Front Row Stands Up

[Browner]

Yesterdays match. L8. 2nd v 5th.

Background.

White win very comfortably, Golds main advantage is a dominant scrummage, which increases after W7 was RC (unrelated foul play). Gold scrum regularly goes forward resulting in White invariably not coping and eventually White front row stand up under the pressure ( whilst seeming to maintaining their binds) invariably led by White LHP who can't seem to stay down or handle the pressure he's under.

On the 2nd occassion Gold#3 says where's our PK? I advise G5 ( their captain) that going up 'per'se' isn't an offence, and that its a 'pressure release valve' for a struggling front rower " please ensure your players know what my interpretation is" but he struggles to convince the experienced G#3 who voices his disagreement to his audience. They continue, and sometimes march their opponents several meters at a time or even push White off their own ball, but crucially the scrum NEVER collapses.

As the match progresses, G3 gets more and more animated which festers into a couple of teammates disgruntlement, and the captain is given two other opportunities to quieten G3 before PK for dissent is the inevitable consequence, soon after during normal I get a bump in the back & when I look round G3 is the nearest player ! ( I suspect its not accidental, but issue a " be very careful Prop" personal warning)

Post match I'm doorstepped by G3 as I walk into the clubhouse where his rant includes continued reference to my refereeing being "a disgrace" . I have various witnesses, and my only retort is " the biggest disgrace is how you greet this referee post match" at which point he is discouraged away by the home Manager & a committee blazer.

Later I have a good barroom chat with Gold Manager on several rugby related topics (this is how you do it G#3!!!) Where he says that their scrum is the strongest part of the game and not getting PKs meant they couldn't contain their better opponents and its not their fault if their opponents 'can't prop'.
My reply was generally three fold;
A) once I'd clarified my interpretation then players need to accept and work to it, not continually dissent it verbally, and G3 wasn't responding to his captain ( manager acknowledged that G3 doesn't respect G5s authority etc)
B) that the LoTG don't consider 'standing up' as an offence.
C) STE doesnt guarantee 'equally capabability.

My Interpretation
Despite how 'elite' referee these scrums, I see this subject as follows

A prop who can't cope with the pressure forces going through him from both directions ( given that non-parity can exist) has x4 choices ;

1) cope but go backwards hoping to stay stable and not dropping/losing his footing.
2) bend double or get lifted up off feet completely
3) bend or hinge or collapse
Or fearing those three......
4) stand up to concede scrum positioning/contest but release the pressure/forces going through his body.

#2 & #3 are spinal paralysis safety risks, #1 also but with an element of hope, so if a player can't cope this only leaves #4 as a pressure release to a front rower under extreme personal pressure.

All queriers of the risks should refer to 'matt hampson' ( or others!) .. or WR/RFU insurers.

Any other thoughts anyone ???

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Sounds like you tried to manage it. You could have red carded him for dissent in the clubhouse.

 

[matty1194]

Sounds like you tried to manage it. You could have red carded him for dissent in the clubhouse.

Whilst I agree with your first part that Browner on reading his description dealt with the issues on the park once the game is over he cant do what as you state in your second part and RC in the clubhouse!

What I would advocate is the match official abuse reporting procedures that are in place wherever Browner referees and get the bugger dealt with.

 

[irishref]

Fill in a "disrespecting officials" form, or whatever you call it in your territory. No need to use cards in the clubhouse I think.

I would say that 20.2(a) is all the law reference you need to penalise standing up though.

 

[ChrisR]

I think 20.8(i) may come into play. The White front row may be driven up by Gold. If Gold is asking for the PK then I'd guess that this is a deliberate action by Gold. PK to White.

 

[The Fat]

Are gold staying down in their normal pushing position as they drive the White scrum back or is their FR getting underneath and driving through and up on an angle to try to win the PK?

 

[OB..]

After White LHP stood up, how did you restart the match?

 

[The Fat]

Fill in a "disrespecting officials" form, or whatever you call it in your territory. No need to use cards in the clubhouse I think.

I would say that 20.2(a) is all the law reference you need to penalise standing up though.

The sanction for 20.2(a) is a FK

Side note:
I have asked, several weeks ago, for a law reference on this from SArefs via the Duty Ref and suggested that if they cannot provide a reference then it may be one for Andre Watson to ask for a Law Clarification on or WR guidance memo.
Awaiting their reply.

 

[talbazar]

If you really want a law reference:
Start from 20.2.(a) which is a FK offense and add 10.2.(a) which is "intentionally offending".
Because, in order to release the pressure, White Prop is intentionally breaching law 20.2.(a).

Is it fair to him? Maybe not. But, if we (referee) can guaranty that he is not pushed illegally by Gold #3, then it wouldn't be fair to Gold #3 not to do anything...

My 2 cents.
Pierre.

 

[Browner]

Are gold staying down in their normal pushing position as they drive the White scrum back or is their FR getting underneath and driving through and up on an angle to try to win the PK?

They kind of ' both went up together" but my feeling was white LHP head invariably popped out slightly first, closely followed by Gold, I was feeling that white wanted the pressure release coz Gold was stronger & under him slightly.

 

[Browner]

After White LHP stood up, how did you restart the match?

