South Africa coach Peter de Villiers labels Wallabies scrum cheats

[tragic]

Well, if we cheat in the scrums we must be doing a pretty bad job of it. PDV is obviously worried.

We should have a TMO just to adjudicate on the scrums, with the benefit of seeing both sides of the caper. What exactly goes on in the middle of it will probably remain a mystery to all but the guys dishing it out and copping it, but at least it might lead to some consistency and stop refs deciding to hold scrum clinics in the middle of play. It might also stop such commentary as PDV's.
Or not

[Sheikh]

Sounds like a PDV brain fart. He really thinks the Wallabies scrum is 'milking' penalties? Has he seen the latest stats on penalties given by refs?

[Ecky]

I think what youre really trying to say Ecky is that people in glass houses shouldnt cook barefoot...

Reffing is a tough gig however there are definitely areas where top level ref's need parity and i believe we are not seeing it at the moment... too many opinions on what is right and its not just the refs, fans, commentators hell even the coachs all have their own views on what is right and what is wrong...

I think the Robbie deans summed it up perfectly a couple of weeks ago when questioned on his thoughts of the ref after the wallabies AB's game. He simply said that the players have to be aware of the ref's requirements and adjust accordingly.. this failure to adjust was their downfall not the fact that the ref was constantly pinging Baxter...

Ecky I haven't - and really really emphasise with the lot of the Referee especially at the moment - at the international level there is a definite inconsistancy in the way that the breakdown and scrums are managed and it is probably a lot easier for a spectator at home to catch the odd eye gouging etc..

Having said that I would love the TMO with the same benefit of the extra screens have the ability to "mention" that so and so is "whatever" rather than leave the ref looking like an idiot on the TV as is happening at the moment.

Honestly one of the strengths of the game is the fact that the ref is always right even when he is wrong - and I would always uphold that but can you really defend a game whereby people consistently manipulate the rules to the refs perception of whether their naughty actions had a material effect on the game as is the case at the moment.

More Black and White stuff.

Thanks guys.

What interests me is the perception of the viewer, whether an international or local club game, and whether that perception is influenced by which team is being supported. Obviously us lot here are, in the main, supporters and also supporters. There are a lot of AB and Proteas (sorry, 'bok) supporters and I get the feeling that the refs' ability is linked to the success of the team being supported. (case in point being the RWA premiers from last season being no chance of a finals berth this year and their more vocal supporters seemingly attributing this to the officials in the games they've lost this year)

Anyhoo, it is pretty difficult for a person (whether player, coach, supporter or official) to go into a match without some sort of pre-conception of the game. For example, everyone who referees a game with Butch James in it will linger a bit more when he enters a contact, just to see if he might suddenly sprout arms to use in a tackle. Similarly, the ref for any game with George Smith in it will make sure his weight is on his feet as he pilfers yet another tackle ball. And some supporters will groan and immediately pre-concieve how a particular ref will perform, even though there are many days, weeks sometimes, before the game. (Some of these Troglodytes find some sort of smug self-absorbed satisfaction in smiting posts based on their prejudiced conception)

So, in the case where a ref is officiating in a match where the teams have only seen him/her fleetingly, there may well be no preconception and more of the "let's see what the ref pays attention to and what we can get away with" gambit, where the participants in the match will learn as they go along.

I had an interesting pre-game chat with a Premier Grade coach recently who said that part of their preparation was to watch film of the ref they've been allocated, for that very reason.

In a perfect world we'd all be consistent in ruling on such things as the breakdown (tackle/ruck/maul), but then in that same perfect world the players would remember where "the gate" is and how to stay on their feet. And how to release and roll away, and how to push, pass or place the ball once they've been tackled, and how to let the ball go so the man on his feet can take it from him....

So, in international stuff, one would hope the teams would prepare for the ref of the day (where thay can). And in community rugby they can do it a bit, but surely the good teams can adapt to the ref during the game?

