Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

'Who butchered that?' - Ian Foster panned over All Blacks blunder

By Ian Cameron
All Blacks coach Ian Foster (L) with Ardie Savea of the All Blacks (C) and Beauden Barrett of the All Blacks (R) during the first Rugby Championship and Bledisloe Cup match between the New Zealand All Blacks and Australian Wallabies at Eden Park on August 07, 2021 in Auckland, New Zealand. (Photo by Fiona Goodall/Getty Images)

All Blacks head coach Ian Foster was panned by many over a critical personnel blunder, which lead to the best player in the first Test spending most of the second on the sidelines, helplessly watching on as Ireland claimed their first victory over the men in black on NZ soil.

ADVERTISEMENT

When All Blacks lost Angus Ta’avao to a 30th-minute red card and with Ofa Tuungafasi already in the sin bin, Foster’s side found themselves defending their line with Irish camped in their 22.

Ireland were awarded a penalty within 10 of the All Blacks’ try line, a situation which would 99 per cent of the time would have seen Ireland kick to touch in order to maul off the lineout.

Video Spacer

The perfect lower-body workout for rugby players | Charlie Willett | RugbyPass

Video Spacer

The perfect lower-body workout for rugby players | Charlie Willett | RugbyPass

However, realising the All Blacks who were down to 13-men and would be obliged to commit eight players to a scrum, a quick-thinking Johnny Sexton called for the setpiece from match day referee Jaco Peyper.

The All Blacks then critically called for Ardie Savea to be subbed off to allow Aidan Ross take the field for the scrum. They were then forced to make up the eight with backs – centre Quinn Tupaea and first-five Beauden Barrett both drafted into the back row in a scrum that was uncontested.

It was at this scrum that things got a little confused.

What Peyper appeared to miss was that the All Blacks had forced uncontested scrum through foul play, and should have been obliged to remove another nominated player, a fate that befell Italy in this year’s Guinness Six Nations game, also against Ireland.

The Law reads: “If a front-row player is sent off , and the team cannot continue with contested scrums with players already on the field, then the team nominates another player [Savea] to leave the playing area to enable an available front-row player to come on. The nominated player may act as a replacement.”

ADVERTISEMENT

In this case it would have meant New Zealand should have gone down to 12 men. They got away with it, so to speak, and went on to play with 13 and then 14-men when Tuungafasi returned to the field.

Ireland didn’t score off the scrum but it forced New Zealand into removing a player, which crucially ended up being Savea. It was a major blunder, as it ultimately lead to Savea not returning later in the contest.

There was some confusion when Tuungafasi did return from the bin, with Savea looking to return with him, until it was pointed out that they had 15 players on the pitch.

The All Blacks made a second, potentially more crucial mistake though, as they didn’t realise that they could bring Savea back on as a replacement. Under the Law 3.20, Savea would have been able to replace one of his teammates later in the game.

ADVERTISEMENT

A small number of people did pick up that the All Blacks should have been down to 12 and not 13-men and that Savea could have returned as a replacement in the back row had Foster called for it.

Foster has since said he was advised that Savea could return by the officials.

Richard Gordon wrote: “For those confused about what happened in the #NZvIRE game, under law: 1) Savea can return as a replacement. 2) Papalii cannot return. 3) The ABs should have dropped another player and gone to 12 when uncontested scrums.”

The loss of Savea was certainly picked up on social media, where the call was pilloried – Foster the scapegoat in chief.

Former All Blacks flyhalf Lima Sopoaga wrote: “Damn you really wanna play without Ardie Savea? Who butchered that?”

Dylan Jack wrote: “Ian Foster butchered the Ardie Savea call. No matter what, Savea should be the last player you bring off.”

South African rugby scribe Mark Keohane posted: “Leaving Sam Cane and sacrificing Ardi Savea summed up everything you need to know about Foster’s thinking.”

In the end it didn’t matter the mess up by officials didn’t stop Ireland winning the game, not least as they already had a one man advantage. It does however question how on the ball the coaching ticket were when they decided to take arguably their most influential forward off.

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 6

Sam Warburton | The Big Jim Show | Full Episode

Japan Rugby League One | Sungoliath v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Japan Rugby League One | Spears v Wild Knights | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 10 | Six Nations Final Round Review

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | How can New Zealand rugby beat this Ireland team

Beyond 80 | Episode 5

Rugby Europe Men's Championship Final | Georgia v Portugal | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

T
Trevor 28 minutes ago
Will forgotten Wallabies fit the Joe Schmidt model?

Thanks Brett.. At last a positive article on the potential of Wallaby candidates, great to read. Schmidt’s record as an international rugby coach speaks for itself, I’m somewhat confident he will turn the Wallaby’s fortunes around …. on the field. It will be up to others to steady the ship off the paddock. But is there a flaw in my optimism? We have known all along that Australia has the players to be very competitive with their international rivals. We know that because everyone keeps telling us. So why the poor results? A question that requires a definitive answer before the turn around can occur. Joe Schmidt signed on for 2 years, time to encompass the Lions tour of 2025. By all accounts he puts family first and that’s fair enough, but I would wager that his 2 year contract will be extended if the next 18 months or so shows the statement “Australia has the players” proves to be correct. The new coach does not have a lot of time to meld together an outfit that will be competitive in the Rugby Championship - it will be interesting to see what happens. It will be interesting to see what happens with Giteau law, the new Wallaby coach has already verbalised that he would to prefer to select from those who play their rugby in Australia. His first test in charge is in July just over 3 months away .. not a long time. I for one wish him well .. heaven knows Australia needs some positive vibes.

21 Go to comments
B
Bull Shark 4 hours ago
Jake White: Are modern rugby players actually better?

Of 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 comments
TRENDING
TRENDING England No8 Sarah Beckett banned after leg-breaking croc roll tackle England No8 Sarah Beckett banned after leg-breaking croc roll tackle
Search