Is scuffling material away from play.

[Huck2Spit]

Had a match last weekend that was a close contest between too undefeated sides. There was a lot of back and forth scoring and good rugby for the first 60+ mins. For the last quarter they both seemed frantic to secure the win and discipline become a problem. No ARs just me-- kid on one side line with a flag and a reserve on the other.
At a breakdown ball was passed out, but the ruckers there got into it pushing, grabbing, talkings hit... I saw it peripheral but followed the BC who made some ground and then continue to follow the rugby as a several phase attack was on. It lead to a try and before the restart told the captains to end it-- that's their warning & anymore would equal a card-- and have a word with their teams. A Red card was awarded for stomping about two minutes later but they straighten out.
If boys wanna not play and fight, should that be managed over others that are playing the game I came to ref?
I was told once to focus the rugby first and deal with extracurricular stuff after.
If I had blown up the scuffle it would have stifled the attack-- wasn't material in the moment.

 

[Dickie E]

This is really difficult without ARs as it requires you to split your focus between 2 things that are invariably 180 degrees apart.

As a rule of thumb I will play on if it is a bit of push & shove. If it escalates to strking, I'll stop play and manage. I guess you develop a feel for the mood.

If you play on and someone says "ref, he just punched him"??? :chin:

 

[Staffs_Ref]

I can only really echo and add to what Dickie E said.

It has less to do with materiality and more to do with player safety and game management. Whether you need to stop the game immediately will depend on how serious you think the scuffle is. If it's a "handbags at dawn" type of situation then you can probably just let play continue and have a word at the next natural stoppage. If you consider it to be something more serious, then I think you need to stop play straight away and deal with it. I suppose you just develop a sense as to where things lie on that scale and react accordingly. The only further caveat I would add, is that if it is a U19 match I would err strongly towards stopping play regardless.

 

[DocY]

What Dickie and Staffs said.

Very difficult to watch both play and the scuffle with only two eyes, but my rule of thumb is - if I think more players will get involved I'll blow up.

 

[Decorily]

I was told once to focus the rugby first and deal with extracurricular stuff after.
If I had blown up the scuffle it would have stifled the attack-- wasn't material in the moment.

Your efforts to allow a game of rugby happen are admirable......however if you had blown up it may also have stifled the stamp!

Yes, judge the mood, but in my book 'prevention is better than cure'.

 

[didds]

The elephant in the room that is not being discussed is that blowing ujp for the fight may well stop the attackers from scoring. And the fight may be a tactic to do exactly that.

I have no answers myself.

didds

 

[Phil E]

I agree with Dickie, Staffs and DocY.

It's like a player down injured. Sometimes you stop, sometimes you wait for the next break in play.

I certainly wouldn't stop for two people throwing handbags if there was a try scoring opportunity on the books.

 

[DocY]

The elephant in the room that is not being discussed is that blowing ujp for the fight may well stop the attackers from scoring. And the fight may be a tactic to do exactly that.

I have no answers myself.

didds

I was discussing something similar to this the other day:

A red player has broken away and is very definitely going to score. As you glance over your shoulder (before BC has got to the goal line), you see a blue player punch a red player and a minor brawl ensue (without the try scoring opportunity it's penalty and card against blue). What do you do?

 

[FlipFlop]

We have this problem a lot over here.

For me - I deal with it by playing rugby. If it is serious - other players rush over, so you have to stop it. Then:
1st time - warning to players
2nd time (if different players) - warning to skippers
3rd time - bin
4th time - red

And I don't pick and choose - all involved get the cards. Never needed to worry about step 5. And rarely get beyond step 3. Once you have binned 2 players for a minor scuffle, players and captians know you are serious. And my warnings are not play on words. I am clear about the cards, and then I follow it through.

 

[leaguerefaus]

I was discussing something similar to this the other day:

A red player has broken away and is very definitely going to score. As you glance over your shoulder (before BC has got to the goal line), you see a blue player punch a red player and a minor brawl ensue (without the try scoring opportunity it's penalty and card against blue). What do you do?

If the only punch is by blue, I'm awarding a try.
If red retaliate by punching before their teammate has grounded the ball, I am not awarding a try.

 

[DocY]

If the only punch is by blue, I'm awarding a try.
If red retaliate by punching before their teammate has grounded the ball, I am not awarding a try.

I argued for blowing up - I was trying to describe a situation in which, had a try not been about to be scored, you'd have definitely blown up. Enough of a brawl that you really should stop play and with an obvious instigator.

I thought (and still do) that it might be a PT. To me, the brawl can't be allowed to develop, but you also don't want blue to benefit from throwing the punch.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I was discussing something similar to this the other day:

A red player has broken away and is very definitely going to score. As you glance over your shoulder (before BC has got to the goal line), you see a blue player punch a red player and a minor brawl ensue (without the try scoring opportunity it's penalty and card against blue). What do you do?

