Springbok fans lost their minds over Bryce Lawrence after the 2011 quarterfinal loss to the Wallabies
The 2011 Rugby World Cup quarterfinal will forever go down in infamy as one of the great individual performances of all-time from Wallaby flanker David Pocock, who scuttled the Springbok breakdown with industrious endeavour that played spoiler on the day.
The Wallabies, after winning the Tri-Nations earlier that year and proving their mettle as a top team to beat at the World Cup, scraped a 11-9 win that sent the defending World Cup holders unceremoniously out of the tournament.
Pocock’s herculean effort wasn’t met with equal admiration & respect from Springbok fans, who instead turned their attention towards referee Bryce Lawrence. Aggrieved Springbok fans humiliated by the loss felt that Lawrence’s officiating, particularly at the ruck, aided Australia over their side.
After a blatant forward pass from centre De Villiers was called back costing the Springboks a try-scoring opportunity, the wrath towards Lawrence turned into conspiracy. Wild and unfounded allegations were thrown at Lawrence as Springbok fans reached for any conspiracy theory that would explain the loss.
Why has Referee boss, Paddy O'Brian, appointed fellow New Zealander, Bryce Lawrence, in SA/Aus game to determine S/F opponents against NZ?
— Willem van Zyl (@Wilwie) October 8, 2011
@Lialoyz Australia didn't eliminate the #Springboks, but ref Bryce Lawrence did to benefit his home country, New Zealand, in the semis
— Rams™ (@RegularRams) October 10, 2011
@QuadeCooper does bryce lawrence travel with the team or on his own aussie sponsored plane?
— socrates georgiades (@djsox) October 9, 2011
#brycelawrence Let's call 4 investigation into match fixing re this sod! Two games in a row he blew the favourites out of the game.
— Chris van der Heyde (@ChrisvdHeyde) October 9, 2011
As Lawrence was a New Zealander, some conspiracies felt that he had planned to gift the All Blacks a ‘preferred’ semi-final opponent in the Wallabies despite the fact the Wallabies had beaten the All Blacks a few months prior in Brisbane.
A full-strength All Blacks side had absolutely hammered South Africa 40-7 on New Zealand soil in the Tri-Nations in Wellington.
The Wallabies had also done a number on South Africa, sweeping them 2-0 home and away during the 2011 Tri-Nations, with the Springboks sole win coming at home against a second string All Blacks side in the last round. On form and results, the Wallabies were by all means logically the tougher semi-final opponent.
This was lost however as online petitions gained steam as Springbok fans launched campaigns to stop Bryce Lawrence from reffing again, which reached over 30,000 in just a few days after the match.
Help get rid of @Bryce lawrence!! Useless on all accounts http://t.co/014DZ87e
— James Edwards (@James1877) October 10, 2011
@bokrugby Petition To Stop Bryce Lawrence Ever Reffing A Rugby Game Again http://t.co/KVagHX7j. #BryceLawrence #rwc2011 #Springboks
— Ryno Mey (@rynomey) October 10, 2011
Flip sakes, check out this for viral growth, 29,386 "likes" in one day and counting – Petition against Bryce Lawrence http://t.co/rlqiowwu
— Tyron Bache (@TyronBache) October 10, 2011
@BryanHabana i hope the SA Rugby Union is going to appeal and take legal action against Bryce Lawrence,honestly,he let u lose that match,
— Tavonga Manjonjo??? (@tavmanj) October 9, 2011
You can sign all the facebook petitions you like over Bryce Lawrence – fact is, the #bokke is in SA already and nothing is gona change that!
— Where’s Wally? (@thatwallace) October 10, 2011
Bryce Lawrence is blind in one eye, and that blind eye always seems to be facing the side AUS is playing from
— Darren Ashley Clarke (@DarrenAshClarke) October 10, 2011
If SANZAR still rate Bryce Lawrence as their no.1, heaven help us all. #rugby #sanzar #rwc2011 #wallabies #boks #ausvrsa #superrugby
— Mindy Pawsey (@MKPS001) October 9, 2011
So why is Bryce Lawrence trending in NZ for?? What did he do wrong??
