SANZAR gives nod to referees to reward attacking teams

[beige]

Does it really matter if the ball is fed into the scrum skewed?

Anyone that's watched a rugby league game lately will say "yes"...

[Lee Grant]

If referees are giving us the short shrift they are said to be doing, it is largely because they are getting it from their superiors who fawningly apologise to coaches

This is the kind of crap that goes on. If it's not the refs on the ground it's their bosses. We are lucky in the SH that coaches are not as feral as Venter - what a great name for him - he loves to give the refs a serve.

Some referees like a bit of fawning too. Steve Walsh talked too much and wanted to be the players friend all the time. Let's hope he improves in his 2nd iteration because otherwise he is a fine ref.

I nearly vomited watching Pommy Ed Morrison refereeing the All Blacks years ago. He was talking to Kronfield and saying Josh this and Josh that and explaining the laws like Kronfield had never heard them before. As far as talking to players is concerned: less is more better IMO.

Does it really matter if the ball is fed into the scrum skewed?

Anyone that's watched a rugby league game lately will say "yes"...

Agree beige. It's the kind of dopey question that makes me despair for our game. I mentioned the skew throw to the scrum only as an example, an easy to understand example of laws that referees wilfully ignore.

Does it really matter? Let me think. What is one of the basic tenets of our game? Competition for the ball. Hookers used to strike for the ball all the time when the ball was thrown into the scrum. Now they can't, except for the few weeks of a year when they have a crackdown.

I asked an old league referee about 25 years ago what the idea of the league scrum was when nobody could compete for the ball. He said proudly that league was sick of the old contests for the ball at scrum time and the fights. Putting the pill under the feet of the 2nd row avoided all that. Besides, he said, it isolated 12 of the 26 players and the other 14 wouldn't have the field cluttered by fatties.

But as I indicate: it is not that one ignored law by itself that is significant.

"Does it really matter if players don't stay on their feet?"
"Does it really matter if the tackled player is not released?"
etc etc

Only if you care for the fabric of the game.

---------- Post added at 03:48 ---------- Previous post was at 02:22 ----------

I have been remiss in not pointing out this excerpt from a rugby365 article posted by AndyS on the last page.

Referees who get their application of the law wrong in Super 14 will be told of their problem and the matter could be made public. In fact the buck will stop with the men who select and appoint referees to Super 14 matches - Andrew Cole (Australia), Colin Hawke (New Zealand) and Tappe Henning (South Africa), who is also an IRB referees' selector.

Full article

This is more like it - public scrutiny or the possibility of it. And there is a hint of the buck stopping with referee selectors. The trouble is there are only two pro referees employed by the ARU now so it wouldn't be easy to bench Walsh or Dickinson.

But I like that principle.

Not to the point, but it's another reason why we need the ARC back. Not only do we need it for the players to learn their trade and put themselves forward for Super rugby, etc etc - and to give a pathway for young coaches - but we also need it to develop referees.

Public scrutiny of wannabie referees and putting the onus on referee selectors to do their job better - to accurately promote or demote on merit - would be priceless at this level. Then when the best get promoted to Super rugby they would have a lot of bad habits eliminated.

Who knows: we may get a couple to get scrummies to put the ball in straight.

[James]

I nearly vomited watching Pommy Ed Morrison refereeing the All Blacks years ago. He was talking to Kronfield and saying Josh this and Josh that and explaining the laws like Kronfield had never heard them before. As far as talking to players is concerned: less is more better IMO.

Yeah look thats fairly lame but worse is when refs refuse to explain why a decision was made and tell a captain to go away and walk off like they don't even know themselves.

Does it really matter? Let me think. What is one of the basic tenets of our game? Competition for the ball. Hookers used to strike for the ball all the time when the ball was thrown into the scrum. Now they can't, except for the few weeks of a year when they have a crackdown.

