Etzebeth suspended.

Courtesy Supersport.

Eben Etzebeth will miss South Africa’s Rugby Championship clash with New Zealand after the big lock was found guilty of foul play by a Sanzar judicial hearing on Monday and banned for two weeks.

Etzebeth was found guilty of “contravening Law 10.4 (a) Punching or Striking after he was cited during the match at the weekend between Australia and South Africa in The Rugby Championship.

Etzebeth had appeared to aim a headbutt at Australia’s Nathan Sharpe in the 25th minute of the two teams’ Rugby Championship clash in Perth last Saturday.

Etzebeth has been one of the most consistent performers since Heyneke Meyer took over as Springbok coach and his absence will leave a huge hole in the South Africa team which will play the All Blacks in Dunedin on Saturday.

Meyer, speaking just hours before the result of Etzebeth’s hearing was made known, spoke of what the potential loss of the lock would mean for the team.

“It will be a big loss. I have a lot of respect for Flip (Van der Merwe) but I really believe that Eben, as a 20-year-old, is playing superb rugby. He was awesome last weekend and he will be one of the greats going forward,” Meyer told a news conference in Auckland.

“It will be a huge setback because we have some sort of continuity in our tight five now and he has done well with Juandre (Kruger). I believe that Eben has improved in every single test he has played and, even though he is a youngster, he is a huge physical presence,” he added.

Nigel Hampton QC, who heard the judicial hearing, did not mince his words when describing why he had administered his punishment.

“I was satisfied that this was not an attempt just to push the opposing player away by using his head without contact being made. The player brought his forehead forward and downward with a degree of speed and force into the nose area of the opposing player making contact with that player. This was a deliberate act done as a part of an episode of escalating “Holly Wilaboobie for tat” pushing and shoving between the two players. As to sanction, intentional striking with the head into the face of another is not to be countenanced under any circumstances,” said Hampton in a statement.

Lock Bakkies Botha is expected to be called up to the squad as a replacement

Biltong wrote:Agree on both counts, but this infuriates me to no end. firstly I hate that rugby has become a game of "outwitting referees, out taunting young players"
the IRB should really consider the guy that starts the whole thing should be banned as well, if you are using it to milk penalties or bans you are as guilty as the guy retaliating in my eyes.

AlastairW wrote:After seeing that i was surprised he wasn't seeing red to be honest. Contact or not, the intention was there and he should not have played out that game.

anotherworldofpain wrote:Speaking of about foul play:

I thought the inicident near the end that was lauded by Kearnsy and Marto where I think it was AAC put in a tackle on two players warranted a yellow.

You can't tackled the player without the ball. So if you tackle two at once, surely only one can have the ball. Also I thought both, or either hits were very high. He seemed to get Mvovo around the head. The commentators admit it was a try saving tackle, so surely a yellow and consider a penalty try?

Biltong wrote:Yeah, Sharpe is one of those guys that makes fun of the teacher and then blames his best mate.

aucklandlaurie wrote: I actually am pleased that Etzbeth only got one week, it definitely didnt deserve more, however so many of these incidents get sanctions completely out of proportion, plus he was one of the standout young locks in Superxv.

On the Adam Ashley Cooper incident, I thought that was pretty bloody clever.

Biltong wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:Speaking of about foul play:

I thought the inicident near the end that was lauded by Kearnsy and Marto where I think it was AAC put in a tackle on two players warranted a yellow.

You can't tackled the player without the ball. So if you tackle two at once, surely only one can have the ball. Also I thought both, or either hits were very high. He seemed to get Mvovo around the head. The commentators admit it was a try saving tackle, so surely a yellow and consider a penalty try?

i did consider those two issues as well, early tackle or high tackle could have been the call.

But it still doesn't solve the real problems we face.

offload wrote:This was a nothing incident, a bit of gamesmanship and pushing.

Not a good advert for rugby that the lad has been suspended.

Mr Fishpaste wrote:

AlastairW wrote:After seeing that i was surprised he wasn't seeing red to be honest. Contact or not, the intention was there and he should not have played out that game.

Isn't that getting a bit Orwellian! If I intend to hightackle you and miss, should I be sent off? Surely in the moment of contact players are intending to do as much damage to their opponents as possible! Should all mal-intent be penalised then.

Although on the other hand Etzebeth was a fool for being wound up so easily. He should have learned from (was it Steve Thompson) and given old Sharpe a kiss...

AlastairW wrote:... It's always the locks, and i think we now have the spirtual sucessor to Grewcock :p

doctor_grey wrote:

AlastairW wrote:... It's always the locks, and i think we now have the spirtual sucessor to Grewcock :p

To be fair, I think Jamie Cudmore is the spiritual successor to Mr. Grewcock. Maybe even the next, more advanced (ie. lunatic) version. Etzebeth has a long way to go to be included in that august group, don't you think? But much to aspire to. Practise, practise, practise..........

emack2 wrote:Sadly it is part of the game and has been all my long experience of RU.So often the player who reacts instead of the instigator is punished.