[6N] England v Italy

[TheBFG]

Perhaps I should say that at the higher levels of the game you also make calls so that the ARs know what is going on because then it allows them to input the right calls and advice if necessary. If in the situation we are talking about they did not know it was 'just a tackle' they may have input incorrect calls.

Agree with this, there was an incident last season in a Euro game (in Scotland somewhere, remember it was cold!) Luke Pearce binned a player for a call from AR of midfield offside, within 5/7m of the goal line. On closer examination, there was no ruck so no midfield offside. I'm not sure the carded player did what he did because he knew there was no ruck, but from then on there seemed to be an effort to call "tackle only" to allow players and also AR's what the ref was looking at.

 

[crossref]

Interesting that the SA refs website suggests that RP may have been coaching by actually calling 'just a tackle'. I just wonder what would have happened if he hadn't.
http://www.sareferees.com/News/law-discussion-just-a-tackle/2830851/

Perhaps I should say that at the higher levels of the game you also make calls so that the ARs know what is going on because then it allows them to input the right calls and advice if necessary. If in the situation we are talking about they did not know it was 'just a tackle' they may have input incorrect calls.

On this, here's the guidance we have received today, from the RFU

Thoughts?

"

Secondly, referees at Premiership level have been instructed not to call ‘tackle only’ or ‘ruck’ as per last Saturdays continued callings. It is suggested you now do likewise and cover that in your briefing. "

 

[DocY]

On this, here's the guidance we have received today, from the RFU

Thoughts?

"

Do you know the thinking behind that?

It's something I find very useful for managing a game - if a player looks like he's doing something wrong announcing what's going on lets everyone know you've seen it, you're not a "blind b******", stops unnecessary questions and keeps the crowd off your back.

 

[crossref]

I don't know the official thinking. No doubt it's along the lines of the SA referees argument.

 

[DocY]

I can partly see the argument - the referee shouldn't preempt a particular behaviour (unless it's to stop an infringement) - but IME (and what I thought RP was doing on Sunday) you make the call after Italy had encroached beyond the back foot, where I think a call is perfectly sensible and should be encouraged.

 

[ChuckieB]

I can partly see the argument - the referee shouldn't preempt a particular behaviour (unless it's to stop an infringement) - but IME (and what I thought RP was doing on Sunday) you make the call after Italy had encroached beyond the back foot, where I think a call is perfectly sensible and should be encouraged.

Agree - Seems fairer and then the other side can then decide if they know what to do in the situation? Neither side gains an advantage. RP was just calling a position in the play and this must be encouraged for the benefit of the spectator who has trouble enough seeing what is going on. Ultimately it has to be for the benefit of the game long term.

 

[crossref]

Here is more information

Special update on the Tackle/Ruck - 03/03/2017

Welcome to a special update, which is being distributed following the England v Italy 6 Nations game last weekend.

According to law 16:

The definition of a ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground. Open play has ended.

In view of the England v Italy Six Nations game at the weekend, where one or both teams decided not to compete at the breakdown, we have discussed this issue within our referee groups and we will be taking the following approach this weekend:

The referees will not on every occasion call ‘tackle only’ or ‘ruck’. If a player runs around the breakdown and a ruck has been formed, the referee will either PK that player or play advantage and will not be telling the player to go back. If an AR calls midfield offside against a defender, the referee can respond by ‘tackle only’ therefore it is play on.

I would also like to bring to your attention that the player acting as number 9 cannot be tackled or have a kick charged down by players on the wrong side at a ‘tackle only’ situation.

Also attached are some further notes to help your members prepare for their next game and to build a better understanding with coaches and players.

Please circulate to your members and clubs they will be ref’ing this weekend.

Do contact us for any clarification at; laws@rfu.com

Yours in ref’ing,

Michael

Michael D Patz



RFU Match Official Development Manager

Tackle Only Messages

Us - Consistent, Calm, don’t shoot the messenger - ‘Professional’

1. Know the law

2. Practice Pictures - e.g. England v Italy

3. Consistent Comm’s - Succinct, not a commentary

4. We are not going to “call players back” if a ruck forms and they are offside

Other Areas to Consider

1. Players voluntarily to ground

2. Tackle only

a. Can’t play the 9 unless from own side

b. Beware players pulling in defenders

c. If the 9 runs into a player looking for a penalty - NOT a penalty

d. Charge down - can’t interfere as law above

Ruck

2 players in contact/on feet/over the ball

Communication



There will be times when referees will use “Ruck”, “Tackle” as normal and to clarify when there is an offside line

 

[didds]

can I distribute that info in #127 to our coaching staff?

