The IRB has confirmed that referee Alain Rolland erred in not allowing Australia to make a late substitution against South Africa last Saturday.
The Wallabies were forced to play out the closing stages at Loftus Versfeld a man short, although it did not affect the result as the Springboks had all but sewn up a 31-8 victory.
An IRB statement said that, according to Law 3.12 (exception 2), Australia reserve hooker Saia Fainga'a should have been permitted to replace injured hooker Tatafu Polota-Nau.
Touchline microphones picked up Rolland - an experienced referee who officiated at the 2007 World Cup final - telling the Australians that they could not make any more substitutions as they had already used the usual maximum of seven.
"The area of substitution management is a team effort. This was an unfortunate case of human error by the match officials who accept that they made a mistake," said IRB match official selection committee chairman John Jeffrey.
Australian Rugby Union chief John O'Neill said despite the match officials' inaccuracy, no decisions on the night affected the final result of the Test.
"South Africa were absolutely the better side, we congratulate them, they dominated the match, and that is not up for debate at all," he said in Sydney on Thursday.
"However, given the circumstances where the Wallabies were dealing with a massive and mounting injury toll, it was frustrating and unfair for the team to carry additional burdens.
"The challenges they faced at a ground where no Australian team has ever won were difficult enough.
"So I appreciate the IRB acknowledging the match official team failed to recognise Law 3.12 and allow the Wallabies to play out the match with a full complement of 15 players."
Rolland, who will also referee the match between South Africa and New Zealand in Soweto this Saturday, was assisted in Pretoria by Greg Garner of England and Romain Poite of France, with South African Shaun Veldsman the Television Match Official.
Comments
rugby_rockstar says...
Given how the Boks were completely assendant I can't see that one subsitution sparking a 23pt come back.
However, given how I kinda enjoy giving rugby authority figures hell, I vote we nail Alain to a tree, then dance around it chanting stuff like "You're pants and ya know you are!" until we get bored and go home. then we'll come back in the morning and let him down while saying stuff like, "I hope you've learnt your lesson" and "Well, it was for your own good Alain."
Posted 13:29 17th October 2012
leebok says...
@JjPeanut well said. Those questions need to be answered. AB's are a good team if you play by current ref standards. If you use the true IRB rules they would not be as good and probably not finish a game with 15 men as the persistent offending would result in warnings and cards. EG: apart from the card they did get, Reid should have been carded for deliberately bringing down a rolling maul 3m out, and doing so from an offside position. I still cant believe how that was missed. It was so bad Im starting to think of conspiracy..
Posted 21:10 10th October 2012
JjPeanut says...
...and not to mention Macaw playing the ball on the ground to turn the ball around as the springboks are just one metre from the line. No wonder richie macaw has such a fabulous win record percentage. One set of rules apply to him and the AB's and another set to the springboks. How does a ref miss so many blatant professional fouls? How does Bryce Lawrence continue to ref after his performance at a rugby world cup quarter final between the springboks an the wallabies...oh maybe because part of his contract was to ref exactly as he did and get the desired result for the AB's. The list goes on and on.
Posted 22:52 08th October 2012
JjPeanut says...
...and not to mention Macaw playing the ball on the ground to turn the ball around as the springboks are just one metre from the line. No wonder richie macaw has such a fabulous win record percentage. One set of rules apply to him and the AB's and another set to the springboks. How does a ref miss so many blatant professional fouls? How does Bryce Lawrence continue to ref after his performance at a rugby world cup quarter final between the springboks an the wallabies...oh maybe because part of his contract was to ref exactly as he did and get the desired result for the AB's. The list goes on and on.
Posted 22:52 08th October 2012
JjPeanut says...
Why would Rolland be punished? He was needed for the next match between the AB's and the Springboks. Who else could miss the tip tackle that would have given a springbok a 4 week ban and Reid's goaline infringements in front of Rolland, that would have sent a springbok to the sideline for 10 minutes. How do these events get consistently missed when the AB's infringe and get no punishment. Is it a mistake, inconsistency or similar payroll structures to those we find in cricket match fixing?
Posted 22:06 08th October 2012
Sprogrugby says...
It's true that the ref shouldn't be having to make calls of this nature - 4 & 5s responsibility although of course the ref is sole arbiter. As it seems, 4 & 5 had it right in that they were going to allow Fainga to come on, Rolland overruled and the IRB said he got it wrong (eventually). It would have been smarter for Rolland to go with 4 & 5's call, and if that was proved wrong, then it was on them. As a 4 at super 15 level, the refs were happy for me to make the call and in fact didn't want to get involved.
