Henning blows the whistle on 'poor' players

'Players' skill and judgement lets them down'

Retired referee Tappe Henning has come in for some severe censure from many people, both players and fans alike, after his handling of the Springboks' fortuitous 30-27 win over a World XV in Johannesburg last week.

It was Henning's last match before he formally slipped into retirement. Some even suggested it was one match too many for the match official who was a world class referee in the not too distant past.

But Henning hit back strongly on Wednesday, suggesting that maybe the players should look at themselves when they want to find fault.

Speaking to sportwerf, a website that is the mouthpiece of former Northern Transvaal/Blue Bull players, Henning suggested that he was justified in awarding 33 penalties in a game that never got going.

"The suggestion is that a game averages about 23 penalties, or thereabouts. Now my question is this: which 10 penalties do they think I should not have awarded," Henning told sportwerf.

"There are no 50-50 decisions when it comes to penalties. It were all clear cut transgressions which justified penalties. If I had decided not to award any of those penalties I would have been dishonest and that's not how I referee a game."

According to the match statistics there were 34 scrums, of which 20 collapsed.

"I didn't collapse any of those scrums. I also did not kick the ball into touch ... which produced 19 line-outs.

"Referees sometimes get these games where the players' skill and judgement let them down.

"[Last] Saturday there were numerous off-the-ball incidents.

"There was obstructive running from the Springboks and continuous offside play by the World XV.

"Luckily Jonathan Kaplan and JC Fortuin [the two touch judges] helped me a lot, otherwise there could have been serious problems.

"I had my hands full with Justin Marshall [World XV scrum-half and captain] and Joe van Niekerk [Bok No.8], who constantly attempted to tell me how the other team was transgressing. The worst thing I could have was to start overlooking transgressions.

"It could easily have developed into a brawl.

"The scrums were also a headache, yet I only awarded three penalties in that department. It was against Cobus Visagie because he did not scrum straight and against Lawrence Sephaka because he did not bind.

"I told Visagie why he was penalised and then he told me they were opening [leaving gap between the loosehead prop and hooker]. I told him again at a later stage to scrum straight, not in at an angle.

"But he is very strong. On three occasions he, legally, scrummed them into submission."