• Welcome to the Green and Gold Rugby forums. As you can see we've upgraded the forums to new software. Your old logon details should work, just click the 'Login' button in the top right.

2012 S15 All things Referee thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
After reviewing the guidelines it appears that Bryce reffed the situation 100% correctly... according to the IRB in regards to lifting tackles:

Have another look at the tape. He was lifted above the horizontal, dropped at an angle of about 60 degrees to the horizontal and impacted the ground with his shoulder first. And it was not even considered to be a penalty. I rest my case.
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
I seem to recall a penalty...?

If there wasn't then Bryce did stuff up... however, it did not deserve a card...
 

Slim 293

Stirling Mortlock (74)
No, under the guidelines Warburton's tackle warranted a red card...

The one on the weekend didn't...
 

Bruwheresmycar

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
Not sure about that. It was a lifting tackle. Should have at least been a penality. These was none. Should have been a white card, there was none. Should have been a warning, there was none. Recent history has been such that any lifting of a player was to receive the severest penality. Just ask Sam Warbuton.

Bryce was playing advantage, as soon as the tackle occurred he blew the game up and took it back for a penalty in front of the posts. He should have given a warning, but if he saw the tackle clearly didn't warrant a red card he doesn't need to give a white card.

& Sam Warburton's tackle however was classed as a spear tackle under the guidelines.
 

Bruwheresmycar

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
What do you see as the difference?

Clerc was picked up, turned past horizontal and driven to the ground practically neck first.

AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was picked up, turned about horizontal and was dropped from a low height onto his side. - Penalty at least, just not sure it fits the red card guidelines, any appeal would have a decent case.

Not in the guidelines but Clerc was on the ground for ages and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) appeared unhurt and got straight up. Clerc was probably milking it, but just something random that could influence the ref on field.
 

suckerforred

Chilla Wilson (44)
Clerc was picked up, turned past horizontal and driven to the ground practically neck first.

AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was picked up, turned about horizontal and was dropped from a low height onto his side. - Penalty at least, just not sure it fits the red card guidelines, any appeal would have a decent case.

Not in the guidelines but Clerc was on the ground for ages and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) appeared unhurt and got straight up. Clerc was probably milking it, but just something random that could influence the ref on field.

And this demonstrates how difficult the consistancy of reffereeing is. From my point of view I would have used the yellow in both cases.

I saw the Warburton tackle was - picked up past the horizontal (admittedly further past then Polki on AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper)) and dropped. Just as AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was picked up, past the horizontal and dropped. The fact that AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) landed on his shoulder and Clerc on his head could be put down to a number of factors, including how aware each of them was about what was happening and how they got their own body into a position to lessen the impact of the fall.

Now, adding that to the fact that the ref's were told at the world cup that 'if the tackled player goees beyond the horizontal' then the tackler is to be sent off, what do you do? Are the instructions from the RWC now forgotten as they only applied to that competition? I think we are going to have to agree to disagree here Bru. ( And Slim.)
 

PaarlBok

Rod McCall (65)
Interesting one which happens in the Brutes vs Blues match on Loftus. Ended in a lot of drama even supporter and players wanted to smack each other.

Rugby365, my wise friend Paul Dobson view.

Law Discussion: Ranger's last act

Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:02

In the very last minute of the Super Rugby match between the Bulls and the Blues, there was an incident after the try which has resulted in a citing. It is not that aspect that interests us but whether there should have been a penalty afterwards or not.
Bjorn Basson of the Bulls scored a try in the left corner. René Ranger of the Blues dived shoulder first onto Basson who was on the ground. The referee discussed the matter with his assistant who had held out his flag to indicate foul play. The referee then issued Ranger with a yellow card and also a white card which indicated a referral to the citing commissioner. The citing commissioner cited Ranger, which conformed that foul play had occurred.
The foul play consisted of two obvious actions - diving on a player on the ground and diving onto him should first. Clearly this constituted dangerous play.
What happened next. The Bulls' captain Pierre Spies wanted a penalty. The referee explained that 'in law' he could not do this, saying: "You would get a penalty back at the half-way line but because time's going to be up on the clock when he takes the conversion, it's going to be game over."
Obviously it's worth discussing, and it's not simple.
Law 5.7 (e) If time expires and the ball is not dead, or an awarded scrum or line-out has not been completed, the referee allows play to continue until the next time that the ball becomes dead. The ball becomes dead when the referee would have awarded a scrum, line-out, an option to the non-infringing team, drop out or after a conversion or successful penalty kick at goal. If a scrum has to be reset, the scrum has not been completed. If time expires and a mark, free kick or penalty kick is then awarded, the referee allows play to continue.
The ball becomes dead after a conversion, which is what the referee was talking about. The try was scored and the foul play occurred just before the 80 minutes were up, but by the time the conversion was taken, time would have been up and was in fact up.
There is another piece of law about the ball becoming dead: Law 22.11 (c) When a player scores a try or makes a touch down, the ball becomes dead.
The law does not say the ball becomes dead when the referee blows his whistle, but when the try is scored. The ball is dead when Basson grounds the ball.

