Referees - Match Adjudicators, or Match "Managers"?

[Punkpapa]

Nobody's really questioning that. But a video review could have shown that De Villiers was in touch. Line out..throw to ACT.

Guess that is what I was trying to get at - the question of whether the try was to be awarded or not was irrelevant as the ball was in touch before the incident. I don't want to see penalties all the time - that is why we are playing under ELV's.
I don't really have an issue with the infringement call, other than the fact it happened after the ball being in touch.

[shasta]

I had to watch the replay and slow it down to see that he went out, if the 'Assistant Referee' couldn't see in in real time what do you expect the Match Referee do? TMO at every possibly opportunity?

I've already said I can't see why every try can't be reviewed while the conversion attempt is being made. It's what they get paid for.

[BLR]

I've already said I can't see why every try can't be reviewed while the conversion attempt is being made. It's what they get paid for.

So if the try is decided not to be a try they just told the kicker 'bad luck, your kick didn't count'?

[shasta]

So if the try is decided not to be a try they just told the kicker 'bad luck, your kick didn't count'?

Practice. Just kidding. Probably the video ref would know before the attempt if there is a potential problem and he needs more time.

[BLR]

Practice. Just kidding. Probably the video ref would know before the attempt if there is a potential problem and he needs more time.

I think NFL have a system where the video refs are constantly monitoring the play and can interject, I'm not sure but I think I heard something like that....ideally putting another frequency on his earpiece so not only can he hear the 'Assistant referees' the TMO can inform him on any potential problems, make them work for thier bread....

[shasta]

I think NFL have a system where the video refs are constantly monitoring the play and can interject, I'm not sure but I think I heard something like that....ideally putting another frequency on his earpiece so not only can he hear the 'Assistant referees' the TMO can inform him on any potential problems, make them work for thier bread....

So you're coming around then?

[BLR]

So you're coming around then?

No, I was always around I just don't think that they should interrupt play, and the fact is that until full coverage like I suggest is implemented then it would make the game too stop start.

[Punkpapa]

If Mr Walsh had of asked the TMO - I am going to award a penalty try, is there any reason I should not award it, then the answer would have been right. He could have still given a penalty for the infringement, but it would not have been a penalty try.

[Ecky]

One thing I notice a lot - esp since I was gifted a pair of 'Sports Ears' (you guys are too much ) and at the Force's game against the Chiefs is how much the referee's interfere with and guide the play of the game rather than refereeing the game as it is played.

We know that the Chiefs were targeting O'Connor with high kicks and then attempting to intimidate him with a charge. On at least two occasions the runner leading the charge was in an offside position and was called back by the referee before making contact and play was allowed to continue.

Sure, Jonker may have saved O'Connor a bit of a knock and allowed the game to 'flow' by apparently not allowing an infringement to occur, but by being in an offside position and attempting to attack O'Connor in the first place they had already interfered in play - O'Connor had to keep an eye on the ball and the offside player who was about to flatten him. To his credit, O'Connor stood his ground and made the catch.

I would expect this sort of coaching by the referee in a juniors match, but surely at Super 14 level the referee's role would be to referee and not coach?

Should the referee alert a player that he is on an offside position? Should a penalty have been awarded in the above instance? Should the refs take a step back and only referee on the game as it is played? This would give the disciplined teams the benefit that good discipline should bring and penalise the undisciplined.

As an aside - did anyone else think that when advantage was applied to the Force, it lasted only a few seconds with little ground being made yet seemed to go one over multiple phases for the Chiefs?

Bloody refs ....

Well, well, well, I was wondering if/when such a can of worms might be opened along these lines.......

Back in "the day" the ref was a policeman of sorts and said nothing during the game until he blew his whistle and then verbalised what the offence and sanction were.

Ever since I have been reffing (11th year), us lot in Australia have been guided along the "less is best" line. Less stoppages, not necessarily less talk.

