Ted is a man does not pander to snobs, the politically correct or those who are afraid to say what they really think. During his time as the Headmaster of Auckland Grammar, the boys were given no favours for who they were (or who their parents were). He was only interested in what they they could achieve, and how hard they were prepared to work to achieve it. Like a lot of Kiwis, he will say what he thinks, and not give monkeys whose feelings might be injured, or toes might be trod on in saying it. He doesn't call a spade a spade, he calls it a shovel!!!
Far too much is being made of his comment re: match fixing, but once again, true to form, the media have taken what he wrote completely out of context and have blown it out of all proportion. Those who have not read his book (I have) might be better to read it first before indulging in idle, ill-informed and misguided speculation based entirely on the ******** that has been quoted in the media about what he said.
Here is the quote direct from the book, my emphasis
" (I) briefly contemplated match-fixing as the only logical explanationâ€
The truth is he does not think that now, but the media are either too stupid to understand what "briefly" means, or they deliberately ignore that part of the quote so that they can sell papers -- I suspect the latter.
IMO, this is the right time for him to put his feelings and perceptions in print. He has now won a world cup, and has retired from the game; there is no unfinished business. I find it refreshing to read a sports biography that doesn't gloss over the uncomfortable issues and sweep the controversial things under the rug. He is telling HIS story, the way HE sees it, and I applaud him for doing so without fear or favour.
Technically, his analysis of the 2007 quarter-final is right on the money. It was extraordinary (and unprecedented) that a team who spent three quarters of the last 50 minutes of a match defending, much of it within their own 22, could do so without being penalised even once. Not even a free kick or an advantage call. Ted's suggestion that Wayne Barnes was too inexperienced to be refereeing a match of that magnitude, and that he essentially folded under pressure, was also correct. It was clear and obvious to ANYONE watching the game that he was refereeing only one side, and completely ignoring material offences by the French that were occurring right in front of him. The parallels between that match and Bryce Lawrence's abysmal effort in the Australia v South Africa quarter final in 2011 are remarkable; but at least Bryce had the courage and fortitude to fess-up after the game and admit how badly he got it wrong.
Bob Francis, one of the selectors who picked Wayne Barnes for that match agreed in a radio interview this morning that, in hindsight, it was a mistake to select such an inexperienced referee for such an important fixture, when there were far more experienced referees available, e.g. Chris White, who was not appointed to referee any play-off matches in spite of his vast experience as an international referee. Instead, he was posted to the TMO Box. What were they thinking??
Having said all that, Ted and his team didn't have the Plan B they should have had, and if they had, then this whole issue would never have arisen. However, this does not negate the fact the Wayne Barnes should never have been thrown in at the deep end the way he was. He was selected for the RWC2007 panel in only his first year as an international referee and with with only three tests to his name, and only one of those was a test between traditional test playing nations. . This was unprecedented, and is a position that the iRB clearly did not allow any referees to be put in at the 2011 event.
It is highly unlikely that they will ever make that particular mistake again.
Because it made the French think they had a chance, only for our hapless 4th string first-five to dash any hopes.
