Northern Edition
Select Edition
Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
New Zealand New Zealand
France France

Jaco Peyper denied in 'robust and direct terms' a Nic Berry claim

(Photo by Ashley Western/MB Media/Getty Images)

It has emerged from the evidence given at the Rassie Erasmus misconduct hearing that Test level referee Jaco Peyper was at odds with his colleague Nic Berry regarding their recollection of a telephone call between them last July in the wake of the first Test win by the Lions over the Springboks. The fallout from that match resulted in this week’s heavy sanction for Erasmus, the Springboks director, who was banned from all rugby for two months and from any matchday involvement until the end of September 2022.

ADVERTISEMENT

The suspension stemmed from criticisms made by Erasmus about Berry, the Australian referee who was in charge of the Test series opener in Cape Town, and the 80-page written judgment published since the ban was announced has shed light on how the entire case played out.

One sticking point went unresolved, however – the different opinions that were given in evidence by Peyper, a South African referee, and Berry regarding the phone call that took place between them at 7:51pm on July 25, the day after the Lions has struck the first blow in the Test series against the Springboks. 

Video Spacer

Freddie Burns on whether the Springboks will target England’s Maro Itoje and Marcus Smith on Saturday

Freddie Burns | All Access
Freddie Burns joins Jim Hamilton as the pair look ahead to this weekend's mouth watering clash between England and South Africa at Twickenham.
Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Duration 22:29
Loaded: 0%
Stream Type LIVE
Remaining Time 22:29
 
1x
    • Chapters
    • descriptions off, selected
    • captions off, selected
    • en (Main), selected
    Video Spacer

    Freddie Burns on whether the Springboks will target England’s Maro Itoje and Marcus Smith on Saturday

    Their detailed evidence was set out in the post-hearing document published by the judicial committee. In it, it outlined what was said at the hearing by Berry and fellow referee Peyper. “I’m able to get Jaco on the phone,” said Berry. “We speak for ten minutes. He tells me that Rassie has called him and wants him to comment on the clips.

    “Jaco refuses and said that it is unprofessional and out of protocol. He says that Rassie is putting AJ Jacobs under pressure to comment on the clips as he is in camp with the SA team. We discuss the fact that Rassie has threatened to leak footage on social media. I ask Jaco for his advice and he suggests that I should try and get ahead of it and respond to Rassie’s clips.”

    In contrast, Peyper claimed: “Mr Berry did not indicate to me that Rassie threatened to leak footage on social media. He only asked for my advice whether he should provide answers to the video clips received from the Springbok management team and I recommended that from experience he should do so, as that often defuses the media reporting the next day as teams now engage with the referee and not the mainstream rugby media.

    “My view, as expressed to Mr Berry during the telephonic conversation, was that it would be preferable for him to engage with the Springbok management team rather than to ignore the request as in my experience, providing a response has had the effect of diffusing tensions between coaches and referees. This, in turn, leads to fewer comments in the media about refereeing decisions from previous matches and an increased focus on preparations for upcoming matches.”

    ADVERTISEMENT

    In their summation of these two contradictory pieces of evidence, the judicial committee wrote: “We considered with care the evidence of Jacob Peyper. He denied that during the call at 19.51 that night Nic Berry told him that Rassie Erasmus had threatened to leak the clips on social media. He denied in robust and direct terms that Nic Berry showed him a draft version of his statement which Nic Berry said he approved.

    “Nic Berry was more circumspect in his evidence and characterised the difference as one of recollection. We do not need to resolve that dispute between refereeing colleagues. There is ample evidence, which we accept, which supports Nic Berry’s version of events.”

    ADVERTISEMENT
    LIVE

    Finals | Rugby Africa Cup

    South Africa v Argentina | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

    France v New Zealand | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

    England v Wales | World Rugby U20 Championship | Extended Highlights

    Tattoos & Rugby: Why are tattoos so popular with sportspeople? | Amber Schonert | Rugby Rising Locker Room Season 2

    Lions Share | Episode 3

    Zimbabwe vs Kenya | Rugby Africa Cup Semi Final | Full Match Replay

    USA vs Spain | Men's International | Full Match Replay

    Portugal vs Ireland | Men's International | Full Match Replay

    Trending on RugbyPass

    Comments

    13 Comments
    C
    Chris 1336 days ago

    Nick Berry lmao, running to mommy with his fruitcake, Rassie you total gangsta. It's good for World Rugby, has anyone else witnessed a substantial improvement in refereeing since?? It's been like a day and night change. They totally pulled their socks up after that video.

    R
    R 1337 days ago

    Nic Berry is a third rate referee and everyone knows this, not wanting to agree does not change this, the facts surrounding his shocking performance bear testimony to this.


    Hounding Rassie because he had had enough of this poor refereeing is the issue, not whether Berry is useless, as this is already well known by all!

    N
    Niel 1337 days ago

    _

    j
    james 1338 days ago

    Why a witch hunt case? Is it to save the referees because it seems that some of them is getting paid to determine the outcome.......little bit of crit is not bad , learn from your mistakes

    B
    Brad 1338 days ago

    Baaahhh,

    A South African Ref siding with another South African, would you expect anything different?

    L
    LL 1338 days ago

    And World Rugby claimed the lying Aussie had no reason to lie. But it is clear he did and his reason too is clear: to make himself a victim instead of an incompetent.

    D
    DP 1338 days ago

    This is pure gold. Showing the due process as a witch hunt, taking a liar Ozzie prima Donna’s word over someone else’s just to prove your point. You’ve just thrown Peyper under the bus who just happens to be one of the best refs you’ve actually got.

    B
    Brad 1338 days ago

    "Peyper......one of the best refs you’ve actually got"

    Really, you must be a Saffa!

    g
    gavin 1338 days ago

    How do you know Peyper isnt wrong? He might have forgotten the conversation

    Load More Comments

    Join free and tell us what you really think!

    Sign up for free
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Latest Features

    Comments on RugbyPass

    TRENDING
    TRENDING 'Future is very, very bright': Junior Boks boss on superstar compared to Dupont Junior Boks boss on superstar compared to Antoine Dupont