influential decisions,” Marshall said.
“In general, I thought that he was balanced; whether he was too harsh in one area or not harsh enough in another, he was consistent in the way that he did it, but it’s really hard to be measured when your team has won, to say there was a problem with the referee.
“I can’t really say. It also wasn’t the style of game that was super free-flowing; it was quite combative. There weren’t stages where the ball was being swung around, like both teams didn’t really want to play in that halfway zone. They were trying to kick it and win the aerial battle.
“It was a game of chess. Every time the All Blacks got in the 22, they pretty much scored, but they didn’t have anywhere near the entries that the Springboks did.”
He added: “When I look at it, and go back to the question about the referee, because I’ve bounced around it, the thing that I found when I digested the game and looked at it was ‘Yup, probably the Springboks got a few decisions that should have gone their way that didn’t’. But they were the architects of their own demise.
“They made way too many errors in the red zone. Usually when they get in there, they’re ruthless, and they weren’t. They coughed the ball up, guys shepherding got called for blocking – runners that were ahead of the ball carriers, real simplistic stuff that they don’t usually do.”
Springboks’ wastefulness in the 22
Still, both the former internationals agreed that South Africa were wasteful once they entered New Zealand’s 22 – a theme that plagued Rassie Erasmus’ charges in the opening two rounds of the Rugby Championship against Australia.
In fact, according to SANZAAR’s stats provider Opta, South Africa have averaged 10.7 entries into the opposition 22m zone per game in the competition – the most of any team – but have scored just 1.8 points per entry. They have the lowest conversion rate per entry in the tournament, while the opposite is true for the All Blacks. New Zealand have made the fewest entries per game (6) and scored the most points per entry (4.2).
Shimange believes that this isn’t down to just one area of concern for the Springboks but multiple. However, he still felt that there was a lot being missed by the officials.
“It was compounding errors. Sometimes they missed the lineout, or the All Blacks steal it, next time you get the lineout, but the delivery is not good. Then you get the delivery right, and then there’s a knock on or a mistake at the breakdown. So, it was compounding errors,” he continued.
“You could sense the frustration, a lot, from the Springboks, but even with the ref. You sit there in the commentary box, and you don’t really want to make it about the ref. There’s a part of me that, you know, there’s frustration from the players. There was a lot of chat there.
“It was almost like he lost a bit of control, and then you think to yourself, ‘Am I seeing the same picture as everyone else?’ Then you go on social media and see the outcry, and you’re like, ‘Maybe I wasn’t wrong.’ Sometimes you think you’re sitting there, ‘I’m like, no, man, was he offside?’ And start double-guessing yourself, but you don’t want to make it about the ref.
“If you asked me if it was a 10/10 ref performance, definitely not, and not because of the result. I just think it was when a ref doesn’t make decisions or there’s no change in behaviour, so anything goes, then players start chatting, and they get the frustration kicks in, and that’s exactly what happened.
“From a South African point of view, I think it was 12 entries into the 22, and you look at that conversion rate… The game plan from the Springboks, the pressure, was good, but the reality is the pressure has to count on the scoreboard, and it didn’t from a South African point of view.”
Victor Matfield: ‘Springboks are using lineout tactics that I’ve always been against’
Frustrated captains
Those remarks reminded Marshall of just how often All Blacks skipper Scott Barrett and Jesse Kriel engaged with Dickson during the match to air their concerns and frustrations.
The sheer number of times they did so points to both captains being disgruntled, according to the ex-scrum-half.
“When I think about it, and your answer made me think it, I did notice Jesse Kriel and Scott Barrett approaching the ref quite a lot,” he said.
“And that means that they’re questioning or asking about stuff. Sometimes, the captain will talk to the ref once or twice during the game, or the ref explains his decision, and the captain just moves on when he’s fine with the decision, but there was a lot of questioning, both captains were at him quite a bit, so there was obviously some frustration there for them to have to do that.”
Shimange concluded the chat, adding: “It was several things, and he just kept going back and back, and you could even see the frustration at the end.
“It was a lot of questions. Was he offside here? Was he onside? What’s happening at the breakdown? Is this allowed? The last sequence with the counter-ruck, when there are players falling over, it sounds like I’m whinging. I thought it was a great counter-ruck, but you can’t fall over the ball, and that wasn’t penalised.
“So I think there’ll be frustration from a South African point of view, but the reality is in a Test match of that magnitude at Eden Park, you need to be at your best, and the Springboks weren’t.”
READ MORE: Duane Vermeulen shuts down Springboks criticism that has been blown out of proportion