Search results

I wish they would switch off all animated advertising during the game, I find it a distraction -but then that is what it is designed for.

Don't just tell them what you are penalising -tell them what you need them to do in future. e.g. "Tackler not rolling away -you have got to get clear much quicker than that"

I have asked a Coach if he would 'Like to sub a particular player before someone gets hurt and/or Red Carded' -he did.

Said it before;- ignore unintentional fumbles that give no clear advantage (They almost always provide a disadvantage to the fumbler's team)

I hope they soon noticed the difference.

You can't be wrong if you blow the whistle for touch. Then worry about the Quick Throw and deal with that separately.

My first thought on replay was "His right arm is down by his side so he can hit with a 'hard' shoulder" although his left arm did come round afterwards. The head movement looks bad enough for a 'head contact' but WB gave him benefit of the doubt. Yellow for either, or both.

Absolutely correct. And; Both the flanker and number 8 need to learn how to protect their scrum-half. Where to place their feet, where to place the ball. When to pick it up and pass to your scrum-half thereby taking out the oppo, 9 etc.

As an assessor, if a referee penalised a player under Law 9.27 'against the spirit of the game' I would find it difficult to criticise them. Equally, if they handled it with a 'get on with the game' type comment I would also find it difficult to criticise them. At my level I might expect a...

Well done, that is the biggest hurdle out of the way.

If they did not 'Cause' the shortage, no man-off.

Momentum driven over I can live with, secondary shove by his team mates arriving after the going to ground = PK for not releasing

3.19 and 3.20 are compulsory man-off when a team 'caused' the lack of a front row player at the first time of asking (their Red or yellow card, no front row replacement). An injured player does not mean you play one short unless it is the first time of asking..

I'm not laughing

If all players in a Ruck are supposed to stay on their feet, how can we have a ruck with everyone OFF their feet?

Now all we have to do is work backwards into the laws to see if it is correct. Life seemed much simpler before they 'Simplified' the laws and added some of the Experimental Law Variations.

No; I refer to "anything else not covered in law =scrum". Anything in goal can only be a 5m scrum. Only because it is not covered in the "simplification"

Error on my part -looking at defending player, still trying to find Attacking player Laws

We had a similar scenario in a training video recently -I gave that a red card, I give this a red card. Contest your innocence at Disciplinary if you wish.

We all think like that.