A bad day at the office for CJ?

[Dickie E]

Or just a mistake by a player eager to get on? Do you really think a player will count how many are on already?

What were the circumstances? Were there multiple changes being made?

This is elite HSBC 7s, not the weeds. There are significant substitution protocols that are followed and all officials are miked up. Yes, a mistake. But not a good look.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Ok, so was it cheating, or a convenient failure to count?

You're still make the same false dichotomy

1. NZ Cheating
2. NZ can't count

You do not admit the possibility of any other reason such as

3. Sideline official made a mistake
4. Player who was supposed to come off didn't hear his name/number called.

But I agree with Dickie... whatever the reason for the eight players being on, its not a good look for the game, especially in Olympic year with the Olympic Sevens looming..

As I said before, it isn't the first time its has happened in a high profile game. England v Samoa, RWC 2003. England fielded 16 players at one point during the game, which coincided with a try-saving tackle by an England player on a Samoan attacker.





NOTE: In case you don't understand what a false dichotomy is, here is a simple example for you

Is this shape a square or a circle?

The question is a false dichotomy... it admits no answer other than the two supplied?

 

[crossref]

Its just being made a big deal of because its NZ and because they scored a match drawing try while the extra player was on the field. .

In sevens any half-way organised team with an extra player on the field will very likely score a try! I can't imagine a teamlike NZ failing to take advantage of 8 v 7.

But of course it was a cock-up, I can't conceive of a plot to deliberately bring on eight players.

 

[thepercy]

You admit that NZ made a mistake, I was just highlighting the nature of the mistake.

 

[Pegleg]

I did not raise this point to accuse NZ of cheating or being too think to count to 7. Nor to have a go at the referee. It's just a "cock up" that of the type we've all made I once got it an a game of 15s on the parks.

At the top level the refs should be less prone to this sort of error mainly because they do have back up staff; ARS, 4th, 5th, officials TMOs etc. That it happened at a fairly high profile event is bad publicity for the game.

To turn this into: "was the team cheating or thick?" Is not helpful.

 

[irishref]

Wouldn't say it's CJs fault, he's only got 5 players in front of him!

You'd assume those in charge of the sidelines would have a grip on who's coming on and off.

You'll have an official situated with each team's bench who receive substitute cards from the team. They give this card to a pitch manager who is in radio contact with the ref. The pitch manager and bench official are in charge of getting players on and off the pitch.

 

[crossref]

You'll have an official situated with each team's bench who receive substitute cards from the team. They give this card to a pitch manager who is in radio contact with the ref. The pitch manager and bench official are in charge of getting players on and off the pitch.

I wonder if what happened is that there was an entirely above board substitution, with the card properly submitted, but the substituted player didn't get the message and failed to leave the pitch

 

[ChrisR]

Perhaps they should use the electronic number boards that indicates who's on/off. Or do they already? That way players (and the referee) can see their number and the referee can be aware of who's leaving. Since all subs happen on a dead ball it shouldn't be too hard. Especially if the player leaving has to be off the pitch before the replacement can enter.

Is time off during substitutions?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Perhaps they should use the electronic number boards that indicates who's on/off. Or do they already? That way players (and the referee) can see their number and the referee can be aware of who's leaving. Since all subs happen on a dead ball it shouldn't be too hard. Especially if the player leaving has to be off the pitch before the replacement can enter.

Is time off during substitutions?

We use substitute boards (not electronic) in ITM Cup and Super Rugby

I wonder if what happened is that there was an entirely above board substitution, with the card properly submitted, but the substituted player didn't get the message and failed to leave the pitch

I saw something similar to that happen in the ITM Cup. Referee called time off, gave the secondary signal for substitution and called out the player's jersey number (14) to leave. The player started jogging off towards the sideline, but he hadn't actually heard the referee at all, he was just heading into position on the wing; the referee saw him jogging away and thought he was heading off, so he played on with 16 players on the field. However, it only lasted a few seconds because the sideline official saw what happened and called him off.

Now I can easily understand how that might happen, and the sideline official not spot it, in a situation where both sides are making multiple subs at the same time.

 

[Dickie E]

Perhaps they should use the electronic number boards that indicates who's on/off. Or do they already? That way players (and the referee) can see their number and the referee can be aware of who's leaving. Since all subs happen on a dead ball it shouldn't be too hard. Especially if the player leaving has to be off the pitch before the replacement can enter.

Is time off during substitutions?

No, electronic boards are not used.

Maybe 50% of the time time off is called while the sub happens. Often the ref will look for the player who is going off but just as often the player knows beforehand it is his turn to go off.

For the other 50% the sub is made without time off as the stoppage is close to the bench or the sub is made after a score or at 1/2 time.

There is some variation ref to ref. Some are strict on time off while others less so.

 

[irishref]

It's sevens remember, subs have to be processed asap. Pitch manager with radio contact to ref is in charge of any message that a player still hasn't left the pitch.

Bench officials for each team should 'count them on and count them off' and relay message to pitch manager by non-compliance. Also asap.

 

[Ian_Cook]

NZ Sevens team cleared of wrongdoing?

http://www.worldrugby.org/sevens-series/news/137975


Sounds like WR has decided it was a series of mistakes with no one group or person to blame.

"The investigation, undertaken by the designated disciplinary official, has determined that, while New Zealand did field eight players, it was an inadvertent breach as a consequence of a number of factors relating to the management of replacements involving a number of parties," the statement read."

So much for "cheats" and "numerical illiteracy"!

 

[Dickie E]

It would be appropriate for NZRU or Sir Gordon to make a statement of regret & contrition.

 

[Ian_Cook]

It would be appropriate for NZRU or Sir Gordon to make a statement of regret & contrition.

I agree.

The sideline officials might want to offer an apology to Mike Friday and the Aussie Sevens too.

 

[Dickie E]

I agree.

The sideline officials might want to offer an apology to the Mike Friday and the Aussie Sevens too.

why Mike Friday?

 

[Ian_Cook]

why Mike Friday?

Oops, I meant Andy Friend! My bad!

 

[Ricardowensleydale]

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/98915197/RugbyRefs/shape.jpg[/IMG]

Is this shape a square or a circle?

The question is a false dichotomy... it admits no answer other than the two supplied?

The answer is "No, it is neither a square nor a circle"

 

[Ian_Cook]

The answer is "No, it is neither a square nor a circle"

And therefore proves the false dichotomy since your answer is neither of the two then were offered.

Thanks

 

[Ricardowensleydale]

And therefore proves the false dichotomy since your answer is neither of the two then were offered.

Thanks

I think you misunderstand the original question due to a persecution complex.

"Was it cheating, or a convenient failure to count?"

The answer you were looking for was "No it wasn't"

If I ask my wife "Is your mother's birthday in 15th or 16th of June" that doesn't mean it is on either the 15th or 16th

PS I have no idea when my mother in laws birthday is.

 

[OB..]

I think you misunderstand the original question due to a persecution complex.

I don't think so. I took it to be a bit of sledging, implying that there was no honourable explanation. And I am not a New Zealander.