BUT...... if one can 'manage' the player out of committing the offence he is about to commit by telling him what to do, or what not to do, then play can continue, there's one less stoppage and you lot on the side line are happier. (I actually thought that Jonker's call to the guy rushing O'Connor and the guy actually pulling out of his run was one of the best bits of game management I've ever seen! Usually the guy has only eyes for the ball landing in the other guy's arms that he is deaf to this type of call)

Imagine if no ref reminded the "pillars" and "posts" that they really do need to be behind the hindmost feet of their player in the tackle/ruck/maul and we just penalised them. Imagine if no ref reminded the #9 (scrummy, as the Saffas call them) that the maul has stalled and they need to get it moving or clear it. Imagine if the players had to figure the line of touch and the gap in a line-out. Imagine if the players had to rely on their own law knowledge as to when the ball has emerged from a scrum/tackle/ruck/maul/line-out.

Having said all of that for you, dear reader, to bear in mind, any player who is in an offside position is liable to penalty if he affects play. From where I was sitting (in a corporate box with Cougar & Cola in hand) I thought that the approaching player had pulled out in time for O'Connor to exercise whatever option, and so had not affected play, so no penalty required.

Also please note the TMO is simply not able to adjudicate on things in the field of play; he may only adjudicate on what's going on in in-goal. So, at the moment, Junior (S Walsh) could not have gone to the TMO for the call unless the player had gone into touch in the motion of scroing the try. Or the touch-down. (That's the defender dotting it down for a 22)

As for advantage, there is a distinct difference in how (imho) it can be applied for a scrum vs a penalty kick or free kick. I would let the advantage go for quite a lot longer for a penalty than for a scrum, for instance. If the non-offending team gets good possession and is able to pass it along a line (much like a back line after they win the scrum) then advantage is over pretty quickly. If they are not gaining much ground, or have poor quality ball, then I will blow it up pretty quickly if a penalty kick is the go. It's the only law in the book which allows the ref's discretion so, according to law, the ref is always right in this one.

...and for those of you who have commented, or have opinions, on who is a good ref and who is not so good, I really, really, REALLY hope your opinions are not based on the commentary of the games you've watched. Nor are they based on your patriotic support of one team.....

Right - any questions?

[The InnFORCEr]

Right - any questions?

How do you sleep at night

[Punkpapa]

As I have been quite vocal about the Refs I like and don't like, it is not that I think they are bad refs, but more what they focus on. Where IMHO Mr Walsh went wrong was an application of one interpretation for one team, and not applied the other way (hadn't mentioned this previously, but seeing that the Brumbies were denied a try for not too disimilar situation at the other end, it begs the question?)

Just a quick clarification about the TMO only being able to comment on the in goal play. In the case of the penalty try, it makes sense. But how is that applied for Shep's no-try - was the knock fwd in the field of play? In which case, was it the grounding of the ball where the knock on occurred, or the gathering of the ball which was in the field of play?

[shasta]

No, I was always around I just don't think that they should interrupt play, and the fact is that until full coverage like I suggest is implemented then it would make the game too stop start.

I was winding you up there.

I don't want to see anything like that. Our referees have enough to get right in general play without the George Ayoubs of the world yammering in their earpiece. That's for the ref's assistants. The TMO is not interrupting anyone while play is stopped for conversions. Similar to the Mungos who now monitor the "stripping" rule while the scrum is forming for the knock on/ball dropped in tackle.

[no.8]

Right - any questions?

What is the name of your seeing eye dog?

[jazza93]

the refs are doing fine in the super 14 at the moment. I hope they keep it up for the finals.

The video ref needs to be sorted out by the finals though, they need to be clear on what they can and cant do so there is no problems like these.

[Ecky]

How do you sleep at night

Like a baby - I wake crying every 4 hours having pissed myself....

What is the name of your seeing eye dog?

Eric. Why? have you met him?
Oh, and both of my parents are married - to each other and everything!

Just a quick clarification about the TMO only being able to comment on the in goal play. In the case of the penalty try, it makes sense. But how is that applied for Shep's no-try - was the knock fwd in the field of play? In which case, was it the grounding of the ball where the knock on occurred, or the gathering of the ball which was in the field of play?

Dunno as I haven't seen the TV version of it yet. But, according to the protocols, it's the bit where he's in the process of scoring, so typically this is in the in-goal. I thought at the time he might have scooped it forwards as he was collecting it off the ground before he made his way to the try line, but will need to see the TV stuff to comment.