In a somewhat tersely-worded statement, SANZAAR this morning confirmed that Sharks Director of Rugby Gary Gold will attend a disciplinary hearing relating to his “conduct” during the Crusaders game on 26 March.
“SANZAAR has completed an investigation into the alleged conduct of Sharks’ head coach Gary Gold during the Sharks v Crusaders match played at Growthpoint KINGS PARK on 26 March 2016.
SANZAAR has referred the matter for a hearing in accordance with SANZAAR’s Disciplinary Rules.
The matter will be heard by SANZAAR Judicial Officer Nigel Hampton QC via teleconference on Tuesday 5 April 2016: 16:00 (AEST), 18:00 (NZST), 08:00 (SAST), 03:00 (ART).
SANZAAR will be making no further comment until this process has been completed.”
This one has been kept very quiet up until now and it’s really not clear exactly what Gold is alleged to have done. It’s no secret that he as a little frustrated about a number of TMO calls during the game, but certainly kept his mouth shut about that during post match comments. We await further news and will let you know once we have it.
Tweet
Um… Okay. Wonder what he did that was so bad.
Maybe he farted in the press conference?
I read on another site that he used the F word.
I’m not sure if this is factually correct.
Probably had a word with mr. referee at halftime about his mysterious scrum interpretations…..same as Cheika a few years ago.
SANZAAR have decided the Gary’s use of reverse psychology in suggesting his team deserved to lose is bringing the game of rugby into disrupte.
Or he took the last Haribo sweet during a board meeting which sparked a mass tantrum, incidents of biting, and numerous hours of consoling by the members mothers.
IMO the second one is more plausible based on my perception of how a SANZAAR meeting actually unfolds.
@Bump (Comment 3) : which site?
@gregkaos (Comment 5) :
😆 😀
Very strange indeed?!?!
SANZAAR have finally decided enough is enough with Gold’s continuous references to character.
Well lets hope it had something to do with the refs having technology and not using it properly.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 9) : hahaha you would he so lucky!!!
http://m.sarugbymag.co.za/mobilecomponents/basicpostview.php?lastpage=0&slug=/neutral-referees-in-super-rugby
SANZAAR have been a real Gold mine of information about the charges here.
Hopefully the Sharks have a Gold standard legal team.
Correct TMO decisions these days are like Gold dust.
Usually our coach’s behaviour is as good as Gold.
Our coach normally seems like such a laid back and well mannered chap. Quite obviously, all that glitters is not Gold.
The pot of Gold here is if SANZAAR accepts that the TMO should have reviewed Willie’s run with a little more consideration and care.
This unwanted sideshow proves that a coach who keeps his cool about iffy ref issues is worth his weight in Gold.
It’s hard to truly question our coach’s motives though, as he normally has a heart of Gold.
Our coach will need to show bucket loads of character if he wants to strike Gold with the SANZAAR judicial enquiry.
Our coach may just have learned the hard lesson that silence is Golden.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 22) : I think Gary could be in contact soon asking you to write his biography
@SheldonK (Comment 23) : that would just make me a cheap Gold digger.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 24) : Touche! That comment struck comedy Gold…! ;mrgreen:
@Culling Song (Comment 25) : Not all that glitters is Gold however…
Don’t know about the SANZAAAAAAAAR charges, but the Sharks would certainly have a leg to stand on if they were to charge Gary for bringing them in disrepute; I mean, that hairstyle and sartorial sense….
Is Jaco Peyeper the Golden Thread that runs through all this nonsense.
@Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 28) : he is certainly no Golden boy with the Golden touch.
After this disciplinary debacle, it’s possibly time to offer our coach a Golden handshake and be done with it.
@50shadesofshark (Comment 12) : It was bound to be brought up at some stage. I thought Berry was very harsh on the Saders last week. Berry blew the Lions out of a game against the Bulls at some stge, he was made to miss a few matches and now I think he is super sensitive in any game that the Lions play. Its probably a subconscious thing but I think he should rather just not ref any Lions games for a while.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 30) : Not yet, for in his mind he can see the victory parade along the Golden Mile.
@Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 31) : the Crusaders are the epitome of smart. They talk about neutral referees only after they beat the team touted as SA’s best at their home ground. Nobody can accuse them of having a whinge.
I think in essence neutral referees sounds like a great idea but you have to remember why we did away with them in the first place… every SA vs NZ tussle was refereed by the largely incompetent Australian refs and that caused FAR more controversy and suggestions of bias than the present set up does…
@Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 31) : think the saders were blown correctly,and trying to shift attention from what they do -especially at the scrums.call for neutral refs was made by forwards coach.neck roll was spot-on .saders did it numerous times in the match in dbn without being penalised.think the ref had a look at the match they played there and knew what to look for.
r170 000 fine.
