This might not be a recognized medical term yet – but to provide my own definition I would like to offer the following:
Giteau Disease: That condition that presents itself as temporary / partial blindness to the eyes of match officials/ citing commissioners and causes them to regard brutal acts of intentional reckless and dangerous play as non-punishable.
In the 34th minute of the Test between Australia and the Springboks we find this moment or madness from Matt Giteau. The Wallabies receive the ball from the lineout on the halfway line and the flyhalf kicks a high ball. Giteau rushes up and performs a brutal and intentional illegal “tackle” on the South African scrumhalf Fourie Du Preez. Giteau receives a yellow card and is sin-binned for 10 minutes.
Best way to summarize this moment of madness or “brain fart” from Giteau would be to point to the following:
• Giteau was not focused on competing for the ball
• His eyes were not focused on the ball and was looking at Du Preez all the time.
• Giteau launched himself into the air and collided with Du Preez with the point of impact above the torso and at the neck area of Du Preez.
• The ball is not even in the television screen at the point of impact, but still metres up in the air.
• No arms were used in an attempt to perform a legal tackle.
Less than 2 weeks ago we had a fundraiser in South Africa for the Chris Burger and Petro Jackson Fund. This fund is aimed at assisting rugby players who are injured in the game of rugby. This fund makes an important contribution to players after an injury – but even more important is how we enforce the rules of the game and how officials try to remove reckless and dangerous play from the game!
I am totally in support of strict punishment for reckless and dangerous play. I am totally in agreement with several weeks of punishment dished out to Schalk Burger for eye gouging. During the World Cup in 2007 Burger was also punished for a few weeks for a reckless tackle. But how is it possible that Giteau is not suspended for a few weeks for the physical attack on Fourie Du Preez. I would like to refer to this at a physical attack as the video footage does not convince me that there was any attempt at a “tackle”.
What is the message that the non-citing of Giteau gives to our young rugby players? Is it that you can try and take out the opposition rugby player as long as it looks as if you are in the vicinity of the ball? Is it that you may jump with your body into the neck area of the opposition player with no regards for his safety and that you might at the worse only be sin-binned for 10 minutes?
What would have been the outcome if Fourie suffered a serious neck injury or had his rugby career ended right there? Would Giteau then have been cited – and do we have to wait for such a result for a match commissioner to regard the offence as serious enough for further punishment?
The fact that Fourie was not seriously injured, or that the Springboks have won the game are not important in any attempt to remove dangerous play from the game!
We can only hope that more match officials will open their eyes to the real dangers in the game and think of the consequences of their failure to do so! May this Giteau Disease not place more of our rugby players at risk!!
[ View more photos taken by Gerhard Steenkamp at Superimage Media]
We would like to invite all our supporters to view the safety guide before they travel to the game:
• Spectator Survival Guide for Safety of the Road to the Sports Stadium