Outeniqua hooker Keaton Olivier slotted a close-range, angled penalty after the hooter to secure a dramatic 30–29 victory and break Maritzburg College hearts.
However, the legitimacy of the kick was soon questioned.
Following the penalty award, Olivier was visible on the sidelines with his coaching staff. On the field, the Outeniqua captain indicated a shot at goal, with scrumhalf Fagen Hendricks appearing set to take the kick. Yet, after a replay sequence had run, Olivier was shown lining up and ultimately taking the decisive shot.
This raised questions around whether a substitution had been made after the decision to kick at goal, and if so, whether it was within the laws of the game.
Rugby Law:
Once a penalty has been awarded and the team indicates they are kicking at goal, the referee will normally not allow a substitution purely to bring on a specialist kicker.
This is to prevent time-wasting and gamesmanship.
What is allowed:
If a substitution is requested before the kick is indicated, and the referee permits it, then the incoming player can take the kick.
Substitutions are more commonly allowed at clear stoppages (tries, injuries, halftime, etc.), not during a live decision phase like setting up a kick at goal.
That said, schoolboy rugby in South Africa can have competition-specific rules (e.g. festivals vs league matches), so there can be slight variations.
Bottom line: You can’t usually roll on a kicker after the penalty decision has been made and the shot is being set up — it’s at the referee’s discretion, but most will not allow it.
@KES Oldboy (Comment #5)
Or NFL either
@Smallies (Comment #21)
Ek het nou al die posisies sien pale toe skop in my lewe….hakers, loskop stutte, slotte, flanke, agste manne, en obviously die hele agterlyn, MAAR ek kan nie recall dat ek al ooit ‘n vaskop stut ‘n skop sien nail het nie…..
@OUD ANKER (Comment #19) Daar het n mannetjie saam met my seun Grant Khomo gespeel,hy was n hakker/loskop gewees ,hy kon met gemak 60m drops en 65m stelskoppe skop,hy was die span se back up skopper gewees
@OUD ANKER (Comment #19) Man, ja, maar rugby is mos nou (meestal) nie ‘n saak van lewe en dood nie. ‘n Bietjie humor langs die pad is goed vir almal. In die 1995 RWC het NZ vir Japan 145-17 gewen, MAAR Hiryuki Kajihara het twee drieë gedruk daai dag – daar is nie baie ouens wat kan sê hulle het dit teen die AB’s gedoen nie. As Hiryuki op sy oudag op die stoep sit, gaan hy vir sy kleinkinders sê, “kom ek vertel julle van my twee drieë…”. Keaton Olivier gaan vertel van die dag toe hy die ghym vir Outeniekwa beklink het. Dis wat die spel so wonderlik maak in my oë.
@tzavosky (Comment #18)
Dok, ek dink as enige voorspeler ‘n skop nail bring dit glimlagte op gesigte. In die geval is dit net die omstandighede rondom die skop wat die situasie bietjie versuur het.
@PASSIONATE ABOUT RUGBY (Comment #3) Man, my comment was thorougly tongue in cheek. The fact that a hooker took the kick, brought back memories of Okey Geffin, who kicked the Boks to victories over the AB’s even before my time.
It’s just one of those things that make you smile, unless you take it very seriously.
@Mate (Comment #16)
En ek het geen probleem dat die haker of enige speler (posisie) for that matter die skop waargeneem het nie. Ek meen John Eales (Wallaby SLOT) was ‘n dodelike stelskopper. Ek bevraagteken egter die timing van die opstuur van die Outeniqua haker om die skop waar te neem. Al was dit binne die reels is hierdie vir my amper soos die uithardloop van ‘n kolwer aan die bouler se kant deur die bouler as die kolwer sy kampie verlaat sonder die bedoeling om ‘n lopie te steel. 100% binne die reels, MAAR selfs in die druk koker van ‘n wereld beker uitspeel wedstryd sal die bouler eers die kolwer die 1e keer waarsku…i.e. gees van die spel.