"Does it really matter if players don't stay on their feet?"
"Does it really matter if the tackled player is not released?"
etc etc

There is still a lot of competition for the ball but the competition comes from all 8 players rather than having the hooker competing separately as well. Does it make a huge difference to the game feeding the ball in skew? Scrums are still competitive and last I heard the Force won a fair few opposition scrums against the Sharks.

Now for your two questions the answer is: yes it makes a bloody big difference. Both of those things would slow the ball down a lot and there would be no momentum to the game. Defenses would have plenty of time to reset and the game would probably end up being a big kick-a-thon.

Jumping didn't use to be allowed in the line-out. Do you think that is a good or a bad development in the game? Just because the game is changing a bit doesn't mean it is for the worse.

[jazza93]

You can feed the ball scewed but it doesnt matter. If they forced halfbacks to feed the ball straight they will just spin in it and always find a way to get just as much advantage.

You can't really attack James like that, its a crap argument you have anyway "does it matter if they stay on their feet". Dont Quote someone and reply with crap like that.

[Lee Grant]

Sorry if that offended you but it happens to me all the time on other rugby forums in the last 10 years and I don't blink an eye when it happens. The Kiwis can be bloody savage on their sites.

Tying in a remark you think is dopey to an earlier post that agrees with you in some respects is not uncommon and I have had some against me on my short stay here myself. But you can't be precious about it.

The only one I got precious about was some guy who reckoned I got him suspended on another forum, which wasn't true. He should have dicussed it on that site when he was allowed to return to it. That got up my nose.

James didn't object to my comment either because he's a wiser head.

On your comment on the skew throw - again.... it's not that one example that is the point, but replies are making it the point. The point is that it's an easy thing for referees to observe and in not doing so on a regular basis they are changing the game.

Younger people probably don't realise but striking for the ball used to be a real skill and now it is hardly ever talked about. Put that non-observance with the many other un-observed laws and you get a change to the game. Then some bright-eyed boys come up with an idea: Let's have some ELVs to fix the game up.

Some of the ELVs were/are great but a lot of them were band-aids to the main problem that competition for the ball was being compromised by referees invoking only those laws they thought were important.

They became the defacto law makers and what they have done to the game is appalling in my eyes.

[jazza93]

I read the first line of your newest essay: "sorry if that offedned you''

And if your going to cop out like that don't argue on forums because the only people who can't take it are people who use that line insted of just getting on with it.

[Ecky]

On your comment on the skew throw - again.... it's not that one example that is the point, but replies are making it the point. The point is that it's an easy thing for referees to observe and in not doing so on a regular basis they are changing the game.

Just out of interest Lee; have you refereed a game? If so, may I please ask what is your personal checklist when it comes to scrum time?

I have refereed a few games and my scrum checklist is quite long. While it includes the credibility of the feed (NB not if it's straight, but if it's credible), that is but one of many items - more items in the scrum checklist than any other phase.

[beige]

[Lee Grant]

Ecky - fair comment. No I'm not a ref, just a fan with eyes in his head.

Again ..... I've got to repeat as I will have to later on - that I am not so concerned about the bloody scrum feed by itself. I gave it as one example of referees not observing the laws. But because people keep mentioning it - I have to respond to it - and because I respond they think I think the scrum feed is the holy grail.

It's not. It's just one of many things that referees ignore now - or do in the eyes of a fan.

You can talk about your bloody checklists to the cows come home Ecky but I can tell you that your dad or granddad if they refeered, did a far better job than you and your generation are doing with the scrum feed.

Why can I say this? I'm an old bastard, certainly old and certainly a bastard, and I have seen decades of scrums where referees managed one thing beautifully that your current referees can't do with your wonderful checklists. They got scrummies to throw the ball into the scrum straight and the opposing hooker hooked for the ball. Ask your dad.

Oh yes - today's refs will make sure that the hooker throws the ball into the lineout 10-15 metres straight, they have a checklist, but a 1 metre throw to the scrum is a blind spot for them.

How high on your brilliant checklst is ""Ensure that Law 20.6.(d) is observed".

Why do referees frequently call not straight throws to the lineout and infrequenlty ping skew throws to the scrum?