- Award the try to red
- Stop the clock
- RC the blue player
- Restart the clock and allow the conversion attempt.

First rule of coloured cards....they are a management tool not a penalty. You do not need to actually award a PK to to give a card.

Did you see what Jerome Garces did in the RWC semi between NZ and SA? Bryan Habana tried to stop a try by batting the ball down at a defensive ruck close to his own line. Garces plays advantage, and a few passes later, NZ score a try on the other side of the field. Garces awards the try, then goes back and YCs Habana.

ETA. Video
https://youtu.be/1KqWm87BkAM?t=131

 

[crossref]

Did you see what Jerome Garces did in the RWC semi between NZ and SA? Bryan Habana tried to stop a try by batting the ball down at a defensive ruck close to his own line. Garces plays advantage, and a few passes later, NZ score a try on the other side of the field. Garces awards the try, then goes back and YCs Habana.

I did that in my last game of the season

 

[DocY]

Did you see what Jerome Garces did in the RWC semi between NZ and SA? Bryan Habana tried to stop a try by batting the ball down at a defensive ruck close to his own line. Garces plays advantage, and a few passes later, NZ score a try on the other side of the field. Garces awards the try, then goes back and YCs Habana.

I did make note of that, yes. I think the only time I've ever seen it.

I wasn't thinking about stopping play immediately to issue the card - just to stop a scuffle/brawl escalating.

But I suppose they're not going to stop as soon as you blow your whistle, so an extra few seconds isn't going to make a difference and will save a tricky decision!

 

[TheBFG]

Agree with early posts, play on if safe to do so.

The problem I have is when we then go and speak to capts about "stuff going on off the ball", we (I'm guessing here) all tell them to go and speak to their teams, put the monkey on their back blah blah! "Next player goes" etc etc.......

I'm not suggesting for one min we should all do a Sir Nige and bring both sides in and give a formal bollocking, but we all know the capt will go back in and give a half arsed message, backed up with "if it goes off again, one in all in" potential message.

So should we make it a more formal chat and include as many as possible?

 

[DocY]

Agree with early posts, play on if safe to do so.

The problem I have is when we then go and speak to capts about "stuff going on off the ball", we (I'm guessing here) all tell them to go and speak to their teams, put the monkey on their back blah blah! "Next player goes" etc etc.......

I'm not suggesting for one min we should all do a Sir Nige and bring both sides in and give a formal bollocking, but we all know the capt will go back in and give a half arsed message, backed up with "if it goes off again, one in all in" potential message.

So should we make it a more formal chat and include as many as possible?

In my playing days I had a one-time captain who'd do the opposite. Even before the referee had had a word with him he was giving players very loud and very obvious bollockings.

He apologised to me after my first game with them and explained that it was all for the ref's benefit - just trying to send a clear message that we're trying to do the right thing, that he's controlling the team's discipline and that the ref doesn't need to worry about it.

I can see what he means now. If I'm refereeing and a captain is doing that, rightly or wrongly, I have more faith in him. And taken to the other extreme if I've asked the captain to have a word with his team and he obviously doesn't (I usually watch them until I restart play) the message that sends to me is "well the captain isn't helping with the discipline so it's all on me"

 

[DocY]

So should we make it a more formal chat and include as many as possible?

To actually try to answer your question: I include as few as I deem necessary. That'll be the captains and if I can single particular miscreants out I'll include them - usually not the first time, but on subsequent scuffles I might bring players in for a "I've seen you two heavily involved twice now and I'll be keeping a close eye".

More often than that is when I see a player who was involved before move unnecessarily towards a potential situation I'll let him know I'm watching there and then - nothing formal though.

 

[Pegleg]

I thought (and still do) that it might be a PT.

What possible grounds are there for a Penalty Try?

 

[didds]

presumably 10.2(a)

10.2 Unfair play
(a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send off will result if the offence or a similar offence is committed, or sent off.
Sanction: Penalty kick

A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored. A player who prevents a try being scored through foul play must either be cautioned and temporarily suspended or sent off.

In the suggested scenario

* a try was probabl;y to be scored
* the ref spotted foul play
* to prevent the fol play getting worse he blows
* ... thus preventing the try from being scored


ergo the foul play has prevented a try from being scored.

I'm not fully happy with it either but it does at least seem equitable in more simple scenarios of no retaliation etc.

didds

 

[DocY]

What possible grounds are there for a Penalty Try?

A try was probably going to be scored and foul play by the opposition prevented it - by making the ref stop play.

I am coming away from that way of thinking. Given players won't stop when you blow your whistle anyway, I don't see any harm in waiting an extra couple of seconds to award the try then dealing with it.