The ‘part’ of the Eben Etzebeth ban that frustrates England legend, who makes Rassie Erasmus prediction and issues ‘help us understand’ plea to South African fans
Eben Etzebeth walks to the touchline after his red card in Wales and, inset, Springboks boss Rassie Erasmus
England legend Ben Youngs has expressed his frustration that the ban handed down to South Africa’s Eben Etzebeth for his recent red-carded eye-gouge was reduced to 12 weeks for mitigating factors.
The English men’s record caps holder also gave a prediction about Rassie Erasmus now that he has renewed his Springboks contract through to 2031, and called on South African fans to explain why their support of the club game doesn’t match the passion they have for their national team.
Following on from his November 29 sending off in Cardiff after making contact with the eye of Wales’ Alex Mann, Etzebeth learned last Thursday that he will serve a 12-match ban and won’t play for his club, the Durban-based Sharks, until it expires after a United Rugby Championship game against Cardiff on March 27.
Retired English scrum-half Youngs, though, insisted that the 18-match entry point punishment for the eye-gouge should have stood to send out a more credible message that this type of foul play can’t be tolerated in rugby.
“It has to be 18 or more. It does.”
Instead, the disciplinary hearing committee allowed mitigating factors to be taken into account, reducing the sanction to 12 games much to Youngs’ annoyance.
Speaking on the latest episode of For The Love Of Rugby, the show he co-hosts with Dan Cole, Youngs said: “When you look at it as a whole, I’d say 18 weeks sounds about right. You make contact with someone’s eye and they have basically said that it was intentional; it has to be 18 or more. It does.
“The big issue here, or certainly where people’s frustration is, is the fact the mitigating factors include previous records that then reduce it down to 12. That shouldn’t count in this case.
“You have gouged someone in the eye; 18 weeks sounds about right. That is a hefty ban for something you should never ever do on a rugby field. 18 weeks seems okay. Most people would go, ‘18 weeks, yeah, about appropriate’. But to reduce it down to 12, that shouldn’t be reduced because of previous (good records).
“If you make a high tackle or maybe do a spear tackle and you sort of slip, then I get there is mitigating factors in terms of have they got a clean record previously, how many tackles have they made in their whole career and only have had X-amount of bans?
Eben Etzebeth ‘devastated’ after eye-gouging ban as Sharks put Springboks lock to work
“With something like an eye-gouge, you can’t mess around with a thing like that. For it to be reduced on previous records, I don’t agree with that part. For a lot of people, 18 weeks, they would have gone, ‘Yeah, about right’.
“You have identified it is intentional – well then there is no mitigation in terms of what you have done previously. You have done that intentionally, so yeah, 18 weeks, I would have gone ‘That sounds about right’. Twelve weeks? That is short of what it should be.”
Cole, his fellow retired England centurion, added: “If it was reckless and got reduced down, fair enough, but because it was deemed intentional, to then reduce it down on previous, not just in this case but in general, as soon as it is deemed intentional it should just stay as the ban.”
It was Friday, the day after the Etzebeth ban was confirmed, that SA Rugby changed the narrative by revealing that head coach Erasmus had agreed to a contract extension taking him through to the Rugby World Cup in America.
Sharks to lose Springboks star amid coaching uncertainty while Siya Kolisi fields interest
Erasmus will celebrate his 59th birthday just weeks after that tournament is over and Youngs has predicted the South African won’t be moving overseas once that newly extended deal expires.
“I just don’t see Rassie ever leaving,” he reckoned. “Why would you? He is almost Mr South Africa to the point where I don’t think he would ever coach another national team, I just don’t see it.
“Even when he has had enough of the international stuff, he will always be a consultant or within some sort of set-up within South African rugby. He is embedded in that. What he has done for the game and continues to do for the game is remarkable. You’d be mad to ever let him go anywhere else and I don’t think he will ever want to go anywhere else.
“Great news for all South African fans, and I’m sure great news for him. It’s his country of birth, why wouldn’t you want to coach them? For everyone else, the treadmill of South African dominance continues perhaps.”
Having acknowledged the new Test-level Erasmus contract, Youngs then switched to the club scene and called on South African rugby fans to explain why their franchise teams only attract limited support.
The former Leicester Tigers player spent his career regularly running out to capacity 26,000 crowds at Welford Road, especially for Champions Cup games, and he was left flabbergasted that the Bulls could only generate an attendance of 7,300 for their home game last Saturday despite naming several Springboks in their team to play the star-studded cup holders, Bordeaux.
“If there is only 7,300 attendees for Bordeaux coming over, who are the reigning champions and it is in for a cracking game and it didn’t disappoint, it was fantastic; for such a rugby-mad nation, for a country that is totally behind the Boks and rugby and everything it brings to that country, it baffles me,” he said.
“I don’t really understand why there is a disconnect between the national side and the club teams because you have got the first game of the Investec Champions Cup on the back of the Boks finishing their tour, all the hype around that, a lot of their players returning.
“You look at (Canan) Moodie, for instance, and the try that he scored with the goose, absolutely outrageous. You have got (Handre) Pollard returning, and all these guys, and I look at it and think, ‘Why is there only 7,300 attendees?’ I don’t quite get it.
“Now, I have never been there in terms of watching a club game, so I would like to know some South African insight. Why is the national team, as successful and brilliant as it is and so well supported, and why is the club teams not having that same engagement, especially when it’s a team like Bordeaux coming over?
“It didn’t really make sense to me because in the UK, obviously we have smaller stadiums but the attendances are way more than that and everyone recognises these games are brilliant, especially the Investec Champions Cup ties, because you don’t get to play these teams very often.
“I need some help… Let us understand why that is. What is missing from it? Is it a lack of identity towards the club teams, where you have such an identity with the national team? Help us understand, please.”