— Lauren ?? (@Rugbynerd) October 10, 2011
Bryce Lawrence. Argh. You cost us. I hope you feel great!!
— Simone (@simisays22) October 9, 2011
“@dannicholl: Lots of nasty stuff about Bryce Lawrence; please give him a break. Poor man had his long-term guide dog put down Thursday.”
— Jené Schutte (@Jene18) October 10, 2011
Blaming Bryce LAwrence shows us up as a bunch of bad sports-we should be above that.
— David Wolpert (@DavidWolpertZA) October 9, 2011
I know this topic is getting old, but isn't SA blaming #BryceLawrence a bit like NZ blaming Suzie a few years back?
— Lynn Fothergill (@lynn_f) October 10, 2011
The anti-Lawrence rhetoric was aided by journalists stoking the fire with harsh criticism of the referee following the match. Mark Reason writing for The Daily Telegrath penned a scathing response.
“Lawrence made a complete hash of the game… and the Springboks will be furious,” he wrote without restrain.
“They identified the breakdowns as a key area before the game, but expected there would be some sort of reffing.
“The South Africans thought the tackler would have to release the ball-carrier. They thought the offside line would be respected. They thought that men would have to stay on their feet. It was a shambles.”
Scribe Brendan Gallagher wrote in a similar vein, saying that Lawrence had “horribly laissez faire control” of the breakdown which saw David Pocock “offend at will”.
The breakdown laws were a contentious sticking point for upset Springbok fans, agreeing with Gallagher and Reason that the Wallabies were able to get away with infringing in every way possible.
Banging a dead horse, but Bryce Lawrence's Refereeing Flowchart made me chuckle: pic.twitter.com/qcpAOUI8
— Grant McDermott (@grant_mcdermott) October 10, 2011
Outgoing Springbok captain John Smit was also not in the mood to pour water on the flames, delivering some parting shots as he talked to press after the game.
”Bryce is not difficult to communicate with, he just doesn’t seem to listen very well,” Smit told journalists.
“The one positive (of retirement) is that I won’t ever have to be reffed by him again.”
A different take on the game was made by Kiwi writer Hamish Bidwell, who opined that the Springboks tried to ambitiously play a game they do not have the skills to deliver, and that was ultimately their downfall.
“Rather than pummel the Wallabies into submission, South Africa shifted the ball virtually every opportunity,” he wrote for the Waikato Times.
“It was laudable stuff, just not especially effective.
“Opportunities were created, most notable Jean de Villiers putting Pat Lambie away for what should have been a brilliant try. Only the final transfer was forward, as if to demonstrate how much running and passing just aren’t part of their skillset.”
Comments on RugbyPass
I wouldn’t spend the time on Nawaqanitawase! No point in having him filling in a jersey when he’s committed to leave Union. Give the jersey to a young prospect who will be here in the future.
4 Go to commentsIt was a pleasure to watch those guys playing with such confidence. That trio can all be infuriating for different reasons and I can see why Jones might have decided against them. No way to justify leaving Ikitau out though. Jorgensen and him were both scheduled to return at the same time. Only one of them plays for Randwick and has a dad who is great mates with the national coach though.
53 Go to commentsBrayden Iose and Peter Lakai are very exciting Super Rugby players but are too short and too light to ever be a Test 8 vs South Africa, France, Ireland, and England, Lakai could potentially be a Test player at 7 if he is allowed to focus on 7 for Hurricanes.
5 Go to commentsPencils “Thomas du Toit” into possible 2027 Bok squad.
1 Go to commentsDon’t see why Harrison makes the bench. Jones can play at 10 if needed, and there is a good case for starting her there to begin with if testing combinations. That would leave room for Sing on the bench