The timing of the foul play may well be relevant. If Ranger's action occurred before Basson scored, the subsequent action was sufficient and complete.
If it happened after Basson had scored, the circumstances may well be different.
The incident happened quickly but could the TMO have been consulted to determine the timing of the foul play - before or after the try? That does not seem to be the case as the TMO protocol extends only to the following: 'Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal.'
Let's accept that the order of events was try first and then foul play. Is that it?
Law 22.7 (c) Any other foul play. When a player commits any other foul play in the in-goal while the ball is out of play, the penalty kick is awarded at the place where the game would otherwise have re-started.
Sanction: Penalty kick

In this case, the game would not have restarted at all after the conversion. The game would usually have restarted after the conversion - failed or successful - at the half-way line, but not in this case as time was up.
The use of 'out of play' in this law is clearly inadequate as the Definitions to the Laws of the game defines out of play as: This happens when the ball or the ball-carrier has gone into touch or touch-in-goal, or touched or crossed the dead-ball line. That definition clearly does not fit in with this law.
Look at dead to see if it fits better.
Dead: The ball is out of play. This happens when the ball has gone outside the playing area and remained there, or when the referee has blown the whistle to indicate a stoppage in play, or when a conversion kick has been taken.
This is not the same 'out of play' as the earlier 'out of play'! It has a wider scope.
If the ball is dead after the conversion, then time is up. There will be no restart and so there will be no penalty.
But perhaps the intention of the law is that there should be a penalty and 'the place where the game would otherwise have re-started' is just an indication of where the penalty kick should take place, the mark of the kick.
In fact that seems the best interpretation. It is hard to see that such an infringement has not a part to play in the match in which it happened. After the conversion the match still had unfinished business and the unfinished business was at the next place that the game would have been in action, that is at the middle of the half-way line.
For the Bulls' this would have been important if the conversion had failed as they would have needed another score to earn a bonus point./ In fact the conversion succeeded and the penalty could have improved their situation only if they could have scored a try from it.
 

PaarlBok

Rod McCall (65)
Super 15, Week 4
Chiefs vs Brumbies in Tauranga
Referee: Ian Smith (Australia)
Assistant referees: Vinny Munro (New Zealand), Nick Briant (New Zealand)
Television match official: Shane McDermott (New Zealand)
Stormers vs Blues at Newlands
Referee: Glen Jackson (New Zealand)
Assistant referees: Jaco Peyper (South Africa), Stefan Breytenbach (South Africa)
Television match official: Johann Meuwesen (South Africa)
Hurricanes vs Highlanders in Wellington
Referee: Bryce Lawrence (New Zealand)
Assistant referees: Keith Brown, Mike Fraser (New Zealand)
Television match official: Richard Kelly (New Zealand)
Waratahs vs Force in Sydney
Referee: Jonathon White (New Zealand)
Assistant referees: Steve Walsh (Australia), Angus Gardner (Australia)
George Ayoub (Australia)
Sharks vs Reds in Durban
Referee: Jonathan Kaplan (South Africa)
Assistant referees: Mark Lawrence (South Africa), Cobus Wessels (South Africa)
Television match official: Shaun Veldsman (South Africa)
Rebels vs Cheetahs in Melbourne
Referee: Garratt Williamson (New Zealand)
Assistant referees: Andrew Lees (Australia), James Leckie (Australia)
Television match official: Steve Lesczcynski (Australia)
 

PaarlBok

Rod McCall (65)
Aussies want to visit our country and learn the trade of reffing?