Posted 08:53 06th October 2012
Ferdie says...
while the ref has to take the blame as 'the man' on the day - what responsibility do the sideline officials have? They are supposed to be keeping tabs on blood bins, times for yellow cards, subsititutions, ensuring no more than 15 on the field for each team (that has happened too) . . . bit much to expect ref to manage all these goings-on on the sideline.
I thought the ref in this case made his decision on the basis of those experts on the sideline?
Posted 08:34 06th October 2012
pierredelot1 says...
Love it. Of all the referees at the so called top level. Mr Rolland is always right. How dare the IRB say he was wrong. Who do they think they are. Scrums should be allowed to remain competative, as the moment they are uncontested the game goes down the pan.
Posted 08:33 06th October 2012
pog_mahone says...
Percewreck - Rolland got it absolutely right and according to the letter of the law when he sent Warburton off. The IRB agreed. This time he didn't - and the IRB agreed. You're pretty unforgiving of his one mistake, haven't you ever made one yourself?
Posted 17:15 05th October 2012
Davoust says...
Lots of sharky welsh around here ... They know their overestimated team had its greatest chance ever last year and now it's gone ... for the next hundred years :(((
Posted 14:29 05th October 2012
rustytrumpet says...
Yet again Rolland makes a balls up. When are the IRB gonna do something about him. He clearly isnt of International standard.
Posted 12:29 05th October 2012
uglea says...
Usually these games have a match coordinator or manager that overseas the process and qualified referees who track the substitutions, cards issued and bllod bins etc.
The call should have come from those people. Perhaps they said they had made the max subsistutions (which is correct) but didnt ex;plain the front row repleacement process.
As an Aussie, I dont think we ever get a fair rub from Rolland
Posted 02:39 05th October 2012
sandal says...
@jontheref
Give them a break?
No. They're test match officials. Rolland has considerable experience. He made a dreadful mistake. He should be accountable.
And he can read the laws of the game while he takes some time off.
Posted 00:35 05th October 2012
Trinats2 says...
ramage, I didn't blame Deans for this, Deans has no idea he has a bench !!!.
I knew the 4th offiical told the Wallaby staff it was fine for the replacement.
I'd be more worried about the breakdown come Sat SA v NZ. Rolland didn't police it at all and I can see it getting messy.
Posted 00:03 05th October 2012
jontheref says...
biggreenmat
The ruling about a player being liable to PK, if he continues running forward, from an offside position, is not negated by the ball going into touch.
This is something the iRB has put out to the member unions to act on.
We had video of it at our recent monthly meeting.
He was correct.
Posted 22:28 04th October 2012
jontheref says...
If there had been a discernable influence on the result, I would give this topic some credence.
Rolland consulted his TJ, ars in modern parlance, and between them, they THOUGHT they had it right.
Give them a break!
Well done Alain, welcome back to Swansea to ref the Ospreys soon!
Posted 19:24 04th October 2012
biggreenmat says...
He got more basic calls wrong than that. He also called a player offsides on a kick into touch. He said the player didn't retire after the kick was in touch and was subsequently thrown in quickly. There is no offsides from a kick straight into touch.
Posted 19:21 04th October 2012
Irishinlondon says...
Rolland checked with his assistant, this is not a common situation so atleast he tried to confirm the ruling, these mistakes will always happen every few years. Apart from that I thinks he had one of his better recent games on the whistle.
As to the people referencing the warburton incident, that is a red by the rule book, he even admitted himself, no malice but still dropped a guy, so give Rolland a break. He has had a poor couple of seasons but I don't include that.
Pearcewreck: you can't start looking at ancestory of refs, the man was a capped international with Ireland, so he has chosen his allegiance!
Posted 17:36 04th October 2012
ArmchairGeneral says...
Worst ref decision, or lack of, was no reds or even yellows or anything for joint spear tackle on BOD off the ball. I will never resist bringing that up for as long as the two players that did it are so highly revered in world rugby. One of them says he had the toughest pack to face this year last Saturday. Lets see if that stands time for more than one week. Yes, still bitter.
Posted 14:58 04th October 2012
Ramage says...
Has there been an apology from the Deans haters No should there be Yes. Has there been an apology from Rolland none that I have seen yet.Should there be YES. Interesting that the IRB have got John Jeffrey a non referee to point out the referee was wrong. The last time a referee was told he was wrong was by the then Head of Referees Paddy O'Brien. Remember all the vitriolic posts. This time it was not the refs boss Jutge but Jeffrey. Will we see a further outpouring from those same scribes? NO. Why not surely as they said it should not be done publicly? Oh we all know why it was not O'Brien making the statement. Seems the IRB have learned something. Oh yes and now its the Welsh supporters time to come out and get their criticisms of Rolland off their chest. Its started expect many more.
Posted 14:49 04th October 2012