• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

IRB: Referee Rolland was wrong

wertas

Academy Player
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Messages
139
Country Flag
Lithuania
Club or Nation
France
http://www.sport24.co.za/Rugby/RugbyChampionship/IRB-Referee-Rolland-was-wrong-20121004

Referee Alain Rolland was wrong not to allow Australia to make a late substitution and finish their match against South Africa with 15 men, the International Rugby Board (IRB) said hours after backing the officials' original decision.
The wounded Wallabies played the final minutes of their 31-8 defeat in Pretoria on Saturday with 14 men after they made all their substitutions early in a physical clash that resulted in five of their players being forced off with injury.
Irish official Rolland blocked the Australians from replacing injured hooker Tatafu Polota-Nau with Saia Fainga'a in the 66th minute saying the Wallabies had made all seven replacements.
The match was delayed for several minutes as Rolland explained his decision to irate Wallaby officials before play was resumed and Springbok wing Bryan Habana took advantage of the extra space to score his third try of the game.
"The referee was correct," the Dublin-based IRB's James Fitzgerald told Australia's Fairfax media on Wednesday only for the sport's world governing body to issue a statement later to say Rolland was wrong.
"Following an initial review, the five-strong match official team acknowledges that they failed to recognise Law 3.12 (Exception 2) when managing a substitution in the 66th minute, which meant that Australia finished the match with 14 players," the statement said.
The confusion appeared to centre on prop Benn Robinson who had been substituted but then came back on the field after his replacement Ben Alexander was injured leaving the Wallabies with one technical substitution remaining, the IRB said.

On the other hand:
http://www.greenandgoldrugby.com/sub-par-substitutions-what-the-hell-happened/

So who is actually right? :rolleyes:

And for me Alexander didn't seem like having any injury. Australia are rotating their props.
 
From where I was sitting, it looked like Rolland didn't want TPN to come back on the field, based on the medical advisement of the Aussie Doctor. AR said that to TPN and the Medic nodded in agreement.

the rotation as I understand it, is only for the props. of which TPN is not. So if a prop which was rotated, comes on to sub TPN, he no longer qualifies as a prop replacement, and has to stay on as a permanent sub.

I think even though AR was wrong in the implementation, it was the Aussie Management who handled it incorrectly. AR followed the rules, and was informed of what was going on by his touch judge. it had to be the officials on the sideline that was wrong and the info they gave to Rolland incorrect.
 
Pity it was a game that was already won. I would have reveled in the irony if Aus lost a close game because of a ref.
 
Pity it was a game that was already won. I would have reveled in the irony if Aus lost a close game because of a ref.
not sure what you are talking about? :)

cue smartcooky... he will be able to explain this situation with the use of ms paint diagrams

personally what happened is a good thing for australian rugby, maybe it's a reminder that we need stronger and fitter props who can go the distance
 
The IRB should take responsibility here. Why don't they just make a coherent set of laws for subs.

In test rugby from now on, teams can manipulate the laws to get exrtra front row subs. You can understand why this didn't seem right in Rolland's head.
 
Last edited:
This is a bit of a nothingness really. As from November there will be 8 subs to use of which 2 will be props, so that crap like this won't happen
 

Latest posts

Top