Front row brief

[The umpire]

The Front Rowers benefit to them is that if they follow it then theyre less likely to get paralysed

So, what do you tell a Suitably Trained and Experienced front row in the short PMB that he doesn't already know from becoming Suitably Trained and Experienced or is in the Law Book?

 

[OB..]

So, what do you tell a Suitably Trained and Experienced front row in the short PMB that he doesn't already know from becoming Suitably Trained and Experienced or is in the Law Book?

They are all trained to try and cheat if at all possible.

 

[Treadmore]

my feeling is that if it ever happens that a PMB is a central question in a court case, the issue won't be whether or not the referee should do one, I thick it's extremely well established best practice and indeed normal practice for a ref to do a PMB, which includes the front row. To the extent that any ref not doing a PMB is remarked upon -- at games I watch if the ref doesn't do a PMB people immediately wonder if he is a 'proper' ref, and in terms of confidence from players and coaches he is starting on the back foot even before he blows the whistle.

I've seen several refs instil a lack of confidence from their PMBs!

No, the question will turn on the content, and WHAT was said. And what, if anything, MUST the ref say at a PMB?

This is much more hazy, and I think a prosecutor would find it very hard to demonstrate any *specific* content that everyone agrees must said. In fact opinions differ, PMBs differ, there is not prescription and the *contents* of a PMB are pretty much discretionary.


In another thread people talked about having a sending-off script. I don't think we need that, but if the front-row brief really is thought to be important for saftey reasons, perhaps refs should have precise script for that element of the PMB.

I think the lack of mandated content or even need for a PMB means that if you had an eye to covering your back in a court case then you would be better off not doing one at all - whatever you do say can be used in evidence against you, not for you!

 

[Pegleg]

Take the advise that you society gives you.

 

[OB..]

I've seen several refs instil a lack of confidence from their PMBs!

Sadly, so have I. They need to work on it as it is part of their game management skills.

I think the lack of mandated content or even need for a PMB means that if you had an eye to covering your back in a court case then you would be better off not doing one at all - whatever you do say can be used in evidence against you, not for you!

It depends what you said, and more importantly, how you followed through during the game.

When I lived in the USA I remember being advised not to bother clearing snow/ice off the sidewalk. If I didn't make a good job of it, people who fell could sue. The argument had its attractions. The claim was that if I did nothing people could not sue Mother Nature. Fortunately the theory did not get tested.

 

[Browner]

So, what do you tell a Suitably Trained and Experienced front row in the short PMB that he doesn't already know from becoming Suitably Trained and Experienced or is in the Law Book?

Good question and I get your suggestion, but in effect you're advocating that a PMB isn't ever needed, which if supported by the RFU means it would get dropped? So why is it retained?

I have no way of knowing if a player is STE or not, I rely on the captain/manager integrity, but if I PMB then I'm happier that its safer than it would be if I didn't. I've ticked my personal 'safety' duty of care box.

 

[FlipFlop]

I am currently doing some training for another sport, which requires participants to sign a legal disclaimer. I've signed this a lot of times myself, and considered it worthless. But it appears that the main purpose is to use it as part of the Duty of Care. By getting the participants to sign the form, the instructor has shown he is following best practise, and therefore can be shown in a court to have exercised best practise, and so is less likely to be found guilty of negligence in the event of a court case.

Do I think the form is worth the paper it is written on? No - as a participant, it means nothing. But if anything were to happen, it protects the instructor, by allowing them to show they followed standard procedures and hence exercised their duty of care. Of course if in others areas they showed negligence, then they can still be found guilty. And this has been tested in courts in various jurisdictions.

I think the PMB is similar. It shows you followed standard procedures, and so is easy for you to show you showed the necessary duty of care. Still be sued and lose - yes. But why not help protect yourself.

I think it is far better in court to say - "I followed all standard procedures - which includes a PMB". Then your lawyer can ask the FR - what did the Ref say in his PMB, and when they say "No idea - don't listen" - it is shown they are not taking their responsibility. And so it becomes harder to blame the ref.....

 

[The umpire]

They are all trained to try and cheat if at all possible.

So, your PMB is "Please lads, no cheating"?

Take the advise that you society gives you.

The last conversation I had was that there was no requirement for one in law or RFU regulations and there was no advised content for one if you did it.

Good question and I get your suggestion, but in effect you're advocating that a PMB isn't ever needed, which if supported by the RFU means it would get dropped? So why is it retained?

No, I tell them my view of things where there are different views and interpretations, e.g. when the ball is out of the ruck, if I'm putting my hand up at lines out, and what really pi$$es me off.
I don't tell the fly half how I want him to kick or pass, I don't tell the full back not to drop the Garryowens and I don't tell the front row how to scrummage.

 

[OB..]

So, your PMB is "Please lads, no cheating"?

Of course not. My point is that you check they are all STE, but you know that does not mean they will want to stick to the laws if they can get away with cheating. You are not going to tell them how to scrummage, but you can tell them that, for example, your cadence will not be timed, but will depend on them complying with the various stages.