Our resident and unbiased referee expert, 50shadesofshark, has given us his golden nugget of wisdom.
In his finding Hampton concluded that, by his own admission, Gold had approached the TMO on two separate occasions (65th and 71st minutes) and had used crude and insulting language towards the official.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 36) : someone has to try and bring reason and facts to the lynching 🙂
Good to see a coach care enough to have a go. Good on Gold.
There aren’t enough swear words to adequately describe the TMO’s currently employed.
@50shadesofshark (Comment 34) : Im not surprised that the call was from the forwards coach, because I think that is where they feel they were shafted, particularly at scrum time. No one is gioing to bitch about being blown for a neck roll when the incident is there for the world to see. Neutral refs will have no bearing on that but they may well take a less one sided view of 50/50 scrum infringements.
@Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 40) : if it is a 50/50 call in the mind of the ref,then he should not blow for a penalty.have a reset scrum.the question is if the saders were “done in”.in the 1st half of the sharks game,they came away with the scrum infringements.now they get penaised in jhb,and suddenly the call is for neutral refs?
When it comes to neutrality NZ and AUS have far more in common with each other than they do with SA. NZ and AUS can never provide a truly neutral front with another third member. Going back to neutral refs is “let’s get the Japies” all over again.
@nortie (Comment 39) : Yep, I feel the same way, it probably didnt help that the TMO was the same one that shafted the Sharks badly in the one game against the Bulls that that Van Heerden bloke blew.
give the coaches the opportunity to ask for reviews?and question a decision with a review?
The manner in which Gold vented his frustration cant be condoned so he deserves the fine. However, i can sympathise with the frustration and what seems to be no recourse on inadequate TMOs whose decisions influence matches greatly…and there have been some shockers this year already
@SheldonK (Comment 45) : They can gladly hire me to make our dissatisfaction verbally known to the ref and TMO
@50shadesofshark (Comment 41) : I dont know why they just dont have neutral refs, it will take so much doubt out of the equation. Actually I think I would prefer non South African refs for Sharks games as well.
@KingRiaan (Comment 46) : Im also willing to do ref uittrap duty.
@SheldonK (Comment 45) : Problem is now Gold and by association, the Sharks, are going to be seen as the bad boys and will have to be extra cautious with their approach to officials.
Allow the coach one opportunity for a review mid match – similar to what they do in NFL when they throw those little white hankies on the field.
@Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 49) : it didn’t stop Cheika and his Waratahs on their march to a first time trophy and it shouldn’t be used as an excuse for the Sharks.
@KingRiaan (Comment 46) : it will be a very expensive job!!!
@Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 43) :
Yep, that was a horrible call that day, messed up my prediction as well, the low life 😆
He who hails from Petoorsdorp and wears a Blou Bul onderbroekie
@Salmonoid the Subtle (Comment 47) :
It boggles the mind. It can’t be because of funds, when the Sharks and Bulls played a few weeks ago, a Kiwi was ref. the next day at Newlands we played the Brumbies with Jaco, if I remember correctly, but anyway, a SA ref.
Why didn’t SANZAAR just switch the two?
Some refs will overcompensate to prove they are not bias, thereby screwing their own countrymen over, others are just plain bias, doesn’t matter how we spin it.
Then, when you are deemed not good enough to ref anymore, or your eyesight has left you, they put you in front of a TV monitor and you continue to stuff up and make bad calls.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 50) : And who will be the judge of the review? Who will review the call? The same TMO?
@nortie (Comment 54) : remember we’re dealing with SANZAAJAAJAAR and for them logic is a very difficult concept!!!
@Ben (Comment 55) : Good question…
@JD (Comment 56) :
Sigh…true.
@Ben (Comment 55) : @pastorshark (Comment 57) : yes probably he will be ask to review his own call!?!?!?!
@JD (Comment 59) : That would be a flaw in the system…pretty pointless…
@Ben (Comment 55) : good question. There should perhaps be a proper timeout session. And the referee in conjunction with the TMO looks at the incident again with extra care and consideration. They already do this with the ref now encouraged to view the incident on the big screen and to make the decision INSTEAD of the TMO. It can only be better to have two sets of eyes instead of the just the TMO’s.
The problem is, in most cases the ref would already have reviewed the incident by this stage on the big screen and would have contributed to the TMO decision being questioned. But it will apply to the very small handful of examples like Willie’s try where the TMO appeared to make a very swift and rash decision (and very important decision) by viewing one angle and not taking advantage of other angles and slow motion shots – and where the ref on field didn’t play a part or just accepted the TMO’s decision.
It’s a pity more on field refs don’t copy Nigel Owens. At least he isn’t scared to make up his own mind once he has viewed an incident.
We saw again this weekend where the on field ref decided to card the Kings player for a no arm tackle, but the TMO was having none of it.