Here is a WP inisiative for 15 year and olders
http://www.wprugby.com/article.asp?id=1284841
Become a schools' referee (boys and girls)

The WP Rugby Referees' Society, in association with SARU and WP Rugby, will be hosting two special courses for potential referees.
What Will be covered?
� BokSmart course
� IRB Rugby Refereeing in Practise and Assistant Referees' course
� On-field instruction, positioning and shadow referee
� Insight into what it takes to be a match official
� Refereeing tips and more
Who Will be teaching the course?
� The WP Rugby Referees' Society
� National and Provincial Panel referees
� IRB Accredited Educators
When and Where Will it take place?
� 28, 29 and 30 March 2012
� 25, 26 and 27 June 2012
� Starting at 08h00 on day one and ending at 14h00 on the last day
� Jan Kriel School, Kuils River
The cost?
� R600 per person
What's included?
� Included in the price is accommodation, meals and refreshments, a goodie bag, Law book and IRB Rugby Refereeing in Practise Manual.
You also stand a chance of being a ball boy/girl at Newlands.
� WP Rugby Referees' certificate
� BokSmart licence and cerificate
Who can attend?
� Learners from the age of 15 (or who turn 15 this year)
Who do I contact?
� Lindsay Booysen - 021 659 4502 (during office hours)
lbooysen@wprugby.co.za
only 60 attendees per course Will be accepted.
 

Hawko

Tony Shaw (54)
Clerc was picked up, turned past horizontal and driven to the ground practically neck first.

AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) was picked up, turned about horizontal and was dropped from a low height onto his side. - Penalty at least, just not sure it fits the red card guidelines, any appeal would have a decent case.

Not in the guidelines but Clerc was on the ground for ages and AAC (Adam Ashley-Cooper) appeared unhurt and got straight up. Clerc was probably milking it, but just something random that could influence the ref on field.

Maybe the game on my tape was played in some parallel universe to yours, but in the game on my tape he was clearly lifted well above the horizontal and dropped on his shoulder. Perhaps someone can post that footage to clarify. I am unable to do so.
 

Bruwheresmycar

Nicholas Shehadie (39)
It's not far off, but I just struggle to see it coming under the spear tackle guidelines. Dangerous tackle for lifting still I reckon.


Maybe we could check at the refs forum or something? Someone there might have experience with the sytems in place. Alternatively you could email someone at your local union. They might have a good idea.
 

elementfreak

Trevor Allan (34)
It's not far off, but I just struggle to see it coming under the spear tackle guidelines. Dangerous tackle for lifting still I reckon.


Maybe we could check at the refs forum or something? Someone there might have experience with the sytems in place. Alternatively you could email someone at your local union. They might have a good idea.
PK and talking to there for me, although with the PK further in field you can understand why he awarded that one.

Edit: The PK call was made on the first viewing (not the greatest angle) although on the reply I would play on as it's a good hit.
 

PaarlBok

Rod McCall (65)
Just to put it in the right thread
Cheetahs were wronged in scrums – Bray
by Brenden Nel 13 March 2012, 17:18
Sanzar referees boss Lyndon Bray has admitted there was a “big imbalance” in the way Keith Brown allowed the Brumbies an advantage in hitting in at the scrums in their match on Saturday.
Bray has also called for more clarity on the final penalty, the one which gifted the Brumbies a victory on the whistle after they were behind for most of the match.
It is clear that Sanzar are not happy with Brown’s calls in the game, especially in the setpiece, where the Cheetahs were penalised five times, often within striking distance, and saw the Brumbies claw their way back from 23-10 to win the game.
While there is nothing that can be done about the result, talk within refereeing circles is that Brown is on shaky ground and will need to up his game or fall off the Sanzar refereeing panel.
Bray, in Cape Town to meet with Saru officials and with teams in the country, said that Brown would still undergo the official Sanzar review, but had already done a “self-review” where the imbalance was apparent.
“Keith has done his own self-review and out of it the scrums to me stood out as the big imbalance. Taking out the debate about the last penalty, the imbalance came with the way he managed the engage sequence in the scrum setpieces,” Bray told SuperSport.com
“There was no question that the Cheetahs did go early, but both packs did and that started earlier with the Brumbies going early on the engage call, to which the Cheetahs responded. There were consequences to that, in that the hip position got messy and the Cheetahs lost confidence in the engage process. Keith has to take ownership of that in the game.”
As for the final penalty, where the Cheetahs were penalised for wheeling the scrum, but have subsequently claimed it was the Brumbies and not them who wheeled the setpiece, Bray is waiting for clarity from the three country scrum experts before making a call.
The Cheetahs afterwards said they ordered players not to wheel the scrum in case there was to be a penalty, but were penalised anyway.
“I’ve sent an email to the three scrum coaches in the countries and am waiting for a response,” Bray explained.
“The issue is that about three years ago we had what we call a “sideways crib”, where the back five literally walk sideways in the scrum. At the time we all agreed that it was rubbish and a negative tactic that was not in the spirit of the contest at the scrum.
“We spent a lot of time at the time debating how do you rule on it. The coaches felt at the time that you need to allow players to have an effective forward push before a scrum can wheel. If there is that, then if the scrum goes around the corner, and the scrum literally turns on its access, it isn’t illegal, as long as there is a forward shove.”
“What I’ve asked is these three or four decisions which led to penalties and the last one to have a professional view as to how we approach this. We need to get back to all the referees and make sure they are mindful that this must be done legally.”
 

