I knew he was doing it, but couldn't catch him at it!

[Robert Burns]

Last week, refereed a very light hearted and enjoyable friendly game.

I was making sure flankers were staying bound as I had seen them break early once and so was catching, when i noticed the ball at the scrums constently coming straight back out, it was quite obvious by the humour/comments that the prop was trying to hook.

I knew he was doing it, but no matter where I stood/came round, I couldn't catch him at it, he alway behaved when i was watching, we had a laugh about it afterwards, but had it been a more serious game the outcome could have been a little less favoursome.

any tips on watching for this, and the flankers?

also, whilst on the subject.

SH puts ball in when scrum goes down, hooker goes to hook it but keeps knocking it back out the tunnel, his foot is not up before the balls in, it's just that he has never hooked before, and the team owned up to this at the start of the game, he had trained for the position though.

And just before some of you shout about having an experienced front row, how do you get experience without playing your first game?

So, with the ball coming straight out all the time, I was just resetting, the odd scrum had 2/3 reforms, one had 4 that was the most.

I gave the hooker the benefit of the doubt as he was new, but would you have done the same? what would you have given?

 

[Davet]

it was quite obvious by the humour/comments that the prop was trying to hook.


any tips on watching for this?

also, whilst on the subject.

It's just that he has never hooked before, and the team owned up to this at the start of the game, he had trained for the position though.

And just before some of you shout about having an experienced front row, how do you get experience without playing your first game?

So, with the ball coming straight out all the time, I was just resetting, the odd scrum had 2/3 reforms, one had 4 that was the most.

I gave the hooker the benefit of the doubt as he was new, but would you have done the same? what would you have given?

The prop is entitled to play the ball when its put into the scrum, so even if you had seen him do it, then there is no sanction against doing it - its legal. See 20.8(b)

As far as the inexperienced hooker, then I would allow him some leeway. I note that it was a "Freindly" game - I would have explained to both sides that he was new at the role, that we would try him, and that if it looked as though there were safety problems then we would go uncontested. If safety was OK then, keep trying, ask the opposition to co-operate a little. They all started some time.

If it were a league game then I would advise the team that having an inexperienced hooker, on his first outing, was innappropriate, and that he would do well to get some experience in friendly games first.

 

[Robert Burns]

The problem with the prop seemed to be he was sticking his foot out as the ball was coming in, and thus 'popping' it back out. Thought the props could only play it once the ball was actually in.

 

[didds]

The prop is entitled to play the ball when its put into the scrum, so even if you had seen him do it, then there is no sanction against doing it - its legal. See 20.8(b)

as long of course as it doesn't endanger the safety of the scrummm... ;-)

If it were a league game then I would advise the team that having an inexperienced hooker, on his first outing, was innappropriate, and that he would do well to get some experience in friendly games first.

sensible advice dave... but if you were reffing our 1st team league fixture this weekend and you raised that point I'm afraid the very real answer would be

"We started the season with five experienced front row for the 1st tean alone. Due to injuries - some inflicted by opposition deliberately - we currently have one of those available. Consequently we have had to do some intensive emergency work on finding a hooker (back row) and a prop (2nd row). OUr FRR is another back row. These players are all by definition inexperienced. We have no friendlies - or maybe have now fitted in one in between the leaguie and cup committments - in order to get these blokes up to speed and "experienced". Our second team front rows while being fine for 2nd team would frankly concern me playing 1st team - if indeed they even would (they are rather seriously committed social players). Our only other option is to provide no front row, offer a walk-over to the opposition and be docked two points. As it is we are in a strong position to win the league so can't be expected to just "give up". As such, we have no option ... we just have to play with an inexperienced front row, purely through circumstance. We would agreew ith your sentiment - but its just not realistic in terms of this season.

soz...

Didds

 

[Davet]

Didds

I would sympathise. And I clearly understand that experience can only be gained by playing the position.

As I said, my advice would be don't play your 1st game in the FR in a League game.

If they had never had even a friendly game then I would not allow them to contest at all.

However, if you and the players concerned both told me that they were trained and had played the position previously on a number of occasions then I would be prepared to at least start with contested scrums. But on the very clearly understood condition that I would call uncontested scrums if I developed any doubt as to their capability.

Which is what I would do in a friendly, anyway.

In a friendly, of course, then if we did need to go uncontested it wouldn't matter too much, and both sides would probably accept the decision happily enough.