The last conversation I had was that there was no requirement for one in law or RFU regulations and there was no advised content for one if you did it.

Our novice referees are given guidelines. I have never come across a referee who does not give a PMB, and would comment adversely if I did (after discussing his choice with him)

No, I tell them my view of things where there are different views and interpretations, e.g. when the ball is out of the ruck, if I'm putting my hand up at lines out, and what really pi$$es me off.

So you agree there is value in a PMB.

I don't tell the fly half how I want him to kick or pass, I don't tell the full back not to drop the Garryowens and I don't tell the front row how to scrummage.

The first two have nothing to do with legality. Scrummaging is something you will penalise if they do it illegally.

 

[The umpire]

So you agree there is value in a PMB.

Indeed, I never said I didn't, but for the purposes described in my last post.
(I sometimes have my doubts, especially when "any questions?" gets "when is the ball out of the ruck?" which I have literally just described!)

 

[OB..]

Indeed, I never said I didn't, but for the purposes described in my last post.
(I sometimes have my doubts, especially when "any questions?" gets "when is the ball out of the ruck?" which I have literally just described!)

Been there, heard that.

 

[Pegleg]

The last conversation I had was that there was no requirement for one in law or RFU regulations and there was no advised content for one if you did it.

Then you've covered your back. Good on you. The advice we are given is different and we have been told (VERBALLY - nothing in writing) that the we are "on our own" if we fail to do one.

All you can do is chose whether to do what you are told to do or ignore the "advice". The you have to take the concequences of your choice on the chin. Don't moan IF you are told to do one and you chose not. If you are told it is "up to you" you're in the clear.

 

[WombleRef]

My Front Row Brief:

Ok Gents, you know the drill - Crouch Bind Set. I want to see you Ear to Ear until I call set and do not push before the ball is in. Any questions?

 

[Na Madrai]

Until the CTPE ceased, I gave a PMB to all players and substitutes that lasted a minute. It covered advantage, the set, the LO and appealing. It was simple, clear and set my stall out - and, on occasion, some players would join in with the final words! As long as I refereed to these simple instuctions, there seemed few problems.

However, I was advised by an assessor that I was opening myself up to a potential lawsuit if a major incident should occur - I should brief only the front row and strictly according to the guide lines - but he could provide none.

Since then, I do no PMB and until such time as I am given an official brief that is applicable to all, I will not do so.

At the first scrum, I hold up the engagement and inform both packs that all scrums are uncontested until the ball enters the tunnel and that all binding in rugby football must be shoulder to wrist. I then call crouch and get on with the game. I find that this is simple, clear and obvious and lets all forwards know exactly my requirements and is the nearest and only thing that gets near to a BMB.

Normally, apart from an annual MOT, I do not get assessed except this year, when I have been assessed three times - all of which were exemplary but none of which mentioned my not giving a PMB.

NM

 

[Taff]

Then you've covered your back. Good on you. The advice we are given is different and we have been told (VERBALLY - nothing in writing) that the we are "on our own" if we fail to do one.

I've mentioned this before, but it's worth mentioning again - Why don't we all get given a summary version of the conditions from the Insurance policy? Because I can guarantee you there will be conditions.

I have to deal with Professional Indemnity Insurance (PII) for my business, and every year we get the documents through, I allocate a whole afternoon just to go through the conditions, just to make sure we don't get caught out and to summarise them.

... Normally, apart from an annual MOT, I do not get assessed except this year, when I have been assessed three times - all of which were exemplary but none of which mentioned my not giving a PMB.

Does your Assessor even listen in to your PMB? Off all the assessments I've had (about 5) and all the assessments others have had, I can only remember 1 where the Assessor specifically asked to listen into the PMB.

 

[OB..]

I don't know about others, but I always ask the ref if he minds me listening in to the PMB, and there has never been any problem. I would be astonished if the referee said he did not plan to do one. It is the standard with my society and all the exchange referees I see.

I suppose this raises the question as to whether there is any need to check studs.

 

[Pegleg]

I've mentioned this before, but it's worth mentioning again - Why don't we all get given a summary version of the conditions from the Insurance policy? Because I can guarantee you there will be conditions.

Indeed.

 

[Pegleg]

I suppose this raises the question as to whether there is any need to check studs.

Why indeed.

Has anyone here ever instructed a player to change boots or any studs because of illegalities?


Has anyone here every sent a player off, or dealt in another way, with a player who has put an illegal stud ( or piece of equiptment) on AFTER the check?


Whilst we are told we must do it. I'll cover my backside though.

 

[Pegleg]

However, I was advised by an assessor that I was opening myself up to a potential lawsuit if a major incident should occur - I should brief only the front row and strictly according to the guide lines - but he could provide none.

Well I'd have told the assessor: "With all due respect until you can give me chapter and verse on the guidelines. I'll go by by societies instructions and not yours."

 

[Browner]

I was assessed yesterday, he specifically declined listening to the PMB.

I was surprised, because its clearly the first interaction in game management communication with the captains, from which in-match referal to it follows.