Ahead of England’s World Cup semi-final against South Africa in 2023, Warren Gatland had a clear message for Steve Borthwick: don’t let the Springboks control the battle on or off the field.
The Wales boss, who famously clashed with Rassie Erasmus during the 2021 Lions tour, urged England to question the number of Head Injury Assessments (HIAs) the Springboks used in their dramatic quarter-final win over France.
Join our Breaking News and Top Stories WhatsApp community for all the latest news direct to your phone.
[ad_connatix]
“For example, if I was Steve, I would be asking some questions about the number of head injury assessments that South Africa called for in their victory against France.
I am not questioning whether they were legitimate or not but there have been people out there speculating about it and I would certainly be putting it out there and highlighting that it looked unusual and raising questions about the protocol.”
Gatland had already been outspoken about Erasmus’ antics, particularly his stint as a “water boy” during the Lions series. That role, usually reserved for carrying drinks, was later banned by World Rugby. Gatland’s quip at the time summed up the mood:
“If he is going to act as a water boy, at least he should have some water in his bottle.”
Writing in his Telegraph column, Gatland offered advice to Borthwick as England braced themselves for the Springboks’ power game.
“I know what it is like to go head-to-head with South Africa’s director of rugby, and my advice to Steve Borthwick would be to make sure he gets on the front foot - and combat any dark arts.”
“To have any chance against the Springboks you must attempt not just to match them physically but also to be tactically smart and show no signs of mental weakness.”
When asked if he would ever use HIA protocols as a way of rotating players, Erasmus cut the discussion short:
“no.”
Erasmus has flat-out denied the suggestions, claiming all three players were withdrawn for assessments for their own safety.
“No,” the Springboks boss said when asked if he’d exploited the system. “I think that would be totally wrong. No. We really care about our players, and rightly so. I think it was (William) Servat, the French forwards coach, who said he hoped the medical team and the HIA people are ready, because there’s going to be a lot of bumps and bruises.
“You could see when Pieter Steph made a head contact, we had to do an HIA there. It was straight head-to-head, and then the same, I think Duane Vermeulen was actually called by the match-day doctor. Bongi got a bad knock against his head.”
He added: “Yes, for us to take those players off – and you know, the chance is always there that they might not pass the HIA – luckily for us, all of them passed their HIAs. I don’t think there’s anything else to discuss about it.”
EDITORS PICKS:
- Men’s 2027 Rugby World Cup draw: England get easy group, Boks get Scotland
- Finn Russell’s new fiancee shut down troll with brilliant comeback
- “Didn’t get on” – Five pairs of famous rugby team-mates who we can’t believe hated each other
- “Huge news” – Premier League football is a step closer to Twickenham
“Goodbye Caterpillar ruck” – Four more rugby law changes for 2025
Rugby thrives on a mix of tradition and evolution, but some laws may no longer serve the game as effectively as they once did.
As the sport grows faster, stronger, and more tactical, certain laws stand out as ripe for reconsideration—not to upend the game, but to make it fairer, safer, and more exciting.
We highlight four specific laws that, with thoughtful updates, could better reflect the way rugby is played today. These ideas come from a deep respect for the game and a desire to see it flourish for players and fans alike.
World Rugby has shown it’s willing to adapt in recent years—these could be the next steps in that evolution.
1. Fewer Substitutions
Rugby has changed significantly over the years, and one of the biggest shifts is how the bench is used. These days, teams often bring on almost an entirely new forward pack late in the game. Big, fresh players crash into tired defenders, making the final 20 minutes less about skill and endurance, and more about brute force. Many fans and former players feel this has turned rugby into a collision sport rather than a contest of stamina and intelligence.
Reducing the number of substitutions would encourage players to pace themselves. Space would open up in the second half, creating more opportunities for creative play rather than endless phases of pick-and-go. It would reward fitness, smart decision-making, and those capable of performing for the full 80 minutes.
Fewer substitutions wouldn’t just make the game more exciting—it would make it fairer, safer, and more in line with the spirit of what rugby has always been about.
With the rise of 6–2 and even 7–1 bench splits, pioneered by Rassie Erasmus, the trend seems to be heading in the opposite direction. That’s all the more reason to act now.