We value your privacy

We and our partners store and/or access information on a device, such as cookies and process personal data, such as unique identifiers and standard information sent by a device for personalised ads and content, ad and content measurement, and audience insights, as well as to develop and improve products.

With your permission we and our partners may use precise geolocation. You may click to consent to our and our partners’ processing as described above. Please note that some processing of your personal data may not require your consent, but you have a right to object to such processing.

More Options

Wed 2 Aug 2017 | 08:34
All eyes on Jaco Peyper after controversial Beauden Barrett yellow card

9
Comments

This weekend's Super Rugby final is set to be a thriller and like any other high profile sporting event, it has already attracted some criticism and controversy. Chief among the criticism is the perceived potential for bias on the part of South African referee, Jaco Peyper.

Right or wrong, this mainly stems from his decision to give Beauden Barret a much talked about yellow card early in the second half of last weekend's semi-final on the Lions home turf.

As you probably know by now, the Lions managed to erase a rather large deficit to the Hurricanes to claim victory and another spot in the Super Rugby final.

More than a few thought the card to be fairly harsh and very influential on the outcome.

Either way, these decisions are part of the ebb and flow of any match and teams should consider the consequences of any lack in discipline.

Peyper was unhappy with what he felt to be a deliberate act of interference on the part of the All Black fly half. As you can see from the clip, Barrett made a nice tackle on winger Ruan Combrinck but dragged the ball away with his legs as he was rolling away. 

To lose their potent playmaker at such a time was clearly a setback for the Hurricanes. In post-match reactions, both teams admitted that the card had a significant impact on the match.

Others, such as former Springbok Nick Mallett, admitted: "It was a pretty tough decision against Beauden."

One can imagine the pressure Peyper will be under as there will undoubtedly be questions raised by fans of both teams should their side lose. However, at this point, all that matters is that Peyper enjoys the full confidence of SANZAAR. Speaking to Sport24, CEO Andy Marinos said:

"The selection criteria for all match offical appointments for the last two years follows a clear tournament policy - as agreed by the SANZAAR executive committee and the tournament's stakeholders - that such appointments be merit-based.

"This merit-based policy was reflected with the appointment last year of New Zealand referee Glen Jackson to referee the Hurricanes v Lions final in Wellington. SANZAAR stands behind the policy and believes the best referees should be available to officiate the best matches."

Potential controversies aside, the match officials are set and we're one day closer to an explosive Super Rugby final showdown in Johannesburg. Ellis Park is already sold out.

Posted By: davidharper

9 Comments

  • gonzoman
    2:21 PM 07/08/2017

    I like Peyper's explanation: "he's on the wrong side, so whatever influence he's had [read: accidental or not] I have to penalize him".

  • dancarter
    6:13 PM 04/08/2017

    I think he's unlucky to have kicked the ball when he's attempting to roll away from the tackle and I don't think it was intentional, but I think a yellow card is right. The end result, illegally gaining possession, is no different than it would have been had he played the ball off his feet, which would also have been a yellow card.

  • vladimir
    2:02 PM 04/08/2017

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BVpv5-igbDb/

  • im1
    10:22 AM 04/08/2017

    Regardless of whether it was an accident or not, Barrett has an obligation to try and not play the ball. He has to be proactive on removing himself from the tackle/ruck without playing the ball. And its not obvoius that he was trying to avoid playing the ball, so its automatically a penalty. And the situation merits a yellow. It should always be a yellow, if the attacking team have surged into the 22 and have momentum and you give away a penalty. I don't think the ref's are harsh enough on this

  • drg
    12:16 AM 04/08/2017

    I somewhat feel my views echo the above posts.. but...

    If Barrett accidentally knocked the ball, we'd probably expect a card no? So the actions of interfering with the ball resulted in a yellow? As can be seen, Barrett interfered with the ball, either purposely or otherwise.,... So no arguments....

    ....What the Canes needed was a Warburton...

  • 10stonenumber10
    8:58 PM 03/08/2017

    Three things are certain in this life.

    1) Faffing around on the deck while going backwards inside the 22 is an almost definite card.
    2) Refereeing decisions will annoy +/-50% of spectators.
    3) Wu-Tang clan ain't nuttin ta f**k with.

    If this was another fly half there wouldn't be such noise about it. Bo-diddley Barrett isn't the messiah, he was a very naughty boy.

  • katman
    8:02 PM 03/08/2017

    Also, the card hard nothing to do with the Lions erasing a large deficit, as this piece suggests. They had already made their comeback to 22-all way before the card.

  • katman
    7:59 PM 03/08/2017

    It's only controversial because some Kiwis had a whinge. No one doubts he dragged the ball back. It was meters from the line. The try was on. Defence was nowhere. So where exactly is the controversy here?

    That's a yellow card all day long.

  • 45678
    2:42 PM 03/08/2017

    cynical play with the defense scrambling back in the 22. Of course it's a yellow card

    It's only controversial if you're a one eyed canes / abs fan or work in the nz press

Related Articles