Primal instincts

To adapt the old shot in the foot proverb that has become idiomatic with the game it seems rugby has gone and kicked itself in the face.

I’m referring to the incident involving Robbie Fleck and André Venter during Free State’s 31-26 Currie Cup victory over champions Western Province in Bloemfontein on Saturday.

First up I’ll never cease to be amazed when such outbreaks of anger and violence occur between Springboks.

These are players who have toured together, who have been to a Rugby World Cup together, who have shared those tense and, one would expect, bonding dressing room moments before a crucial test match, who have stood in the same line and sung the anthem before 60,000… and yet when they clashed there seemed to be such deep animosity between them.

Is this just the primal instinct coming to the fore of men caught up in fierce physical combat or does it indicate some deep-seated loathing thrust into the open in the heat of battle?

It puzzles and dismays me, but I have no answer to account for the fact that men who to all intents and purposes should be friends should suddenly become such enemies – unless, of course, the unifying powers of the Springbok jersey are merely a myth we want, and need, to believe in.

Or is it, as Venter has said, just the natural product of being caught up in the heat of the battle?

That said, the other baffling aspect of a clash that left both players bloodied is the harebrained application of Sarfu’s disciplinary procedures.

Instead of deciding that one, or both, of the players had a case to answer the citing official decided to refer the matter to Christo Ferreira, the former Springbok scrumhalf who is charge of policies and regulations at Sarfu and who is the manager responsible for seeing to it that disciplinary regulations are adhered to.

The question has to be asked – then why have a citing officer? Surely Ferreira, plus one or two deputies given the impossibility of his watching every game, could then just sit in front of a TV and video recorder somewhere and themselves decide on whether players should be called to book?

I, for instance, was not at the game (having been to Ellis Park to watch the Lions beat the Sharks) but I did record the Bloemfontein game for later perusal.

And, without wishing to prejudge the situation, the tape shows that at the very least there is cause to institute further disciplinary action.

The tape reveals that Fleck was tackled from behind (fairly) by Venter and that he lashed out at the big flanker. Venter in turn retaliated. Fleck, who was pinned to the ground, then aimed a kick at Venter, making contact with his heel and in all probability opening up the wound that made for such graphic, and undesirable, television and newspaper pictures.

Now the law book may be a morass of regulations and often contradictory interpretations but in my layman’s opinion, the incident contains a catalogue of violations under the chapter on foul play that needs to be investiged.

Fleck or Venter, or both, may well both be cited but it is unforgivable that the whole business has been fudged to the extent it has.

That is as far as the game goes, but what to make of the sheer brutality displayed by Ellis Park’s security officials – wearing bibs that proclaimed them to be from Viper Protection Services – shortly after the final whistle brought down the curtain on an exciting game between the Lions and the Sharks?

A fan who ran onto the field was assaulted – there is no other word for it – by security officials. What is worse is that the physical attacks were perpetrated by individuals who appeared to be in positions of seniority.

Pieter van Zyl or no Pieter van Zyl it was a disgraceful display that put the stadium as well as the Golden Lions Rugby Union to shame.

One wonders what “citing procedure” exists in this instance?