• Please bear with us. We have moved to a new provider, and some images and icons are not working correctly. We are working hard to fix this

Time to be retired?

B

BikingBud


Referees in England
In an autumn series full of concern about player safety we get this in the final few minutes of the final game.

Screenshot 2025-11-29 at 18.50.17.png

Outright and inexcusable thuggery.

I feel the disciplinary panel should ensure that he never plays the game again.
 
Decorily said:
Do you have a video clip of the preceding few seconds?
Click to expand...
I can’t post a vid, and even then it’s not very clear, but around 78 mins Etsebeth helps drive a ruck back and initially starts to stand before being pulled back to ground.
IMG_3379 Medium.jpeg
There looks to be a hand in his face pushing away, when the welsh 3(?) drops his elbow down catching Etsebeth and also pushing that hand in with some force.
IMG_3380 Large.jpegIMG_3381 Large.jpeg
It’s a decent dig by the welsh elbow, so maybe Etsebeth thought it was deliberate and went after the party he thought at fault and retaliated rather then get the captain to bring it up.

Will be interesting to see what the disciplinary committee say with all the extra angles they have.
 
Those stills are some time before the thumb is in the eye. By my reckoning about 100 seconds after the end of the maul.

From a mixture of the game clock and the TV recording slider:

  • Game Time
  • 78:08 White 19 joins the maul.
  • Maul type stuff, people offside, people being taken out of the side, White 23 being pulled in, Red 7 falls in and when White 19 falls on top, Red 7 pushes his head away, Red 3 flops in, yes the elbow appears to be out and pointy but there is no force or secondary motion/activity.
  • All untidy, all indicating very tired players losing form and some control at the end of a test match but nothing to indicate dangerous or foul play
  • 78:20 ball leaves maul and camera follows ball.
  • Afters start and Ref blows @78:30
  • Time before end of recording:
  • - 28.02 is the same reference as 78:30
  • -27.57 returns to handbags with 5 Red players and 2 White players doing the usually shirt pulling etc, specifically White 19 has Red 7's collar
  • -27.52 overhead shot shows 2 other Red players between Red 7 and White 19 but White 19 still has hold of Red 7's collar - Why? Just let go break it up and move on!
  • -27.43 most other players have broken up and looking to move on.
  • -27.40 White 19 still has hold of Red7 and has now started to wrestle
  • -27.29 - White 19 has multiple "goes" at the head and eye area of Red 7 one of which is captured in the still above. Why?
  • -26.49 Ref talks to both players and is almost restoring the game.
  • -26.41 Replay shows thumb in eye it is not accidental it is sustained and claws across the face with a pincer motion with his thumb being in the eye and his fingers being at the back of the head.
For nearly 40 seconds White 19 has kept hold of Red7s collar - Why?

This is not about pushing Red 7 away as White 19 is still holding and pulling Red 7 towards him with his left arm firmly grasping Red7's shirt.

You can see the determination on White 19's facial expression that this is not just pushing away but is about asserting violence.

This is not accidental in typical handbags, it is a spiteful and hateful action to impose himself.

IT IS NOT A KNEE JERK REACTION

IT IS DELIBERATE

IT IS FOUL PLAY

IT IS UGLY

IT IS TRUE TO FORM FOR ETZEBETH

IT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM THE GAME

THERE IS NO MITIGATION

Would anybody want a player like that on their team?

I would be interested in other people's thoughts.

What would you do on a sat afternoon?
 
BikingBud said:
Those stills are some time before the thumb is in the eye. By my reckoning about 100 seconds after the end of the maul.

Would anybody want a player like that on their team?

I would be interested in other people's thoughts.

What would you do on a sat afternoon?
Click to expand...

The question I was attempting to answer was about what happened before the gouge replays as there was plenty of video of the actions of Etzebeth. I was looking back to see what triggered the afters on the ground.

Would anyone want him on their team? The most capped current SA player - I don’t think he’d struggle to get anywhere. Top level rugby is all business and a player that will give you an edge will get snapped up quickly.

What would I do as a ref? The incident as per the video, it’s a direct RC, no question and no mitigation (assuming I saw it given as I’ll never have a TMO and rarely have independent/qualified touch judges).

What happens on Monday (or whenever the committee meets), no idea whatsoever and what happens next will be interesting. The range for accidental gouge is 4 weeks to 12+, with a max of 52. For deliberate it’s 12 to 24+ with 208 maximum - and based on the video it looks intentional to me.

A cursory, and maybe even accurate search trying to find Etzebeth’s international history has that his reputation as a goon/enforcer doesn’t match to his actual record - one source has 141 caps, no straight RC, but he does a 2-week ban from 2012 for an attempted head-butt. A good lawyer will lean into that - and who knows that with all the angles they may even argue it was provoked, and an otherwise clean recent record we may all be surprised.

Just to be clear, I am not condoning the actions what so ever. I just have no idea how these committees work.
 