[James]

You are probably completely right Ecky. I have preconceived views on Roland though (this weeks ref) being hopeless but I promise I won't bag the ref ever again if he does a good job. And I will leave the decision of whether he did a good job to you, assuming you watch the game. Hows that for fair?

[Ecky]

The only problem with that, James, is that I will initially be watching it as a supporter, like most of our forum folk.

I may watch it a second time early in the week and then make some comments.

The other problem us television viewers have is that we are influenced by the commentators. If we get the Aussie feed, which I imagine we will, then prepare to be influenced, dear reader.

[Action Hardcore]

Don't judge me ecky

[sandgroperrugby]

Like all beings in the professional sports arena everybody is open to criticism for the actions or lack of them. We all know that coaches can be sacked and players dropped on the back of their performances so why not ref's. I agree the TMO's are an under utilised commodity and in some cases should be able to hold up there flags so to speak, but even they have to interpret the rules which seems to be the crux of the matter spoken about on this thread.

I have never officiated a rugby game by the way and probably wouldn’t volunteer to do so.

[James]

The only problem with that, James, is that I will initially be watching it as a supporter, like most of our forum folk.

I may watch it a second time early in the week and then make some comments.

The other problem us television viewers have is that we are influenced by the commentators. If we get the Aussie feed, which I imagine we will, then prepare to be influenced, dear reader.

Ok fair enough.

I am interested in your input after the game all the same.

[Ecky]

Like all beings in the professional sports arena everybody is open to criticism for the actions or lack of them. We all know that coaches can be sacked and players dropped on the back of their performances so why not ref's. I agree the TMO's are an under utilised commodity and in some cases should be able to hold up there flags so to speak, but even they have to interpret the rules which seems to be the crux of the matter spoken about on this thread.

I have never officiated a rugby game by the way and probably wouldn’t volunteer to do so.

In the televised stuff the refs are judged and may well be dropped or demoted to a "lesser" game or similar. In the local comp a similar thing occurs, but not every ref is assessed every week. So, if a local ref has a poor game but wasn't seen by a ref coach, he (or she) may retain their relative position until seen to have a poor game.

TMO's can only rule on things that happen in the in-goal area. That is the current iRB position. The iRB will have to change its position before the TMO can do other stuff. The Assistant Referees, on the other hand, can (and should) assist the referee with things like props' binding, offsides, forward passes etc. The AR couldn't, shouldn't and wouldn't overrule the ref on a prop binding issue on the side of the scrum where the ref is standing.

[sandgroperrugby]

I get that those are the rules regarding the TMO's at the moment i was more speaking of in future law changes that allow for more action from the TMO's so that we can move with the times.

[Sheikh]

I had an interesting pre-game chat with a Premier Grade coach recently who said that part of their preparation was to watch film of the ref they've been allocated, for that very reason.

I'd be surprised if a professional coach didn't do this. It's just as important as watching film of the opposition. Refs, even top international refs, judge different aspects of the game differently.

Similarly, if I was a top official, I'd watch tapes of both teams to pick up what they try to get away with. This would be better preparation then listening to reputations (and never blowing up Richie McCaw no matter what he does because he's pure as driven snow - honestly).

Is there a sarcasm smiley?

[zimeric]

Devilliers might need to swallow humble pie after last nights Dominant performance from the wallabies front row .
Scrum cheats? hardly!!... what about John Smit telling the ref that the opposition was pulling a fast one and the very next scrum gets a penalty and replays show that he was the one doing the dodgy????

[James]

I humbly apologise to you Ecky (and any other refs who read this).

I thought Allain Rolland just had one of the most uncontroversial games I've ever seen. Pretty hard to fault him on any decision he made- with possible exception to his minor blunder about taking the ball back into the 22 which had no real bearing on the game anyway.

What a cheap shot from Giteau. I expected better from Australia. Can't win against South Africa by being cheap-shot merchants. They bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

[palitu]

I Like how Australia is cheats, and yet the saffer flanker was always moving forward onto the aussie loose head prop. that wasnt penalised once...

[zimeric]

it was...... once