The magic words are “must I show it to you again” and the ref backs down
@nortie (Comment 62) : for sure think some refs are just to glad to hand the decision to someone else because then they can’t be blamed!!!
@Gold’s Member (Comment 61) : I’m sure this R150k fine would have made a solid down-payment on a proper stadium screen – that will negate the need for the TMO at Kings Park.
That Nokia 5110 screen masquerading as the Kings Park stadium screen is laughable.
Get the Tahs on the line, and find out where they bought that screen of theirs.
@FireTheLooser (Comment 64) : think Gold is supposed to pay the fine! Is the screen really that bad?
@JD (Comment 63) :
That’s the truth.
We hardly see a try that is not referred these days.
@JD (Comment 65) : That screen is a sad excuse….have heard the ref tell the tmo on a few occasions (in previous games) tell the tmo that he’ll have to make the himself, as the ref couldn’t see on the screen what happened .
I’m sure GG would much rather have contributed his R150k toward a new stadium screen.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 61) : ” And the referee in conjunction with the TMO looks at the incident again with extra care and consideration.”
That makes sense and all, but that’s exactly what they are supposed to be doing already. That’s why TMO’s were brought into rugby. They know very well what’s at stake, but they just don’t seem to care.
I don’t think they have TMO’s in the NFL like we have in rugby. Only when the on-field decision is challenged, then it gets referred to a TMO. Not 100% sure, though.
Vanmartin might be able to help us out, I know he watches a bit of NFL.
NFL, could also call it GRL, whatever tickles your fancy.
@FireTheLooser (Comment 67) : that is sad! Maybe if it’s upgraded then more people will go?!?!
@Ben (Comment 68) : @Ben (Comment 69) : for sure can’t see any reason for the TMO to get it wrong but it still happens!!!
@Ben (Comment 68) : my issue with the Willie call was how nonchalantly Skeef Greeff approached the whole incident. When I watched the same single replay as he did, in normal speed, I could not tell if Willie was off side, so I just do not know how Skeef Greeff could call it so confidently. And, as a corollary, why the ref on the field was happy to go along with such a swift review.
The problem for me now is I have absolutely no confidence in Greeff’s abilities and even worse, I suspect he has an issue with the Sharks.
@Ben (Comment 69) : When instant replay was first used in the NFL, there was an official in a booth reviewing and making the call. Now the ref has a small studio (concealed by curtains) alongside the field, with three large touchscreens and the ability to control all replay angles. The referee (head onfield official in the NFL) then makes the call himself, after reviewing the play field side. Seems to work for the NFL now.
We also have to understand, that they also have all fixed camera angles with the ability to overlay parallel lines across the field with incredible accuracy, something like that would have helped win the Willie try.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 73) : That last paragraph…spot on…exactly that… #goodgreeffitsskeefgreeff
I see Kurt Coleman is out for the season…that gives the Stormers a flyhalf headache…
@Gold’s Member (Comment 73) : Exactly. He didn’t do what he was supposed to do. He is incompetent.
@Dancing Bear (Comment 74) : “We also have to understand, that they also have all fixed camera angles with the ability to overlay parallel lines across the field with incredible accuracy, something like that would have helped win the Willie try.”
That’s all irrelevant, uncle. He didn’t even bother to look at more than one camera angle. I’m sure there were more available, but maybe he had something more important to do. Maybe he needed to request lives on Facebook for his Candy Crush. 🙄
@pastorshark (Comment 76) :
Yep, before the season started if you had posted that, I’m sure many Stormer fans would have been silently relieved (not because we want him injured, but because he had our blood boiling last year) but he hasn’t played to poorly and has slotted some goals, which is a huge improvement on last year.
Not the most exciting flyhalf around, but I can’t think back far enough to remember when we actually had an exciting flyhalf…Robbie Blair maybe?
Pity young Du Preez is injured, now we will have to see what Carel’s son is made of.
And, we have Schalk, if he was good enough for HM to play 10 at the WC, he should be good enough to play 10 at SR
@Dancing Bear (Comment 74) : I was actually thinking of you while I was writing my comment about the NFL. Didn’t think we’d have the honour of you popping in to have a say. 😉
PS: Honour has the same meaning as honor in the US. 😆
@Ben (Comment 80) : The only difference is the Yanks spell it wrong. 🙂
@Dancing Bear (Comment 74) : only problem with that is I think it takes a lot of extra time and will have matches dragged out even more?!
@nortie (Comment 79) : hahaha ja but what number will the blindside loosie wear as I think Schalk will not give up his number?
@Ben (Comment 81) : according to my wife there’s a couple of words that the Yanks spell wrong!!!
@JD (Comment 84) : A lot more than a couple!
@Ben (Comment 80) : I am honored to be honoured!