The factors that go into reduction in sanction are laid out in Reg 17. Clean record will help, but the interesting ones are contrition and admission of guilt, which strikes me a double edged sword for him
 
In autumn full of red cards once can't expect there will be much debate around this one. I expect they will all be lumped together, but that would be shortsighted since the only common factor is it's seemingly only the locks getting carded.

The question will be how long he is out for? Because the next international game is 7+ months away, I'm sure the ban will extend to this period.
The only mitigation would be some sort of provocation, this would require a lot of clever lawyering as there is no way to justify the action and a player of his experience should know better. His club are the big losers here, and they might well step in to the process here with their private equity backing.

For an "enforcer" type player he has done well to impose himself without going too far, but clearly some switch clicked here and he will have enough time to write a book about it.
 
Perhaps we should widen the discussion to also consider cards that might not have been proffered as they are key in the rationalisation of the events.

I do not see any possible mitigation.
 
The regulation refers to "relevant off-field mitigating factors", so surely he will get the same discounts as everyone else for not having previously blinded someone, saying sorry, wearing his best suit etc?
 
shep said:
The regulation refers to "relevant off-field mitigating factors", so surely he will get the same discounts as everyone else for not having previously blinded someone, saying sorry, wearing his best suit etc?
Click to expand...
But don't take biscuits :eek:
 
Dickie E said:
www.walesonline.co.uk

Eben Etzebeth defence case emerges as WRU and Cardiff step in after tragedy

The latest rugby news stories from Wales and beyond
www.walesonline.co.uk www.walesonline.co.uk
Click to expand...
Panel unable to reach an agreement!

Just look at the hate and spite in his face and the attempt to clench and apply as much force as possible - that indicates nothing other than the most severe punishment is warranted.

The assault is as clear as McRae on O'Gara, which only attracted a 7 week ban.

I trust the panel are taking time in considering a significant ban so as to make it watertight and reduce the prospect of appeal and are not trying to find ways to mitigate the outright brutality we saw from Etzebeth.
 
Dickie E said:
Is it 12 weeks or 12 matches or do they mean the same thing?
Click to expand...
I’ve seen headlines listing it as 12 week and others as 12 match. Or Supersport who tweeted 12 week and then liked to their article titled 12 match…

That said, Supersport did list 12 matches he’ll miss, the last being 27 March 2026 - so more like 15 weeks duration.

supersport.com

Bok lock Etzebeth banned for 12 matches | SuperSport

Eben Etzebeth has been banned for an effective 12 matches for his eye gouge on Welshman Alex Mann during their clash in the Springboks’ game in Cardiff on 22 November 2025.
supersport.com supersport.com
* edit to fix link
 
Etzebeth denied making intentional contact with Mann’s eyes:

“Welsh#7 [Alex Mann] and I were both on the ground. We started pushing and shoving each other on the ground. The shoving and pushing continued until we got onto our feet but nothing serious came of that. Just pushing and shoving each other. A few other players (from both sides) joined in, and the situation was basically deescalating and almost over. There were one or two Welsh players in between me and the Welsh#7. “I got an open palm to the face in my upper neck/chin area by Welsh#7,” said Etzebeth. “I looked at the assistant referee to check whether he saw what the Welsh#7 did. I received no reaction from the assistant referee and Welsh #7 went on to pull my jersey towards him, again. At this time I felt I had to start defending myself otherwise I’m going to be rag dolled by Welsh #7.
Click to expand...
Rag dolled - FFS have you seen the size difference?

It was at that time that I wanted to push him against the shoulder to try and get hold of him, so he doesn’t continue to have control of me and my jersey. There were lots of other players involved. South African #20 [Marco van Staden] was behind the Welsh#7 and some of the Welsh players were between us. I made contact first with his shoulder. My hand went into his face. It was very quick and the slow-motion showed that I made contact with his eye.
Click to expand...
So if players were between them he could have let go and those players would have forced the separation however, he has not commented upon the grasp of his left hand continually pulling Red 7 towards him.

He claims it wasn't intentional? So no admission of fault or blame, no contrition?

For their part, the disciplinary panel said that
Etzebeth had his thumb in Mann’s eye for roughly one second and ‘continued pushing down, still grimacing as W7 bent 90 degrees at the waist turning away from the Player [Etzebeth]. We are satisfied that the Player knew what he was doing. It was intentional targeting of the face and eye. Still he did not desist. Both W11 [Rio Dyer] and W23 [Ben Thomas] tried to force the Player away.
Click to expand...
Red 11 and 23 could not force the player away because Etzebeth was pulling him in by the shirt with his left hand whilst he had his thumb knuckle deep in Red 7's eye.
All the time he is staring at W7
Click to expand...
So they are claiming it was wilful?

If they find it wilful and the player considers it was accidental how is there any remorse and how can any credit be given, 18 weeks entry point should be extended due to the findings of aggravation:

All the time he is staring at W7
Click to expand...

How the fuck can the panel say that and only give 12 weeks.

I feel that this again shows an absolute disregard for player safety.

I can only imagine the wholesale Saffer apoplexy is this was the other way round.

It really is pantomime season!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top