Northern Edition

Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Brits ban causes outrage on Twitter

Schalk Brits remonstrates with referee after red card. (Photo by Steve Haag/Gallo Images/Getty Images)

The all South African affair between the Sharks and the Bulls at Kings Park Stadium on Saturday proved to be a heated encounter, as the visitors came away with a 19-16 win. But it was not without its controversy as hookers Schalk Brits and Akker van der Merwe both received red cards for a brawl in the second half.

ADVERTISEMENT

However, the thing that has caused consternation from fans on Twitter is the fact that Schalk Brits has received a four week ban, while Akker van der Merwe only has a three week ban. This is despite many fans feeling that the Sharks hooker was the aggressor in this situation, and Brits was acting in self-defence.

Furthermore, many feel that this was a headbutt from van der Merwe, and potential gouging as his hands covered Brits’ eyes, as well as the barrage of punches landed on the former Saracens forward. Brits is not completely innocent, as he did throw punches, but that pales into insignificance compared to what he received.

While some fans have been quick to point out that the reason Brits’ ban was longer is because he has a history of striking players on two different occasions, many feel that that still is not a good enough reason to have a longer ban.

This is what the fans have been saying:

https://twitter.com/hendrivanwyk13/status/1113022409240711168

https://twitter.com/MarcRhodri/status/1113039245982265344

https://twitter.com/wjstoman/status/1112763116478259200

ADVERTISEMENT

While a decision like this would always cause a stir, this seems to go much further than simply a ban for two players. Many South African fans are saying that this is the problem with rugby currently, and have not only directed their anger at SANZAAR’s judicial system, but explained that this is why viewing figures for rugby are dwindling. They are saying that there is too much inconsistency, and some players and teams get preferential treatment over others. It is hard to argue with that in this circumstance, as van der Merwe’s actions seem far more acrimonious.

As it turns out, both players will miss the same amount of matches, but it seems to be the principle in this case, and Brits’ longer ban has caused outrage.

You may also like: Sharks presser ahead of Lions showdown

Video Spacer

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

0 Comments
Be the first to comment...

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 5 hours ago
Does South Africa have a future in European competition?

I rated Lowe well enough to be an AB. Remember we were picking the likes of George Bridge above such players so theres no disputing a lot of bad decisions have been made by those last two coaches. Does a team like the ABs need a finicky winger who you have to adapt and change a lot of your style with to get benefit from? No, not really. But he still would have been a basic improvement on players like even Savea at the tail of his career, Bridge, and could even have converted into the answer of replacing Beauden at the back. Instead we persisted with NMS, Naholo, Havili, Reece, all players we would have cared even less about losing and all because Rieko had Lowe's number 11 jersey nailed down.


He was of course only 23 when he decided to leave, it was back in the beggining of the period they had started retaining players (from 2018 onwards I think, they came out saying theyre going to be more aggressive at some point). So he might, all of them, only just missed out.


The main point that Ed made is that situations like Lowe's, Aki's, JGP's, aren't going to happen in future. That's a bit of a "NZ" only problem, because those players need to reach such a high standard to be chosen by the All Blacks, were as a country like Ireland wants them a lot earlier like that. This is basically the 'ready in 3 years' concept Ireland relied on, versus the '5 years and they've left' concept' were that player is now ready to be chosen by the All Blacks (given a contract to play Super, ala SBW, and hopefully Manu).


The 'mercenary' thing that will take longer to expire, and which I was referring to, is the grandparents rule. The new kids coming through now aren't going to have as many gp born overseas, so the amount of players that can leave with a prospect of International rugby offer are going to drop dramatically at some point. All these kiwi fellas playing for a PI, is going to stop sadly.


The new era problem that will replace those old concerns is now French and Japanese clubs (doing the same as NRL teams have done for decades by) picking kids out of school. The problem here is not so much a national identity one, than it is a farm system where 9 in 10 players are left with nothing. A stunted education and no support in a foreign country (well they'll get kicked out of those countries were they don't in Australia).


It's the same sort of situation were NZ would be the big guy, but there weren't many downsides with it. The only one I can think was brought up but a poster on this site, I can't recall who it was, but he seemed to know a lot of kids coming from the Islands weren't really given the capability to fly back home during school xms holidays etc. That is probably something that should be fixed by the union. Otherwise getting someone like Fakatava over here for his last year of school definitely results in NZ being able to pick the cherries off the top but it also allows that player to develop and be able to represent Tonga and under age and possibly even later in his career. Where as a kid being taken from NZ is arguably going to be worse off in every respect other than perhaps money. Not going to develop as a person, not going to develop as a player as much, so I have a lotof sympathy for NZs case that I don't include them in that group but I certainly see where you're coming from and it encourages other countries to think they can do the same while not realising they're making a much worse experience/situation.

144 Go to comments
LONG READ
LONG READ Does South Africa have a future in European competition? Does South Africa have a future in European competition?
Search