Rassie Erasmus has broken his silence on the bizarre Eben Etzebeth substitution, that sparked accusations of gamesmanship during South Africa’s defeat to Australia.
Love the Springboks? Follow RUCK's new dedicated South African rugby Instagram page @RUCKBoks today!
The Springboks boss insisted there was no attempt to manipulate the rules after Etzebeth briefly left the field before returning during Sunday’s 42-38 defeat in Perth.
South Africa had already used their entire bench by the 48th minute, leaving Erasmus with limited options should another player require replacing.
When Etzebeth subsequently came off in the second half, there was confusion over whether the lock was being assessed for a head injury or had suffered another type of injury.
The veteran eventually returned to the action, prompting questions over how the incident had been handled by the Springboks coaching staff and the match officials.
Erasmus, however, said the situation stemmed from a misunderstanding rather than any deliberate attempt to exploit the regulations.
“Well, he had a shot against the neck and I thought he was going for HIA. We don’t control that from a coach’s box, what he’s going for,” Erasmus said to Australian rugby outlet NINE.
The South Africa coach explained that he believed Etzebeth was heading for a head injury assessment after being informed that the lock had taken a knock.
“So when the doctor told me he got a knock against the neck, I thought he was going for HIA, and I think that’s where the confusion is.
“I think he wasn’t marked as HIA; he was marked as injured. Then, obviously, you can’t put another player on. So there’s also a learning there for the match officials, the fourth and fifth official, and for us, to understand.
“But he pulled through. He’s a bit stiff and sore in the change room now, but luckily, I don’t think there’s big damage.”
The episode had already attracted plenty of attention during the match, particularly because South Africa had exhausted their replacements more than 20 minutes earlier.
Justin Harrison, the former boss of Australia’s players association, questioned the situation while working on Stan Sport’s coverage and suggested there had been a frantic realisation that Etzebeth could not simply be replaced.
“Etzebeth is claiming that he’s got head pain and neck pain, and it’s a HIA. The medical is not accepting it,” Harrison said.
He continued: “There’s a serious game of poker face and Oscar nominees going on here. Deadset town hall meeting at the moment. They brought him off initially for tactical and then realised, when he crossed the line, actually you can’t do that.
“So play with 14 or get him back on, a bit of magic spray.”
Morgan Turinui was equally critical when discussing the incident after the final whistle.
The former Australia international pointed to the risk involved in using every replacement before the final stages of a Test match, particularly when injuries can occur that do not qualify for an additional replacement.
“When you empty the eight-man bench, this is the risk you run if you get an injury that’s not HIA or blood,” Turinui said.
Turinui also questioned whether Etzebeth should have been allowed to return once the initial replacement process had been triggered.
“The Boks doctor … we thought he said HIA and now Etzebeth is trying to say ‘no, it’s a stinger.’ The great thing is the match day doctor called them on it.
"He should not have been able to go back on He’s been replaced. If it isn’t really an HIA or blood, he should have stayed off.
“That should have negated the replacement of (Franco) Mostert. They should have finished the game at 14. But for the integrity of the game, I’m glad they didn’t because it’s the Wallabies who have played with 11 and 12. They got back to their 15, and they got beaten by a better side tonight.”
The Etzebeth controversy was just one part of an extraordinary final quarter in Perth, with the Wallabies eventually finishing the match with only 11 players after four Australia players were sent to the sin bin.
Despite the late drama, Australia held on for a memorable victory over the back-to-back world champions.
Erasmus will now have to turn his attention to South Africa’s next assignment, with the fallout from the Etzebeth incident likely to continue to generate discussion around the Springboks’ use of the substitution laws.
