Northern Edition

Select Edition

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

Dupont slammed for comments after World Cup exit

(Photo by Paul Harding/Getty Images)

Joel Jutge, World Rugby’s head of match officials, has slammed France captain Antoine Dupont for the remarks he made following his team’s exit from the World Cup.

ADVERTISEMENT

Following France’s 28-29 loss at the hands of the Springboks in the quarterfinals of the World Cup, the French captain used the post-match press conference to complain about the quality of the officiating on the day.

Jutge has now hit out at the Les Bleus scrumhalf for the remarks he made in an interview with French publication Midi Olympique.

Video Spacer

Red Roses Head Coach: John Mitchell excited for RWC 2025

Video Spacer

Red Roses Head Coach: John Mitchell excited for RWC 2025

Jutge specified that he does not condone Dupont’s comments, however the former international referee aims to counter the various “movements of abuse and threats” against match officials caused by these declarations.

At the post-match press conference, Dupont said: “There are clear and obvious situations which have not been whistled but I don’t want to get angry… I’m not sure that the refereeing was up to the level of the challenge”.

In an interview granted exclusively to Midi Olympique, the boss of the men with the whistle explains why the content of the Toulouse player’s comments could have a negative impact: “As responsible for the referees, I cannot endorse what Antoine Dupont said, because it gave rise to a terrible wave of abuse and hatred online towards Ben (O’Keeffe).

“But I know the man, and I have no doubt about his moral values and the way he perceives the exchanges between referees and players. He is a huge champion and a good person whom we respect, but I repeat, I do not condone what he said that day. We all know that he was under enormous pressure to return following his injury.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Jutge, as the boss of referees, also calls for protecting the profession from the various abuses that can impact match officials and reveals that he is worried about the physical safety of the officials.

“I had anticipated that if France were eliminated in the quarter-finals, it would be difficult for us, because of the emotion it would arouse.

“To be honest, I had thought that it would perhaps be necessary to to be able to physically protect our referees, because I felt a drift coming, with this very strong enthusiasm behind the XV of France.

“It was not necessary because the security at the Stade de France works very well But we must not hide that the days following the quarter-final were difficult.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Related

ADVERTISEMENT

LIVE

{{item.title}}

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

20 Comments
R
Red and White Dynamight 340 days ago

French referees have significantly contributed to some of the worst rugby officials ever. Of more recent times Garces, Poite, Raynal - always refereeing to their own rule book; strict application 1 minute, complete disregard the next. Random unexplainable decisions by French referees filled match highlight reels, closer to watching a sitcom with canned laughter. Raynal in the Bledisloe Cup, clown.

S
S 342 days ago

Storm in a teacup. In context of Rassie & co’s shenanigans, this is just not worth the time focusing on.

P
Peter 343 days ago

DuPont's comments are very mild when compared to what would have happened if SA lost. Rassie would have had another major melt down and made another movie length video of himself moaning and groaning. The referees made sure that was avoided at all costs.

P
Pecos 343 days ago

Dupont = crybaby.

G
GrandDisse 343 days ago

Jutge: “But I know the man, and I have no doubt about his moral values and the way he perceives the exchanges between referees and players. He is a huge champion and a good person whom we respect, but I repeat, I do not condone what he said that day.”

Rugbypass: “Dupont slammed for comments”

T
Thomas 343 days ago

And rightfully so. He was being a stereotypical French sore loser. When they’re winning, it’s because how great they are, when they’re losing, it’s the ref’s fault. Give me a break, crybaby. There are no words for how embarrassing this chauvinistic nonsense is.
The notion, that a ref would whistle against the French in France is so ridiculously absurd, I can’t wrap my head around it.

So no, Antoine. You lost, because you got outworked by a team, that wanted it more, was less entitled, and didn’t moan as much.

When your conversion gets charged down by the shortest player on the field, when you miss multiple penalties, when you shank a kick for touch so badly, that you lose territory instead of gaining it, when you’re treading water in the defense so much, that the only players you can scramble to get close to the opposition team’s biggest juggernaught carrying 5m away from your line is two backs, you simply don’t deserve to win, and there is zero blame anywhere else, but in the mirror.

m
mjp89 343 days ago

Thought at the time he was being an extremely sore loser and some sort of punishment was needed.

Load More Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

J
JW 3 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
TRENDING
TRENDING Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC Leinster player ratings vs Connacht | 2024/25 URC
Search