dsds says...

This so clearly proves the South Africans' case that the British media are incapable of objectivity that it MUST be a wind-up. Julia, you are Danny Stephens in disguise, and I claim my £50. The only thing I can say is that at least you'll look better in a ra-ra skirt, shaking your pom poms and screaming 'Go Lions, Go'. We hope.

Posted 10:19 09th July 2009

Ruperta says...

Whilst being unashamedly English and an obvious Lions supporter I do understand why this article irks you "Bokkers"!! That said I do believe that the armband protest was petulant at the very least. Bakkies is by no means the first and won't be the last to be treated unfairly indeed I find it hard to recall the last time a player was cited and reprieved!! This is where the problem lies and it is not resolved by armbands!! If Schalk Burger was guilty of gouging why was his punishment not consistent with others for the same offence? Dylan Hartley got 6 months for an offence not even seen on camera! We all want a level pitch! That is all we ask but I doubt that the armbands have gained the Boks any respect!!

Whilst PdeV's comments about tutus and dancing were a little ridiculous those who love the game thrive on the physically challenging part of it that make it what it is. There is a fine line which needs to be policed, authorities don't always get it right but when you are wronged be grown up about it!!

Posted 09:44 08th July 2009

ELAF says...

Dear Julia: it appears to me, on reading your article, that you are far from objective and constructive in your critics... in fact you sound like you are a very upset british supporter who just found something else to complain about.....

You could start by taking each act on its merits, and the fact IS that the ban was completely ridiculous, and not just the 2 weeks, even 1 day would have been wrong, since (even the Lions coaching staff agreed) the challenge was fair (not like shaw's knee charge on Du Preez's back while he was on the ground).

Had something like that happened to an english man GOD HELP US!!! you would be bitching for the next 4 years!! If you can't be completely fair and objective in what you write, then stay in the pub....

Posted 09:23 08th July 2009

BozOnline says...

@Finn. Fair one, I did miss the "political statement". Sorry, Julia. And I disagree with the silly sexist comments by some here. But the sentiment of many posts is justified.

Living in the UK and reading their press over the past weeks makes me understand where the hatred comes from that drives football hooliganism. Just about every statement is one sided: no mention of the Botha ban without pointing out that it resulted in Jones's injury, and that Jenkins also left the field with a head wound. None of these reports are balanced by the facts that Jenkins was hurt by BOD in a Crige-esque manner and that the Lions' forwards coaches didn't think there was anything particularly wrong with Botha's cleanout of Jones. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

I remember the SA rugby press being one-eyed, to an extent, but never with the venom seen in the UK press during this tour. And the title of this article is designed to rile Bok supporters, not to convey information. Exactly which friends and admirers were shed as a result of the armbands? Can you point to one? Not many here in the UK: the Bok admirers in the local rugby club still admire the Boks and speak apologetically of the press coverage (as I had to express my embarrassment at Burger's stupidity); those that hate the Boks just hate them more, driven by drivel like that written above. I suspect the Irish are the same. And do Aus or NZ or France, Argentina or the Pacific Isles really care?

Were the armbands silly? Yes. Did these armbands draw attention to a problem and make sure that it's dealt with thoroughly? Yes. Was there any other way to achieve this outcome? Maybe. Did the armbands embarrass some fans? Yes. Did the armbands cause the Boks to shed friends and admirers? Probably not many. Was this article designed to bait Bok fans? Probably. Did it work? Yes. What's the point?

Posted 07:36 08th July 2009

rugbyphile says...

Julia

In your opinion John Smit is tetchy and Victor Matfield made you roll your eyes; why does the mainstream rugby world revere them as great players and great sports? Your opinion is the opinion of a nonentity. Noone could call you a journalist, ie provider of news. What about the total lack of reaction of the IRB and the UK media to the blatant whingeing about the ref by Phillips after the 2nd test? That didn'tr bring the game into disrepute ? He wasn't tetchy or unlikeable? You are another example of the egocentric (our boys are always the heroes win or lose) xenophobic UK media--and Planet Rugby, can't you find some rugby journalists to write for you? Contrast for example Jeremy Guscott's knowledge and balance with the tripe of Harris and Stephens.

Posted 05:23 08th July 2009

brazilrugger says...

while i agree that the armband was ill advised this kind of journalism is inflammatory and contemtuous at best. I dont know you you think you are laying into Bakiies by calling him a thug as though it were obvious fact.

Tabloid, partisan and unprofessional reporting

Posted 01:59 08th July 2009

Bondy says...

Wow, reading these comments I have to say I'm pretty ashamed to be a Springbok supporter. What a bunch of chauvinistic idiotd so many of you seem to be. One guy says Ms Harris should do her homework by pointing out that armbands are used not just to mourn the loss of a comrade? Really? That's ground breaking stuff. Personally I first heard that when in the article it said 'and at times have to make political statements'. For those saying Julia who? You'd probably never heard of the voice of English football Martin Tyler before he became one of the most respected football journalists in the world as he never played the game much, or cricket's Mark Nicholas who is celebrated around the world but never wore the England colours. You don't have to know what it feels like to be stuck at the bottom of a ruck to know that the Springboks wearing armands was over the top and equally that Bakkies suspension was unjust. Grow up guys.

Posted 23:20 07th July 2009

jasonmanners says...

Great job Julia Harris ! Your article sounds like it was written by "petulant schoolchildren"

Planetrugby has once again let its readers down with articles of this quality.

P.S. UK citizen

Posted 21:47 07th July 2009

Diminutive_Bob says...

Good on the Boks. The British attitude of "Never question authority" is an indication of how they still think they are in the feudal age where, what the Lord of the Manor says is law, and don't dare oppose him! This is the same problem we have in football - what the ref says is right, even though me makes HUGE mistakes, he is still the boss. The referee is as human as the players. He makes mistakes. Can somebody in the IRB please be MAN enough and say: "Sorry - we screwed up with the Botha decision" and withdraw the ban. Oh, I forgot - British attitude of "never take responsibility for your own actions" coming through strong again.

Even the commentary on Radio 5 Live was so one-sided, it was sickening! In the second test Matt Dawson was "outraged" at the penalty in the dying seconds of the game. Even though the laws of rugby state that you are not allowed to make contact with a player who is airborne taking a catch. But then, we always hear on UK television and commentary that the aim of the game is to win, regardless of what you have to do. That includes cheating ("it is only cheating if you get caught") and playing negatively and trying to use semantics to try and bend the rules.

At least the BIL did not play negatively trying to force the opponents into making mistakes so that they can kick penalties, like the England team (seeing that they don't know how to score tries, which is what the game is supposed to be about!)

The IRB members are not gods. Face your criticism like men, IRB! And acknowledge that you make mistakes! And a good leader is one that acknowledge his own mistakes.

Rugby is a MANs game... if you want to play touch rugby, go play LEAGUE!!!!

Posted 19:13 07th July 2009

willmarks says...

It is a shame there is such partisanship in this debate. People who invest so much of their own being into a team's victory diminish the true drama of sport. The series was highly entertaining, contested by two committed teams who threw themselves into the competition for their own glory, not ours!

It is hard to pick a winner in this contest. The Springboks won two games but were outscored in the series. No moaning about the changes for match three - there were plenty on both sides. Watching club rugby after this will seems like small beer...

Posted 18:22 07th July 2009