Players don't understand decisions and rightly question, referees feel under pressure and react emotionally....
fundamental laws of the game should revolve around the idea that we as players know when we've infringed and don't have to guess or be dependent on the judgement of a single mind.
Consult with us players to simplify things; let's work this out before the role that refs play becomes a growing cancer within our brilliant game.
I started playing in 1974, and the very first law that was drummed into me was the then analogue to the current Law 10.4(s), which says: [LAWS](s) All players must respect the authority of the referee. They must not dispute the referee’s decisions. ... Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS] Where do you get this bizarre idea that players "rightly question" decisions? You seem to feel that players should be allowed to get on with what they are doing wrong without interference from the referee, because they've been coached to do it (or simply have not been penalised enough when they do it). It's a point of view, but not one I have much sympathy with.
30 players on a pitch who can all quote law to you, clause and verse, might put you under a fair bit of pressure.
Doubt it. If any of them open their mouth to dispute the decision, they'll know full well that the PK comes under 10.4(s). They'll then shut up as the laws require them. As a referee, if a player could quote me a law a didn't know, or wasn't applying, I'd feel it was time to find another way of spending my weekend afternoons. As it is, I have always found ti tiresome to ahve to explain to people who have played (and presumably been coached) the game for decades that the "gate" is a tackle concept, and not a ruck one. A referee has to deal with this and countless other routine misconceptions myriad times a season - forgive us for getting jaded and concluding that players are their own worst enemy by refusing to engage with the laws of the game they play - but it's a technical game, and the frustration you mention derives from the fact that the players normally have only the most limited grasp of the technicalities they fall foul of. We are not there to coach you.
...yet the laws around this situation regularly see people who are trying to win the ball penalised for a wide variety of 'technical' infringements and in other cases allowed to commit a variety of infringements based on the referees understanding - just look at what is being said on this very thread.
This is in relation to the isolated player getting pinged. If you've ever heard the phrase "the man on his feet is King", then the application of this is not rocket science. If you get isolated from your team mates, the tackle sequence develops in full without an intervening ruck to complicate things. Does the tackler act so as to permit the tackled player to place the ball if he wishes to do so? Does the next defender arrive through the gate and stay on his feet? When he wants the ball, does the ball carrier allow him to take it? You'll see that before I consider penalising the tackled player, I want to see the defence get two technical requirements right. If they foul up, the attack gets the PK. But as the tackled player has left his team behind, the defence are able to act without pressure of time. They usually get the opportunity to play legally, and take it. In such cases, they either get the ball or the PK.
Strange? I would've thought that the lack of understanding of a decision was the main root of frustration?
I agree with you. But all I can do is give clear verbal and signalled indications as to the reason for the PK. If the players have not done enough homework to understand it, that's a problem we all have to deal with, but not by extended coaching and mega explanation from me on the field. An example from arecent game of mine: red #12 breaks through the defensive line, and makes 20m before being brought down by the fullback. Blue 6 is next to arrive, and without changing his angle picks up the ball. I penalise him for not coming through the gate; he comments (not aggressively) that there was no ruck. I agree, but give a brief explanation of the requirements of Law 15.6(d). He's unconvinced but doesn't push it - I decline to give a dissent penalty under 10.4(s). I've gone as far as I can without disadvantaging the attacking side; he's still frustrated. What more can I do? Coaching is for coaches. Players should know the laws they play under.
...My apologies if I am wrong, but I seem to remember an extensive period of trial and testing lead by the top referees, which in turn lead to the introduction of the ELVs.
It was not led by the referees.
Ian Cook said:
Err, you obviously don't see what I see...
Attachment 1818
2. No. 10, the tackler has not yet released the ball carrier, so what is Dusutoir doing trying to rip the ball. I thought tackle guidlines wereFirst - the tackler must release the tackled player...
Then - the fetcher (having entered through the tackle gate, can compete for the ball.
Interesting example of the point Soulphoenix was making. A situation that occurs countless times in every game, and we have disagreement. I accept that TD is liable to PK for being off his feet; however, if that's within the ref's tolerance levels, then my take on what you've written is:
2. No. 10, the tackler has not yet released the ball carrier,
but Dusutoir
is legally trying to rip the ball. I thought tackle guidlines were:
First - the tackler must release the tackled player
so that he may place the ball as permitted under Law 15.5(c). In this case, there is nothing preventing the tackled player from placing the ball, except the immediate arrival of TD wanting the ball...
So - TD as the fetcher (having entered through the tackle gate) can compete for the ball, and the ball carrier must release it to him under 15.5(e).