[Scrum] Advantage close to full time

[crossref]

There is an expression you hear elite referees use "No advantage - always under pressure". They usually use it when the team have managed to clear the ruck, but has not been able to get the ball wide of the ruck because of opposition pressure by, for example, rush defence.

that's the point though --

[LAWS](d) Tactical advantage means freedom for the non-offending team to play the ball as they wish.[/LAWS]

normally a team will wish to attack, so if they haven't got the ability to do this then no advantage is gained.

but in the circumstances of the OP we are told that the team do NOT wish to attack, but instead what they wish to do is ---

Have the forwards keep hold of the ball in the usual 'wait as long as possible, pick up, take a step, form a new ruck' way..

so once they form a tidy ruck, and any pressure they did have is relieved then they have got the freedom to play the ball as they wish (which is to recycle it a few more times until the whistle goes)...

You have to make a call one way or another, you can't wait any longer as they are never going to achieve territory, or an attacking option, as they aren't trying to.
So while the Law is the same in the 79th minute, what the team is trying to do has changed.

you could think territorially and call no adv gained, scrum

or you could think tactically and take the view that they have gained the freedom to play the ball exactly as they wish, and have therefore gained a tactical advantage as defined: adv over.

 

[DocY]

I think I can see Ian's point. It's not often I'd call advantage over after recycling the ball once (I think crossref is being a bit stingy with his single recycle, but I can see where he's coming from), but I'd usually call something after two or three phases.

My gut feeling (which this thread hasn't really changed) is that I'd probably wait a similar number of phases as I would earlier in the game, but in the 80th minute, if they've gone back 10 meters and still have secure possession I'd say that's probably advantage over whereas earlier in the game when they were trying to attack I'd almost certainly go back for the scrum.

 

[crossref]

but in the 80th minute, if they've gone back 10 meters and still have secure possession I'd say that's probably advantage over whereas earlier in the game when they were trying to attack I'd almost certainly go back for the scrum.

that's exactly the point I am making, yes.

 

[Pegleg]

A "tactical" advantage can mean different things at different times to different people. EMPATHY!

 

[Ian_Cook]

that's the point though --

[LAWS](d) Tactical advantage means freedom for the non-offending team to play the ball as they wish.[/LAWS]

normally a team will wish to attack, so if they haven't got the ability to do this then no advantage is gained.

but in the circumstances of the OP we are told that the team do NOT wish to attack, but instead what they wish to do is ---



so once they form a tidy ruck, and any pressure they did have is relieved then they have got the freedom to play the ball as they wish (which is to recycle it a few more times until the whistle goes)...

You have to make a call one way or another, you can't wait any longer as they are never going to achieve territory, or an attacking option, as they aren't trying to.
So while the Law is the same in the 79th minute, what the team is trying to do has changed.

you could think territorially and call no adv gained, scrum

or you could think tactically and take the view that they have gained the freedom to play the ball exactly as they wish, and have therefore gained a tactical advantage as defined: adv over.

So you think that the team is "playing playing the ball as they wish" when they run a series of "pick and drives" in the last minute, but they are NOT "playing the ball as they wish" when they did so in the 27th minute? If that is true, why were they doing it?

Let me outline for you a perfectly plausible scenario (one that is often repeated at all levels of rugby) that will help you to understand why I strongly object to your approach to managing advantage.

Same situation as the OP, BUT the Red team is 6 points ahead, and needs one try to claim a bonus point and deny their opponents a close loss bonus point. Red start to pick and drive under advantage; are they...

► Simply trying to wind down the clock to end the game, happy with the win?
► Trying to gain some ground to draw a PK so they can kick a goal and at least deny Blue a BP?
► Trying to score the try to get a BP themselves and deny Blue a BP?

Maybe they aren't even aware of the BP situation, or are not thinking of it, but how are you going to know that? What has happened to your context now?

As I said earlier, both teams have every right to expect consistency; to expect you to apply and manage advantage in exactly the same way in the 79th minute that you did in every other minute of the game. If you applied advantage differently in the 79th minute to the way you applied it to the rest of the game, you have not been consistent.

You have spent the first 75 minutes not calling advantage over until the ball is well clear, a couple of passes wide of the ruck, then suddenly in the 79th minute, you are calling advantage over after a pick and go. If I am your MO, you are in for a discussion about consistency in your rulings.

Trying to second guess what teams are doing or trying to do is fraught with danger. The safest path is to play exactly what is in front of you and remain consistent in the way you manage all aspects and phases of the game, including advantage.

 

[crossref]

Trying to second guess what teams are doing or trying to do is fraught with danger. The safest path is to play exactly what is in front of you and remain consistent in the way you manage all aspects and phases of the game, including advantage.

On the contrary in training sessions often been told that a good ref understanda what a team is trying to do, and the more experienced and better ref you are, the more easily you can read the game, and the better you can ref it... whether it's to help you position yourself in the best place, or particularly to make good calls on materiality and advantage

On advantage

[LAWS](d) Tactical advantage means freedom for the non-offending team to play the ball as they wish.[/LAWS]
so their wishes come into it.

A "tactical" advantage can mean different things at different times to different people. EMPATHY!

quite right

The safest path is to play exactly what is in front of you and remain consistent in the way you manage all aspects and phases of the game, including advantage .

