Pablo
Referees in England
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,413
- Post Likes
- 112
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 6
Something that's been bothering me in the higher-level matches I've watched in recent weeks... it seems to be increasingly common at breakdowns for members of the ball-winning side (always forwards, and most usually front rows) to take up an off-side position as a means of protecting their scrum half. They overstep their off-side line and occupy the "neutral zone" between their line and their opponent's off-side line and very often make the "I'm blameless, sir" raised-arm gesture, sometimes kneeling, and by their very presence force opposition guard forwards and other would-be tacklers to take the long route, thereby ensuring bags of space for the ball-winning SH. In this respect, they are behaving exactly like American Football blockers. In fact this season's ZP game (a while ago now) in which Newcastle hosted Wasps had a try scored (by Wasps) because Will Green had taken up just such a position very close to the goal-line and cleared a path for the try scorer (can't remember who it was) by blocking a couple of potential tacklers - exactly like a lead block in Gridiron!
The reason this bothers me so much is because it seems to set a precedent for a dual standard. Defenders who overstep the off-side line are penalised without question, but it seems very rare for an attacker to be penalised for the same offence. I know we're supposed to reward positive play, which is often taken to mean attacking play, but to my mind this IS negative play, even though it's the attackers who are doing it. It's worse than slowing the ball down illegally and getting away with it, because if you get away with blocking, you have removed even the remotest possibility of competition for possession, which I was taught was a fundamental principal of the game.
I'd like to know what the official line (if there is one) on this is... tactics like this have a nasty habit of starting off on televised top-level matches and then seeping down to the belligerent Old Scumbags 3rd XV type of game... Is this something that needs stamping down on?
The reason this bothers me so much is because it seems to set a precedent for a dual standard. Defenders who overstep the off-side line are penalised without question, but it seems very rare for an attacker to be penalised for the same offence. I know we're supposed to reward positive play, which is often taken to mean attacking play, but to my mind this IS negative play, even though it's the attackers who are doing it. It's worse than slowing the ball down illegally and getting away with it, because if you get away with blocking, you have removed even the remotest possibility of competition for possession, which I was taught was a fundamental principal of the game.
I'd like to know what the official line (if there is one) on this is... tactics like this have a nasty habit of starting off on televised top-level matches and then seeping down to the belligerent Old Scumbags 3rd XV type of game... Is this something that needs stamping down on?