Do we know that this HAS been disseminated throughout England/RFUland?

didds

 

[Paule23]

We had a brief chat at a recent Society meeting about calling ruck, tackle etc. Opinions ranged from call every time to not needed at all, but the general consensus was to call when you want an action. For example, call ruck to get people to keep their hands out (if hands are moving towards the ball), tackle (if people aren't rolling away quickly) etc. I don't agree with the RFU memo as it is not good game management, yes we don't need to call ruck, tackle, hands away etc. But the alternative is to penalise a lot more, interrupting the flow of the game.

 

[chbg]

We had a brief chat at a recent Society meeting about calling ruck, tackle etc. Opinions ranged from call every time to not needed at all, but the general consensus was to call when you want an action. For example, call ruck to get people to keep their hands out (if hands are moving towards the ball), tackle (if people aren't rolling away quickly) etc. I don't agree with the RFU memo as it is not good game management, yes we don't need to call ruck, tackle, hands away etc. But the alternative is to penalise a lot more, interrupting the flow of the game.

Luckily you don't need to agree or disagree with the RFU memo!

I can see why they do not wish to call players back when the ruck has formed, as otherwise everyone will take advantage of it - i.e. automatically assume that it is a tackle-only unless called by the referee. That will be far more disruptive to a flowing game.

 

[Chris_j]

can I distribute that info in #127 to our coaching staff?

Do we know that this HAS been disseminated throughout England/RFUland?

didds

View attachment Tackle - Ruck Update - 2017.03.03.pdf Attached is the PDF from the RFU

 

[Balones]

can I distribute that info in #127 to our coaching staff?

Do we know that this HAS been disseminated throughout England/RFUland?

didds

You can distribute it to your coaching staff but I would suggest that you raise the question with the ref on the day as to whether they have received the info/memo. It does take a while for things to cascade, depending on how often the 'cascader' reads their email. I have not received my official RFU version yet but have acquired it through the Midlands Division today. I have not received anything from my local society. Therefore the picture is patchy.

 

[crossref]

If only the RFU had a website they could put it on

 

[ChuckieB]

We had a brief chat at a recent Society meeting about calling ruck, tackle etc. Opinions ranged from call every time to not needed at all, but the general consensus was to call when you want an action. For example, call ruck to get people to keep their hands out (if hands are moving towards the ball), tackle (if people aren't rolling away quickly) etc. I don't agree with the RFU memo as it is not good game management, yes we don't need to call ruck, tackle, hands away etc. But the alternative is to penalise a lot more, interrupting the flow of the game.

I feel you call when a situation is uncertain (benefits players and spectators alike) and it is for the players to decide how to react. Not when you want them to do something:

- Italian in front of the ball at a breakdown involving the England tackled player and team mates and the opposing tackler (not rolled away/got up as yet) - obvious no ruck and no call - England players should react accordingly - pick and go or pick and pass to a player not in the vicinity of our loose Italian!

- add an Italian who is just hovering and not engaging, i.e. perhaps "out of obvious view" & so not obvious, make the call so person looking to pick the ball knows he still has his options and the Italian not in the vicinity can then chose to stay or retreat. Fair to both sides then.

In the NOwens/LPiccamoles situation, I didn't hear the call but his direction, to the French player coming round, to retreat once the ruck was formed was probably that step too far (i.e. coaching). He was directing him to do something advantaging his side over the other, i.e avoiding a penalty.

Per the RFU memo, "If an AR calls midfield offside against a defender, the referee can respond by ‘tackle only’ therefore it is play on.", the AR call is such that he thinks it "offside", the referee knows it is not and if the AR hasn't seen it/got it you can bet your bottom dollar the players haven't got it and the call seeks to put everyone in the know!

 

[DocY]

In the NOwens/LPiccamoles situation, I didn't hear the call but his direction, to the French player coming round, to retreat once the ruck was formed was probably that step too far (i.e. coaching). He was directing him to do something advantaging his side over the other, i.e avoiding a penalty.

Instructing players how not to give away penalties is generally considered to be good refereeing - this is why you so frequently hear "release!", "roll away!", "retreat!" (lots of words beginning with r...).

As Paule says: the alternative is blowing your whistle, which should be a last resort.

I think the distinction is when you start telling players what they can do, rather than what they can't. I can see how this could be considered going too far.

