SANZAR to probe Keith Brown’s scrum call

March 13, 2012
Posted by Morné

A controversial late penalty, which sunk the Cheetahs in their clash against the Brumbies, will be investigated by SANZAR.

Sport24

The Brumbies won their Super Rugby clash in Canberra 24-23 after centre Christian Lealiifano kicked a penalty after the hooter had sounded.

Referee Chris Brown awarded a dubious penalty to the home side after he felt the Cheetahs deliberately swayed the scrum.

Brown punished the Cheetahs on several occasions, especially at the scrums.

And Lyndon Bray, SANZAR’s refereeing boss, told the Beeldnewspaper that three scrum specialists – former Bok prop Balie Swart, NZ scrum guru Mike Cron and former Wallaby prop Patricio Noriega – will study that last penalty against the Cheetahs as well as two other calls over the weekend to determine if the right decisions were made.

“Keith may not have been very sharp with the early engagement of the scrums and therefore it wasn’t a pretty sight throughout the game.

“But, concerning that last decision, we’ll have to determine if the teams firstly scrummed forward and then lawfully swayed the scrum with momentum.

“When it sways immediately without force, it may be unlawful,” said Bray.

Bray is currently in South Africa where he is meeting with several local coaches and referees.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to MySpace

Tags: , , , ,

12 Comments

  1. namboer namboer says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 8:45 am Reply to this comment

    Smaak my sport24 se mense was bietjie op die :weed: en :beer: …

    “Referee Chris Brown awarded a dubious penalty…”
    maar die opskrif en later in die artikel sê Keith

    :roll:

  2. Morné Morné says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 8:48 am Reply to this comment

    Reply to namboer @ 8:45 am:

    I think the same guy who writes their entertainment news wrote this story.

    Was probably thinking of Rihana at the time! :)

    I am going to leave it as is!

  3. JT_BOKBEFOK! JT_BOKBEFOK! says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 9:30 am Reply to this comment

    won’t change anything – only thing that this will bring is Keith being even more uncertain in decisions made in the future…

    As I said on another thread: the refereeing is killing the game! Well let me rephrase that: The allowance of interpretation of the Laws by the referees is killing the game of union. The Laws need to be re-written and clear on what is penalizable and especially what is penalizable 1st, 2nd, 3rd etc. The breakdown is my biggest concern.

  4. JT_BOKBEFOK! JT_BOKBEFOK! says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 9:34 am Reply to this comment

    Reply to JT_BOKBEFOK! @ 9:30 am:

    Breakdown penalties in order seems to be as follows:
    1st – Tackler not releasing or rolling away
    2nd – tackler assist not releasing
    3rd – ball carrieri not releasing
    4th – support players not coming through the gate
    5th – support players going off their feet

    That is how I see it when I ref.

  5. namboer namboer says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 11:07 am Reply to this comment

    Reply to JT_BOKBEFOK! @ 9:34 am: YOU ref? 8O
    Poor bastards playing against your team! :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Just kidding – well done for putting even more back into the game. Actually think you’d make a good ref.

  6. Boertjie Boertjie says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 11:11 am Reply to this comment

    I had glimpses of the Maties screwing the
    Souties last night.
    At one stage there was a ruck. The Matie
    players formed a tunnel behind the ruck,
    each player bound to the one in front of
    him, moving the ball backwards on the
    ground.
    In the process their scrummy eventually
    had oodles of space to clear from behind
    the ruck.
    Any comment?

  7. JT_BOKBEFOK! JT_BOKBEFOK! says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 11:17 am Reply to this comment

    Reply to Boertjie @ 11:11 am:

    How did they move the ball back? Feet or hands? Feet IMO ok.

    I would like a law come into it to force a team to play the ball quicker. I also want to see a ruck being able to be contested at all times! If players are off their feet and the opposition can’t contest is something I really detest! :censored:
    IMO if the ball is there to be played by the scrummy, contesting not possible due to 10 bodies on the ground at least force the scrummy to use it or lose it like the maul! However the bodies on the ground should be a penalty anyway :Boertjie GOM:

  8. JT_BOKBEFOK! JT_BOKBEFOK! says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 11:26 am Reply to this comment

    Reply to namboer @ 11:07 am:

    Only in very drastic circumstances I referee my team – I ref mostly 7s these days because I am too involved with coaching.

    I used to referee Bundesliga games and am IRB Level 2 certified – whatever that means these days :roll:

  9. Boertjie Boertjie says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 11:44 am Reply to this comment

    They moved the ball with their feet.
    Looked like a swallow’s nest – you know
    what that looks like? – with this long
    tunnel (like six players).
    Opposition had to stay back in line with
    the main part of the ruck.

  10. Morné Morné says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 12:06 pm Reply to this comment

    Reply to Boertjie @ 11:44 am:

    It’s legal, but they are looking to stop this with the new laws they are trailing at the moment where an available ball has to be used in X amount of seconds at a ruck.

  11. Boertjie Boertjie says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 12:23 pm Reply to this comment

    Reply to Morné @ 12:06 pm:

    I’m worried.
    On a daily basis I hear and read about
    people saying they are finished with
    rugby – they just can’t stand the laws
    mess any longer.
    And to me personally the SS15 has become
    just too tiresome and drawn out too watch.

  12. JT_BOKBEFOK! JT_BOKBEFOK! says:
    March 13th, 2012 at 12:41 pm Reply to this comment

    Reply to Boertjie @ 12:23 pm:

    the flopping off their feet all over the ball at the breakdown is pushing me to that retoric as well.
    :Boertjie GOM:

Switch to our mobile site