Answers please.

Please - nobody else talk about the skew throw to the scrum -talk about why players leave their feet more than they did 20 years ago and (a) is it a good thing or (b) is it a bad thing. Or talk about one of the other laws you think that referees ignore and are changing the game.

[Burgs]

I think the feed into the scrum is pretty important, certainly high on my checklist of credability.

[James]

Players going off their feet: Because the game has gone professional. There is pressure on the players to win as winning eventually means money. There is pressure on the refs not to be too picky so as not to distract from the spectacle. Players are faster/stronger/better coached and around 10 years ago there was a revolution in how players/teams approach the breakdown. Personally I think it is a bad thing but having said that its entirely understandable that is has happened and you can't really solve the problem by reffing to the letter of the law. Adapt the rules to suit the new environment. I know a lot of people didn't like the ELVs that much but if the game is changing so must the rules to accomodate those changes.

[GIGS20]

Please - nobody else talk about the skew throw to the scrum -talk about why players leave their feet more than they did 20 years ago and (a) is it a good thing or (b) is it a bad thing. Or talk about one of the other laws you think that referees ignore and are changing the game.

OK Lee, I can't really give my opinion on what you're talking about without going to skew scrum feeds, but it does apply to all facets of the game.

I'm on Ecky's side, there's so much bending, fringing and adjusting of law in the professional game that refs have a million things to watch. The scrum is by far the most intense time of this....I'm not a ref, never even actually a player, but I like to think I know a little bit about the game, and this point comes from the point of view of a fan. At srum time, it's already pretty much a lottery who gets the free kick when the ref sticks his arm up, Often it's club loyalty that decides who's wrong for me, Force collapse because those weak bastards pull off the hit, or Force pull off the hit because those bloody cheats went early...I'm sure if you're honest, you would agree that it's the same for you.

Now, since this area (and the breakdown) involve a pile of bodies trying to get their little advantage by bending the line of law, there's a lot going on and not everything will be picked up. Refs (I'm sure) would be often in the position of saying 'something went wrong, and I saw infringements on both sides, but I don't know where it started' so they talk a bit, give a warning and reset the scrum..........we've had lively threads on the nuber of reset scrums here before. OK, so if we say refs need to tighten up on law, specifically scrum feeds, we'll get more stoppages for delayed feeds, skew feeds and all the other stuff that goes on. You might think that'll make you happy Lee, but I argue that it's a double edged sword. we'd see more resets where the ref just isn't sure who to penalise, more penalties and free kicks and fewer scrums which are a contest for the ball.

I'm happy if the scrum's a contest for the ball, don't think I mind too much if it's skewed a bit towards the attacking team, as long as there's a chance.....I'll start despairing for our game when the ball's never won against the head, I'm happy with that being a BIG BIG play!

Same of course goes for the Breakdown. I don't want to see phase play reffed out of the game by refs who adhere to law for law's sake, If it's a fair contest for the ball....let it flow, If somebody's stopping that contest......that's what law's there for.


IMHO

[normie]

Is this a SANZAR directive or an IRB one? If the S14 is being played to different rules/interpretation than the internationals/WRC, what's the point?

I have the same concerns sheihk; Playing a S14 season with 'rewarding the attacking team' law interpretations only to hit a brick wall when it comes time to play NH teams.

One can only hope the policy is a success and the IRB will encourage the same.

[Burgs]

You have to say the vast majority of rucks would have to have hands involved, the ball doesn't just magically start moving backwards on it's own, but if it always got called then we would have 50 minutes of scrums, 10 minutes of rucks and mauls and 15 minutes of kick returns and 5 minutes of back moves, a bit like NH now...

[normie]

Anyone that's watched a rugby league game lately will say "yes"...

Yes, absolutely, but remember beige, a league scrum is almost non-contact. It is expected that the feed will advantage the feeding team.

However, I see nothing wrong with a slightly skewed scrum feed. After all, the team in possession has deservedly got the feed.