 

[ChuckieB]

Instructing players how not to give away penalties is generally considered to be good refereeing - this is why you so frequently hear "release!", "roll away!", "retreat!" (lots of words beginning with r...).

As Paule says: the alternative is blowing your whistle, which should be a last resort.

I think the distinction is when you start telling players what they can do, rather than what they can't. I can see how this could be considered going too far.

Isn't this where you have to take the view, at all levels of the game, "do it once" it is advisory, do it again, or persistently, then you're in trouble. Good game refereeing is also ensuring the laws are reasonably and consistently applied so as not to disadvantage the side that are actually playing to them.

Sometimes the whistle is the only way. Unenjoyable though it may be, lots of stoppages shouldn't be perceived as an issue for the referee. It is a three way street. It could be more indicative that the one team/both teams need to go back to the training pitch. We should be in support of driving skills improvement but coaching on the pitch is hardly the referees job. It benefits the game situation but not the long term game generally. Enjoyment for all!

With all my comments in the last week I am starting to carefully scrutinise my "refereeing" style. I sense I have a natural bias to the enforcement side, doesn't make me bad, and a development opportunity will be around developing a better empathy for the game alongside. The forum has certainly helped!

 

[didds]

I'm pretty much with chuckieB here.

Ive long had a bit of an issue with two-bites-of-the-cherry whereby players know they can try something in the kinwoedge they'll get sent back when they are spotted, and if they are not sent back they can get away with it.

but i have sympathy with helpiung communiry players to just understand what phase is happening etc

do i am a bit conflicted!

didds

 

[DocY]

Isn't this where you have to take the view, at all levels of the game, "do it once" it is advisory, do it again, or persistently, then you're in trouble. Good game refereeing is also ensuring the laws are reasonably and consistently applied so as not to disadvantage the side that are actually playing to them.

To me, ask, tell penalise is slightly different - in each case they usually have infringed, but you've decided the infringement is not material or otherwise not worth penalising. Telling players to release, for example, you do before they've actually infringed. Sure, if you're telling the same player too frequently you might have to escalate.

In the main, though, you're letting the players know you're watching them - they're less keen on infringing then.

Sometimes the whistle is the only way. Unenjoyable though it may be, lots of stoppages shouldn't be perceived as an issue for the referee. It is a three way street. It could be more indicative that the one team/both teams need to go back to the training pitch. We should be in support of driving skills improvement but coaching on the pitch is hardly the referees job. It benefits the game situation but not the long term game generally. Enjoyment for all!

True, it's not necessarily the fault of the referee and if the skill levels are too bad you're on a hiding to nothing. But part of the referee's job is helping that enjoyment.

You often have a lot of discretion for penalties at the breakdown - if you look for something you can probably blow up at every breakdown (in fact, I'd advocate doing just that for the first few minutes of a match). If you do that throughout, nobody - neither the players, supporters nor you, will enjoy it.

Nigel Owens or Wayne Barnes aren't top referees because they're better at spotting forward passes or offsides, they're better because they games they preside over are more enjoyable and they achieve this by having a good sense of when not to blow their whistle.

 

[ChuckieB]

I'm pretty much with chuckieB here.

Ive long had a bit of an issue with two-bites-of-the-cherry whereby players know they can try something in the kinwoedge they'll get sent back when they are spotted, and if they are not sent back they can get away with it.

but i have sympathy with helpiung communiry players to just understand what phase is happening etc

do i am a bit conflicted!

didds

My 15 year old has a league game this weekend. They have had this referee before . He is "Mature". Great that he is able to officiate at his age and to be commended that he can keep up with play, unlike some I have seen (rugby readiness). Lots of penalties called by him, as no coaching, to the extent that coaches have taken it away and will have tried to address what were errors and so the boys will learn and won't repeat, or to the same extent at least. That has to be good for their development.


With the " RFU memo", I'd be encouraging my coaches to just check he had read it as part of any briefing ( I bet he is the sort to have done that !), remind him it is an U15 game and check on how he responds. You start to then improve your understanding of his game management and can adapt accordingly. Get him onside whether you think he is good or not!

 

[ChuckieB]

Also from the RFU memo:

"I would also like to bring to your attention that the player acting as number 9 cannot be tackled or have a kick charged down by players on the wrong side at a ‘tackle only’ situation."

Seems to be imply if you are athletic enough to charge down from outside the tackle zone it not the tackle zone that is sacrosanct it is the SH!

The only legitimate reason for the player to be on that side of the tackle is, in that case, is to close down passing options for the SH.