PaarlBok

Rod McCall (65)
and Walsch also fluffed it on Loftus.
Sport24
Bulls deserved a penalty - Bray

2012-03-13 20:02
Email | Print


080a5fbae00846eea08a867481f19885.jpg

Steve Walsh (File)
Brenden Nel - SuperSport

Johannesburg - The Bulls were right to ask for a penalty on the halfway line after their winger Bjorn Basson was hurt in an incident of foul play at the end of their 29-23 loss against the Blues at Loftus Versfeld on Saturday.
SANZAR referees boss Lyndon Bray has admitted that referee Steve Walsh “got it wrong” when he refused Bulls captain Pierre Spies’ pleas to award the penalty after the game.
Basson scored in the 79th minute of the game, and as he went over Blues winger Rene Ranger hit him illegally in attempting to stop him, an incident which earned Ranger a yellow card and a citing. The citing was later deemed to be a red card, and Ranger was sentenced to a two week ban by a SANZAR disciplinary tribunal for the incident.
But when it happened, Spies asked rightly for the penalty on the halfway line, the right call after a yellow card was awarded for foul play. Walsh refused, citing the time on the clock, which had expired.
While it may be a long shot, the Bulls could argue that they could have played the penalty and scored a try, thereby giving themselves a chance to win the game.
However, when Walsh refused, they had no chance to do such.
Bray told SuperSport.com that Walsh afterwards had acknowledged he had made a mistake with the call and that he should have given the penalty on the halfway line.
The incident is a rare one, but one which caused much confusion among fans and players alike.
Bray said while it was a mistake, it should be seen in the bigger picture of the game.
“To what extent do you say, how does that error colour that performance. It isn’t that we trivialise it, it is an error and he was the first one to acknowledge that he made that mistake but for 79 minutes he refereed extremely well. We have to see that mistake in the context of his performance,” Bray said.
Bray said the decision, which is not something you see everyday in rugby, had literally caught Walsh out. In the heat of the moment he made a decision, one which was wrong, and it would be brought up in his review, which takes place this week.
“When you look at a guy of Steve’s calibre - he’s one of our best refs and in great form at the moment.
“Something catches you out - in this case its probably something that you have dealt with twice in your career and you make a decision in the moment, and you are adamant and you back yourself. Unfortunately he was wrong and he has accepted it afterwards. It is an unusual situation that doesn’t happen often in a game," said Bray.
The Bulls are unlikely to complain, but will feel they could have stolen the game in the end if they were given the chance.
 

Da Munch

Chris McKivat (8)
and Walsch also fluffed it on Loftus.
Sport24

How could he when your first post about it says he was right, the ball is dead, and is so after a try has been scored.
And the one about the Cheetahs being wronged stinks the same;
...
"Sanzar referees boss Lyndon Bray has admitted there was a “big imbalance” in the way Keith Brown ..."
...
"Bray is waiting for clarity from the three country scrum experts before making a call."

Seems to me, Bray's made the decision before consulting the sanzar scrum experts (why bother having them!) or he likes blowing his mouth off.

p.s I picked the Cheetahs and the Bulls
 

PaarlBok

Rod McCall (65)
How could he when your first post about it says he was right, the ball is dead, and is so after a try has been scored.
And the one about the Cheetahs being wronged stinks the same;
...
"Sanzar referees boss Lyndon Bray has admitted there was a “big imbalance” in the way Keith Brown ..."
...
"Bray is waiting for clarity from the three country scrum experts before making a call."

Seems to me, Bray's made the decision before consulting the sanzar scrum experts (why bother having them!) or he likes blowing his mouth off.

p.s I picked the Cheetahs and the Bulls
Its not what I say, its what Bray say what counts. Read the article.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top