I did learn to spell in SA you know.
My point was that each camera has a virtual representation of the field associated with each camera location, therefore any angle can have an accurate overlay with a line directly across the field with great accuracy. One view freeze frame as the ball touches his foot, and if Willie has a foot behind the virtual line in that one view, presto, he is onside.
@JD (Comment 82) : I don’t think that method would work for rugby. There are so many extended breaks in NFL, it is almost not noticeable anymore. Personally I prefer no review with rugby, it is a flowing continuous game and anything that adds more breaks is just not on in my opinion. I say live with the onfield mistakes by refs and assistant refs, try using neutral refs and just learn to cope from there. Any review just takes away from the match in my opinion.
@Dancing Bear (Comment 87) : I disagree. Can you imagine if that Crusaders try had been allowed after that foot in touch? You’d have been livid. The answer is to use the technology to get as close as possible to flawless decision making, but to do it as unobtrusively and swift as possible.
The current system works but for the idiot behind the screen. The Kiwis want a one shop TMO production centre based in one place to officiate in all matches. It also doesn’t need ex referees but just the best people at making decisions on TV footage. Apparently they do this in the NRL and it works much better.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 88) : Respectfully, please don’t speak about how I would emotionally react to any situation in a rugby match. I understand you may be livid, and I respect that, personally I would not be, mistakes happen, and believe it or not sometimes, the wrong call goes the Sharks way. I prefer a more zen approach to my rugby watching. 😉
@Dancing Bear (Comment 89) : ok…………. “almost everyone else but a Zen master” would be livid.
Why should we take the calls that go against us just because some other dodgy call will at some stage yin and yang its way for us? 🙄 The technology is there. We would all have seen it on our TV screens or at the stadium before the conversion is kicked to resounding boos anyway. The obvious and only answer is to use the technology but find a more effective decision making process. Hence my reference to the NRL TMO Bunker………
Anyyyway. I’ve noticed that this Wynne Gray oke is a bit of a chop. There’s a definite anti-SA trend in his writing too.
http://m.nzherald.co.nz/rugby/news/article.cfm?c_id=80&objectid=11617517
The most embarrassing part of this article by him is that he thinks Gary Gold is the Stormers coach.
“Ban him for a month to let him think over the situation if the roles were reversed. How would Gold respond if the TMO came into the coaches box during a game to challenge and abused him about the Stormers performance?”
Idiot.
@Gold’s Member (Comment 90) : I’m not advocating my approach to rugby watching, or trying to convince anyone, that wouldn’t be very zen would it? 😉
I fully understand what emotions a strong supporter goes through when calls go against their team, I was like that when I was younger.
I suppose that the mention of gridiron in this thread had me comparing the two, and I have always loved the continuous flowing nature of rugby union vs the stop start…explosion then nothing of league and gridiron. I feel that any more interruption to that flow takes away from the beauty of the game I love. Therefore, I personally, would be willing to put up with a few missed calls to see a flowing match. I realise I am in the minority in this respect.
@nortie (Comment 79) :
Brilliant…
@nortie (Comment 79) : But you’re right, since du Preez’s injury, Coleman has been better than he has arguably ever been for you…not brilliant, but ok to good. Having him and du Preez out is a headache…but I’m interested to see how the youngsters go now…
@Ben (Comment 80) :
@Gold’s Member (Comment 88) : I’m with you…
@Gold’s Member (Comment 88) : At the moment the TMO is pretty much only used when there are natural stoppages in the game anyway (try scored yes/no, dirty play). I don’t think the fact that a TMO can be used detracts from the game or hugely disrupts it. I do think some of the TMOs themselves do that… 😀
@Gold’s Member (Comment 90) :
Twit…
@Dancing Bear (Comment 91) : I can definitely understand your sentiment when comparing how much rugby flows compared to gridiron…but at the moment, with rugby using a TMO, it still flows infinitely more than gridiron. The ability to use a TMO is a positive development for rugby…yes, it was overdone at the last world cup and that certainly irritated…other than that, you just need a bit of an improvement in available technology and a major improvement in the quality of actual TMOs… 😆
@pastorshark (Comment 98) : I pretty much agree with your view there. Interesting just chatting to a ref mate of mine…he says when they sit with their reviewer and go over some contentious calls during the game they work on the principal that if you need to have more than 3 views of the incident to make a decision then the onfield ref’s decision is correct. So using that to speed up the TMO decision perhaps only allow them 3 views and then make a call. Looking at the 10th ultra slow motion from the ant’s perspective takes far too long…and then they often come up with a crazy conclusion anyway
@Gold’s Member (Comment 90) : I think he is a total chop and a fat chancer, he writes his article as if Gold went into the TMO’s box while decisions were pending and tried to influence their outcome.