@OUD ANKER (Comment #15)
Ek verstaan
Die haker is opgestuur uitsluitlik om die skop waar te neem.
Wen ten alle koste is mos maar die name of the game.
Loopbaans op die spel
@Mate (Comment #14)
Most probably the debate would not have taken place, but the fact that he nailed the kick does leave a bad taste. Come on, let’s be realistic, what coach knowing that the time is up would substitute a hooker (of all positions) if there was not something behind their (the coaches) thinking. Whether it was legal or not, an honest mistake or just smart game play, the referee is to blame (for not explaining why the no 2 was entitled to take the kick OR he made a mistake). This however does leave somewhat of a question mark on the end result.
I wonder if this debate would have taken placed had the hooker missed that kick?
Most of us are on the same page. However, what happened, deliberate, or without intension to cheat, it is not acceptable. The one implies poor conduct, the other poor judgement and sportmanship. The school should take ownership, and extend an apology. Without doing that, it will imply that the school approves what happened, and it will reflect negative on the school. This is not something that a player has done, but the coaches, as representatives of the school. In the end it is not whether you have won or lost, but how you have played the game.
@Rugger fan (Comment #8)
Well said. Very sporting of you. Nice to see somebody not moaning and making excuses about a loss.
@Rainier @rugger fan Lets agree to disagree. Ref should have been sharper and more switched on. Let’s replace the word cheating with smart gamesmanship. Again highlights that perhaps the plot has been lost on why we compete on the sports field at schoolboy level. I would love the opinion of an independent IRB referee on this situation. The score remains and an excellent game of rugby it was. Well done to Outeniqua!
@buitestaander (Comment #6)
There are a LOT of assumptions made here. If it was a deliberate attempt at cheating it is a bad reflection on the coaches. My money would be on an honest mistake and confusion in the heat of the moment.
@buitestaander (Comment #6)
I also remember a very tight U16A game between College and Kearsney a few years back. The ref didnt keep score (SB error #1) but relied on scoreboard. Kearnsney slotted a difficult PK in injury time to win by 1 point. BUT – the run here – scoreboard had give a conversion to Kearsney early in 2nd half that actually missed. Videos needed to be watched and both HM (and press) corrected this on the Monday morning – but left a bad taste in post match for all involved. Scoreboard is not the bee all and end all. How the game was played is far more important.
This may well have been “illegal” – but I dont believe it was a blatant cheat. The kick was not particularly difficult position (so another kicker probably could have slotted it too) – and the regular kicker was pulled at late notice. The young man who came up and took the shot certainly showed BMT. But was it cheating – I personally dont think so. The ref / sideline / coaches maybe not understanding the laws (see Connaught / Sharks just 10 days back with the ref / TMO / TMZ / coaches etc. in confusion about subs, uncontested scrums etc.). The score stays – great game – Outeniqua take the W and College walk off proudly too. SBR was a winner.
@buitestaander (Comment #6)
I agree that this should not have happened, but the coaches could also have been mistaken about the rules/situation. As such, it should fall on the ref, unless it can be proven that the coaches were fully aware of the rules. I think bulk of the blame should fall on the ref here
Schoolboy rugby is part of the education process. What happened here, is surely not in line with any school’s educational philosophy or value system. I am sorry Rainier, in cases like this, the scoreboard is not all that counts. This match will certainly not be remembered for the final score. In a perfect world, a school should distance itself from such an incident, and extend an apology. Coaches are under pressure, and it is human to make a stupid decision in the moment, but then they must own up.
This is not AFL! You can’t bring a specialist kicker on to take the kick!! Maybe what “threw” the ref was that the kicker was a hooker?
Check the scoreboard.
@tzavosky I’m afraid that is bending the laws of the game to the nth degree, all to secure a shallow victory and if that is what it takes, Outeniqua will have to live with HOW they executed the win the way they did. Ultimately, the referee should have chased that hooker back off the field. I’ve never seen such nonsense before.
If it’s your reserve hooker taking the kick, it SHOULD be allowed!
COLLEGE VS OUTENIQUA