Erasmus had every right to sound off like he did | Jeff Probyn
What a week we have had, between the First and Second Lions Tests with most of the Home Unions rugby media attacking Rassie Erasmus for his comments on social media about the mistakes of the match officials.
I think he had every right to make his comments, particularly as the Lions had already complained about the match officials, especially the TMO before the game.
The replacement of the chosen TMO from New Zealand Brendon Pickerill by South African Marius Jonker sparked a reaction by the Lions criticising World Rugby for not having a contingency plan should a replacement official be required.
They complained about Jonker, saying he could not be neutral because he is South African simply because Faf de Klerk had not been sent off for what they believed was a high tackle in the Lions A game defeat.
Even though the Lions management know that the final decision was down to the referee Jaco Peyper and not the TMO and it was Jonker who highlighted the incident in the first place.
What makes the media frenzy worse is the fact that no one but Erasmus has commented on the dangerous tip tackle by Hamish Watson on Willie le Roux, which unlike De Klerk, was not punished with a card.
The one thing that rugby has always prided itself on is respect, respect for the opposition and for the match officials but the pre-First Test criticism of Jonker put him in an untenable position of being damned if he did and damned if he didn't.
The pre-match meeting between the ‘on field' match official with the Lions management is supposed to have gone well with the Lions airing their concerns and receiving the necessary assurances but it was the TMO who had the biggest impact on the First Test and indirectly won it for the Lions.
Two disallowed tries and that foul by Watson turned the game and even Luke Cowan-Dickie's try had a suspicion of a double movement and yet the TMO said nothing.
As a former Lion obviously I'm glad they won the match, although it wasn't unexpected given the circumstances of competing against a Springboks team that had played only a single Test in the 20 odd months since their World Cup win.
However, the fact that the Lions were able to unfairly pressure a match official before that First Test without sanction does beg the question; would Warren Gatland have kept quiet were the boot on the other foot?
Judging by his reaction to the De Klerk tackle a week earlier the answer is probably no, so why focus just on Erasmus and his comments? I must admit I don't understand the reason for the match officials to have meetings with the management of both teams separately before the game. It appears to me, to say the least, an attempt to influence the decision-making on the pitch in your team's favour by pointing out some plays that the opposition use.
Back in the dark ages of the amateur game, it was up to the players to adapt their game according to how the referee interpreted the laws, not expect him to change to how each team were coached.
Rassie Erasmus missed a trick by not getting his retaliation in first and the Lions reaped the benefit of a number of crucial TMO decisions that won them that game.
I thought that the South Africans didn't get the luck of the draw whenever it was a 50-50, and as much as I want the Lions to win, I want to see a fair contest.
If World Rugby sanctions Erasmus for his use of social media to point out the errors in the officiating of the match, then they should also sanction the Lions for Gatland questioning referee Jaco Peyper's use of a yellow card instead of red in the South Africa A match.