1 Go to commentsWhat a load of old bull!
1 Go to commentsOf the rugby I’ve born witness to in my lifetime - 1990 to date - I recognize great players throughout those years. But I have no doubt the game and the players are on average better today. So I doubt going back further is going to prove me wrong. The technical components of the game, set pieces, scrums, kicks, kicks at goal. And in general tactics employed are far more efficient, accurate and polished. Professional athletes that have invested countless hours on being accurate. There is one nation though that may be fairly competitive in any era - and that for me is the all blacks. And New Zealand players in general. NZ produces startling athletes who have fantastic ball skills. And then the odd phenomenon like Brooke. Lomu. Mcaw. Carter. Better than comparing players and teams across eras - I’ve often had this thought - that it would be very interesting to have a version of the game that is closer to its original form. What would the game look like today if the rules were rolled back. Not rules that promote safety obviously - but rules like: - a try being worth 1 point and conversion 2 points. Hence the term “try”. Earning a try at goals. Would we see more attacking play? - no lifting in the lineouts. - rucks and break down laws in general. They looked like wrestling matches in bygone eras. I wonder what a game applying 1995 rules would look like with modern players. It may be a daft exercise, but it would make for an interesting spectacle celebrating “purer” forms of the game that roll back the rules dramatically by a few versions. Would we come to learn that some of the rules/combinations of the rules we see today have actually made the game less attractive? I’d love to see an exhibition match like that.
29 Go to commentsIrish Rugby CEO be texting Andy Farrell “Andy, i found our next Kiwi Irishman”
5 Go to commentsI certainly don’t miss drinking beers at 8am in the morning watching rugby games being played in NZ.
1 Go to commentsThis looks like a damage limitation exercise for Wales, keeping back some of their more effective players for the last 20/25 minutes to try and counter England’s fresh legs so the Red Roses don’t rack up a big score.
1 Go to commentsVery unlikely the Bulls will beat Leinster in Dublin. It would be different in Pretoria.
1 Go to commentsI think it is a dangerous path to go down to ban a player for the same period that a player they injured takes to recover. Players would be afraid to tackle anyone. I once tackled my best friend at school in a practice match and sprained his ankle. I paid for it by having to play fly-half instead of full-back for the rest of that season’s fixtures.
5 Go to commentsJust such a genuine good bloke…and probably the best all round player in his generation. Good guys do come first sometimes and he handled the W.Cup loss with great attitude.
2 Go to commentsWord in France is that he’s on the radar of a few Top14 clubs.
5 Go to commentsGet blocking Travis, this guy has styles and he’s gonna make a swift impact…!
1 Go to commentsWhat remorse? She claimed that her dangerous tackle wasn’t worthy of a red! She should be compensating the injured player for loss of earnings at the minimum. Her ban should include the recovery time of the injured player as well as the paltry 3 match ban.
5 Go to commentsArdie is a legend. Finished and klaar. Two things: “Yeah, yeah, I have had a few conversations with Razor just around feedback on my game and what I am doing well, what I need to improve on or work-ons. It’s kind of been minimal, mate, but it’s all that I need over here in terms of how to be better, how to get better and what I am doing well.” I hope he’s downplaying it - and that it’s not that “minimal”. The amount of communication and behind the scenes preparation the Bok coaches put into players - Rassie and co would be all over Ardie and being clear on what is expected of him. This stands out for me as something teams should really be looking at in terms of the boks success from a coaching point of view. And was surprised by the comment - “minimal”. In terms of the “debate” around Ireland and South Africa. Nice one Ardie. Indeed. There’s no debate.
2 Go to commentsThere’s a bit of depth there but realistically Australian players have a long way to go to now catch up. The game is moving on fast and Australia are falling behind. Australian sides still don’t priories the breakdown like they should, it’s a non-negotiable if you want to compete on the international stage. That goes for forwards and backs. The Australian team could have a back row that could make a difference but the problem is they don’t have a tight five that can do the business. Tupou is limited in defence, overweight and unfit and the locks are a long way from international standard. Frost is soft and Salakai-Loto is too small so that means they need a Valentini at 8 who has to do the hard graft so limits the effectiveness of the backrow. Schmidt really needs to get a hard working, tough tight 5 if he wants to get this team firing.
4 Go to commentsSorry Morgan you must have been the “go to for a quote” ex player this week. Its rnd 6 and there is plenty of time to cement a starting 15 and finishing 8 so I have no such concerns.
2 Go to commentsGreat read. I wish you had done this article on the ROAR.
2 Go to comments