Just because in this case it would be a league game would not, at least as far as I am concerned, make any difference. We would try it, based on the fact that they had had training and gained some experience - but would react to the situation as it developed. I would not necessarily wait until we had had a collapse before calling it a day either. And yes, I would be ultra-aware of the other side twisting, boring etc. - but in the final analysis if I felt your front row were not coping then I would have little choice.

What going uncontested would do to your points and League position is of absolutely no interest to me - what it may do to the players necks is; and I am fairly confident its of great concern to you too. If the club then made a complaint about my decision I would be happy to stand up and defend it. If you have 2nd team FR players who are experienced then I would have expected you to put them in the first team before playing total novices. The difference between an experienced prop playing 2 levels up on what he is used to and a total novice playing prop at the higher level is surely significant.

 

[didds]

All read and understood perfectly - especially the safety issues. I also understand the league scenario is nnot your concern (and shouldn't be IMO as a general rule).

But ...

If you have 2nd team FR players who are experienced then I would have expected you to put them in the first team before playing total novices. The difference between an experienced prop playing 2 levels up on what he is used to and a total novice playing prop at the higher level is surely significant.

My concern/problems here regarding the 2nd team FRs is really twofold

1) some will just refuse outright to play 1st team. "Its not what they want to do" etc. Yes - I agree that's a cr*p attitude in what is a team/club game but it happens... and we must also respect other's choices

2) the 2nd team FRs _may_ be competent at scrummaging (although possibly that is merely at their normal level... how do we know they will be competent against bigger, stronger, heavier, more skillful packs?) ... but I would have concerns about their safety in other areas... tackle and rucks in particular, and their "lifting" skills and competency might also come into question WRT other's safety ie the jumper.

In short, its a bigger picture than just saying "are they safe to play in the scrums". Other contact and technical areas play just as big a part in selecting a player regarding safety issues. There is one player at a club I coach that I have actually told selection that IMO should not be on any rugby pitch because his contact skills (despite working on them he seems unable to improve whatsoever!) are so poor I am genuinely afraid he will get seriously hurt.

didds

 

[Davet]

Didds

I understand the concern, and of course nobody can force a player to step up from 2nd Team to 1st Team. I would hope in an ideal world that the wouldn't be that big a difference between 2nd team and 1st team, and that the two sides will train together. But as a club chairman, of a very small and about to go defunct Sunday rugby side, as well as a referee, I am all to well aware of the problems -and indeed the problem is much deeper than that mentioned - many clubs have had lower sides fold because of problems getting FR together. If the 1sts have to promote 2nd team Props, then the 2nds (or it may cascade to the 3rds) don't have a front row, so they play uncontested, so next week half the team can't be arsed, so they call off the game.....

I am just not sure I have any solution other than a massive recruitment drive for Front Row players.

 

[MrBadger]

I had the classic on Saturday (in a friendly game) of the side getting stuffed in the scrums deciding that a) their prop was injured and b) they had no suitably trained & experienced replacement - altho we both knew they had a FR player, they told me he wasn't up to it. difficult one...

 

[Davet]

I had the classic on Saturday (in a friendly game) of the side getting stuffed in the scrums deciding that a) their prop was injured and b) they had no suitably trained & experienced replacement - altho we both knew they had a FR player, they told me he wasn't up to it. difficult one...

I don't think you have an option. If you insist he plays and he then gets hurt....

Its got to be the easiest decision on the park - though hard to swallow.

 

[Robert Burns]

all you can do is mention it in your report.

 

[AndyKidd]

also, whilst on the subject.

SH puts ball in when scrum goes down, hooker goes to hook it but keeps knocking it back out the tunnel, his foot is not up before the balls in, it's just that he has never hooked before, and the team owned up to this at the start of the game, he had trained for the position though.

And just before some of you shout about having an experienced front row, how do you get experience without playing your first game?

So, with the ball coming straight out all the time, I was just resetting, the odd scrum had 2/3 reforms, one had 4 that was the most.

I gave the hooker the benefit of the doubt as he was new, but would you have done the same? what would you have given?

Robert

You only say that he had never hooked before. I wonder if he was a prop before which would make him an experienced front row player. I seem to recall a recent Premiership game where the Referee said that because the player replacing the hooker was an experienced front row that the scrums would remain contested. ( I believe it was a Gloucster match).