That's the issue OB..... Gold wanted a PK, whereas I let white get pushed backwards ( the most was 15m) & Gold merely had a scrum going forwards until the ball popped out OR G#8 eventually picked up & ran off with it, commencing a #8 orchestrated attack.

 

[Browner]

Fill in a "disrespecting officials" form, or whatever you call it in your territory. No need to use cards in the clubhouse I think.

I would say that 20.2(a) is all the law reference you need to penalise standing up though.

I'd never consider carding in a clubhouse, abuse forms been written!.

All the 20.2 Laws seem to relate to the players positions upon forming/ pre-feed, not necesarily post formation...
..(anyway you can still push forward whilst standing/leaning forwards if that's the only law pre-requisite)

 

[crossref]

Browner do you think you are reffing this broadly the same as other refs at your level... Or are you out on a limb..

 

[Blackberry]

At the risk of Crossref implying I am going out on a limb.... When a retreating front row elect to take away their opponent's advantage by standing up, I ping for incorrect binding 20.3a. However...... there is a misconception that superiority in the set means an automatic penalty....no, it means you can drive your opponents back. If your opponents simply go back but hold their correct stance, there is no penalty coming. This expectation of a penalty for being dominant is where the problem lies.

What does happen is the dominant scrum which is not satisfied with the gain in ground by their drive engineer a penalty by driving up.

The problem could be solved if players were told superiority does not guarantee a penalty, the benefit they get is the ground gained. When I have encountered this I have stopped the scrum, explained the above to the dominant scrum, then reset. It usually works, in fact almost always works, except on the rare occasions where there has been a prop who is locked onto the idea of getting penalties simply for being dominant.

 

[Dickie E]

( the most was 15m)

that's a hell of a long way. No wonder white were popping.

 

[The Fat]

At the risk of Crossref implying I am going out on a limb.... When a retreating front row elect to take away their opponent's advantage by standing up, I ping for incorrect binding 20.3a. However...... there is a misconception that superiority in the set means an automatic penalty....no, it means you can drive your opponents back. If your opponents simply go back but hold their correct stance, there is no penalty coming. This expectation of a penalty for being dominant is where the problem lies.

What does happen is the dominant scrum which is not satisfied with the gain in ground by their drive engineer a penalty by driving up.

The problem could be solved if players were told superiority does not guarantee a penalty, the benefit they get is the ground gained. When I have encountered this I have stopped the scrum, explained the above to the dominant scrum, then reset. It usually works, in fact almost always works, except on the rare occasions where there has been a prop who is locked onto the idea of getting penalties simply for being dominant.

There was an example of this at the weekend. I think it was Saracens v Tigers???? Ref told dominant scrum pretty much exactly as you have described. I thought it was good refereeing.

 

[The umpire]

This expectation of a penalty for being dominant is where the problem lies.

This. Very much, this. You should not get a PK against you for just not being as strong or as skilful as the other team.

 

[OB..]

That's the issue OB..... Gold wanted a PK, whereas I let white get pushed backwards ( the most was 15m) & Gold merely had a scrum going forwards until the ball popped out OR G#8 eventually picked up & ran off with it, commencing a #8 orchestrated attack.

Are you saying that when White popped up you allowed the scrum to continue?

 

[Dixie]

I'd never consider carding in a clubhouse, abuse forms been written!.

All the 20.2 Laws seem to relate to the players positions upon forming/ pre-feed, not necesarily post formation...
..(anyway you can still push forward whilst standing/leaning forwards if that's the only law pre-requisite)

I agree. Law 20 seems to be written chronologically, with 20.1 through 20.6 dealing with getting 16 people onto the starting line. Law 20.7 tells you how the scrum begins once the 16 have assumed the position; and 20.8 tells you what FR's may not subsequently do. If WR wants standing up in the scrum to be an offence, they need it in 20.8.

Browner, when the scrum popped up, did you let it carry on, or restart with a new scrum at the place they popped up?

 

[Browner]

I agree. Law 20 seems to be written chronologically, with 20.1 through 20.6 dealing with getting 16 people onto the starting line. Law 20.7 tells you how the scrum begins once the 16 have assumed the position; and 20.8 tells you what FR's may not subsequently do. If WR wants standing up in the scrum to be an offence, they need it in 20.8.

Browner, when the scrum popped up, did you let it carry on, or restart with a new scrum at the place they popped up?

Yes Dixie/OB, Gold invariably had the nudge on and White had given up resisting, such that Gold #8 had the ball under control and they trundled upfield, whites backs were continually retreating/stepping back to remain 5m away, until the G#9 or G8 picked up and ran.

G#3 wanted 'his' PK.

For me, it wasn't unsafe, no one was hurt, it never collapsed, IT JUST went backwards ...Gold had controlled possession and freedom to exploit/attack left or right as they chose- when they chose, so why would I whistle and stop the game to give them a PK?

Furthermore, if the result of repeated PKs is a required escalation into YC-->RC then what, white progressively lose all their front row to RC because they aren't as strong as their opponents!! I don't see that as the way this contest should be decided ( who incidentally can now 'accidentally' knock on to force more scrums and see 'more' exiting RCd opposition players)

...... sorry, not on my shift.

Least not until WR Law clearly says that 'the pressure valve release' is illegal, which I doubt they will do as it would defy safety, & signal the commencement of the death of scrummaging IMO ( or the birth of RL lean ons!!!)