If you are saying that you pay no attention at all to what the team are trying to achieve - then I think you are being too rigid

 

[Ian_Cook]

On the contrary in training sessions often been told that a good ref understanda what a team is trying to do, and the more experienced and better ref you are, the more easily you can read the game, and the better you can ref it... whether it's to help you position yourself in the best place, or particularly to make good calls on materiality and advantage

That does not apply to changing the way you apply the Laws.

I seriously doubt that any referee coach is telling you that changing your management of the advantage law in the dying seconds of a match is OK. If he is telling you that, then he ain't much of a referee coach.

If you are saying that you pay no attention at all to what the team are trying to achieve - then I think you are being too rigid

No, that is your strawman

I'm saying that you apply the Laws the same way from kick off to no-side

You haven't addressed the scenario I laid out for you. How are you going to apply context to a situation when there is no way that you can possibly know what Red are trying to do?


---


The Referee has been playing advantage the same way for 79 minutes; a couple of passes wide of the ruck under no defensive pressure is "advantage over".

Red are picking and driving with 30 seconds to go, They have decided to go for the BP try, safe in the knowledge that they have a scrum advantage, so if they make an error, they come back for the scrum. They continue to use pick and drives to try to draw in Blue defenders (even if they are not gaining ground) in an effort to make space out wide.

As they are about to go wide, the referee, Mr Gotcha (who is trying to be a clever dick and second guess that Red are trying to wind the clock down) suddenly changes what he has been doing all match, and calls advantage over, and as he does so, a Red player drops the ball, which a Blue player picks up and proceeds to run the length to score the try under the sticks. Blue kick the conversion to win.

I have a fair idea what the Red coach and players are going to say about Mr Gotcha; some of the words are likely to rhyme with "hunt" and "anchor"

If I am Mr Gotcha's match observer, he is in for a bollocking.

 

[crossref]

Ian, you are so rude.

 

[DocY]

The Referee has been playing advantage the same way for 79 minutes; a couple of passes wide of the ruck under no defensive pressure is "advantage over".

Red are picking and driving with 30 seconds to go, They have decided to go for the BP try, safe in the knowledge that they have a scrum advantage, so if they make an error, they come back for the scrum. They continue to use pick and drives to try to draw in Blue defenders (even if they are not gaining ground) in an effort to make space out wide.

As they are about to go wide, the referee, Mr Gotcha (who is trying to be a clever dick and second guess that Red are trying to wind the clock down) suddenly changes what he has been doing all match, and calls advantage over, and as he does so, a Red player drops the ball, which a Blue player picks up and proceeds to run the length to score the try under the sticks. Blue kick the conversion to win.

I have a fair idea what the Red coach and players are going to say about Mr Gotcha; some of the words are likely to rhyme with "hunt" and "anchor"

If I am Mr Gotcha's match observer, he is in for a bollocking.

I don't necessarily see an inconsistency here. There's more than one way to call advantage over and if the only time the ref has done so previously is two passes clear of a ruck then it's either been a very boring game or he's been very blinkered.

A scrum advantage can't be open ended - if a team is picking and going (even in the 27th minute) I'm not going to let them do so indefinitely with the safety net of advantage.
In your situation, how many times had they tried to suck in defenders? If they'd tried more than 6 times and the referee brought them back for the scrum I'd be giving him a bollocking for not calling it over. Sure, if they'd gone two or three times he might have called advantage over too soon, but that would be the same whenever it happened.

 

[Ian_Cook]

A scrum advantage can't be open ended - if a team is picking and going (even in the 27th minute) I'm not going to let them do so indefinitely with the safety net of advantage.

I agree and I never suggested this at all.

If that is what you have been doing for the rest of the match, I have no problem with you doing it in the last seconds

What I will object to is you springing it on them with less that a minute on the clock after having not managed single advantage that way for the other 79 minutes.'

Refereeing by "gotcha" is always a bad idea!

 

[DocY]

I don't think anyone's trying any "gotchas", just trying to allow advantage to be played as best as possible. Guessing what the players are wanting to do is part of that - and nine times out of ten we get it right.

Another (not unrealistic) example might be: blues are getting hammered in the scrums - every scrum so far has resulted in a red penalty. Red knock-on. If you were refereeing are you really not going to surmise that blue would rather advantage be called over, even if they've lost a few meters, than have a scrum?

 

[ChrisR]

Guessing the intent of players is a slippery slope. Better to go by a standard of advantage lost or gained even as time runs out.

 

[crossref]

judging tactical advantage by definition requires some understanding of their tactics -- you don't often have to guess: just to pay attention.

 

[ChrisR]

CR, I agree that a referee can, over the course of the match, discern the general tactical play of a team.

However, should that influence how you manage advantage? I'd have to think long and hard about before I'd say "yes".

 

[OB..]

If you argue that tactical advantage must always be judged the same way throughout a match, you are saying a team should not adjust its tactics according to the state of the match.

Yes, that presents difficulties, but I am uncomfortable with a rigid approach. If you play advantage when they don't want it, they can always say so.

 

[crossref]

CR, I agree that a referee can, over the course of the match, discern the general tactical play of a team.

However, should that influence how you manage advantage? I'd have to think long and hard about before I'd say "yes".

well,
[LAWS]d) Tactical advantage means freedom for the non-offending team to play the ball as they wish.[/LAWS]

so to say adv over, seems you have to have some idea of what they wish ..

 

[Pegleg]

If you argue that tactical advantage must always be judged the same way throughout a match, you are saying a team should not adjust its tactics according to the state of the match.

Yes, that presents difficulties, but I am uncomfortable with a rigid approach. If you play advantage when they don't want it, they can always say so.

Common sense!