I only bring this up because as far as the laws go the requirement is for a Suitable trained Front Row. And there appears to be no clear definition as to the Hooker actually being trained to hook, so to speak.

 

[Davet]

I only bring this up because as far as the laws go the requirement is for a Suitable trained Front Row. And there appears to be no clear definition as to the Hooker actually being trained to hook, so to speak.

Andy

For what its worth the iRB ruled on this last year: as follows:-

The Designated Members have ruled the following in answer to questions raised:


What does the IRB actually mean by the phrase 'suitably trained and experienced'? Does this mean that a replacement player must be able to play in the position in a manner, which ensures that the match can continue safely with fully contested scrums? Or is the IRB requiring that a replacement player be a specialist hooker, specialist tight-head or specialist loose-head prop?

Ruling
A replacement player must be able to play in the position in a manner which ensures that the match can continue safely with fully contested scrums.


Which I would take to mean that so long as the player was safe in the front row then that is all that is required - the player does not have to be a specialist

 

[didds]

I am just not sure I have any solution other than a massive recruitment drive for Front Row players.

Which the RFU sort of have done... thing is running a few FR Clinics ariound the country won't really do it... they could have done worse than run an advert on TV showing the power and glory of Vickery and Woodman and Thompson overlaid with the World Cup etc etc etc aimed at blokes-of-a-certain-staure to promote the magnificent tradition of FR play and to attract them to their local club.

Too bloody obvious of course.

Meanwhile the FR shortage is exascerbated by the requirement of carrying FR replacements on a bench ... immediately reducing the numbers available to lower sides. 1st and 2nd XVs all carrying a FR replacement now means effectively an entire front row has been taken out of the game for use by a 3rd XV.

Madness.

And before we all start going on about safety etc etc etc what is madness is that EVERYBODY has to play with a 2,30pm KO. In Sydney the grades all follow each other throughout the afternoon so the 4th grade prop covers for the 3rd grade, 3rd grade prop covers for the 2nd grade etc. So AKLL props are available and play, and everybody has cover.

N'est-ce pas?




didds

 

[Davet]

In Sydney the grades all follow each other throughout the afternoon so the 4th grade prop covers for the 3rd grade, 3rd grade prop covers for the 2nd grade etc. So AKLL props are available and play, and everybody has cover.

So if one team kicks off at 2pm, and it gets dark at 4pm......

 

[didds]

So if one team kicks off at 2pm, and it gets dark at 4pm......

so 4th grade KOs at 11 am, 3rd grade at noon, 2nd grade at 1 pm, 3rd grade at 2.15 pm ... or whatever.

30 minutes a half immediate turn around 4th and 3rd grade, 35 mins a half with 5 minutes for 2nd grade. Full 40s for 1st grade with whatever for half time.

Where's the problem with that? It seems to work very well in Sydney week in week out (well, 4ths always KOd at noon there ... but they don;t get 4pm darkness even in the dead of winter ;-)

didds

 

[Davet]

so 4th grade KOs at 11 am, 3rd grade at noon, 2nd grade at 1 pm, 3rd grade at 2.15 pm ... or whatever.

didds

hmm fine, but a bit of a culture shock at clubs, who would have to have a presence on the bar from 11am to ...whenever, would have to prepare staggered meals for teams coming off in succession, would have players who had domestic issues with not being able to do Saturday morning shop run - if travelling away players would have to leave early. If an early finish then players may stay in the bar from say 1pm till whenever it closes - with consequent domestics...

Not against the plan - but it would take a lot of delicate work at club and home to pull it off.

 

[Robert Burns]

so 4th grade KOs at 11 am, 3rd grade at noon, 2nd grade at 1 pm, 3rd grade at 2.15 pm ... or whatever.

30 minutes a half immediate turn around 4th and 3rd grade, 35 mins a half with 5 minutes for 2nd grade. Full 40s for 1st grade with whatever for half time.

Where's the problem with that? It seems to work very well in Sydney week in week out (well, 4ths always KOd at noon there ... but they don;t get 4pm darkness even in the dead of winter ;-)

didds

Isn't it hard enough to get a 4th team out in the first place at 2:30pm? never mind getting them to turn up at a time that will be to them, Mega Early!

Something which I think is unfair,

When the 6 nations are on ALL games should have early kick off not just Englands, as not all of us are England Supporters, surely this would be fairer!