Judah Match Report From Scotland w/ Assessor Comments

[Gareth-Lee Smith]

how many resets = FK?
2?
3?
FK against captain asks: "Sir, what for ?"
What is your reply?

I dont like this ... i can u/stand to a certain extent but ... i dont like it.
We are not allowed to guess and make things up elsewhere on the park ...

Going back to my Foundation Level 1 course (my only official training), they told us that 3 of anything was too many. FK/Penalty (depending on offence, obviously) after that, then about 3 more = Card threat.

 

[SimonSmith]

Agree with Judah.
Other examples could include:
If a scrum goes down and you ask the front row to keep it up, thanking them for it "that's better guys, thanks" the next time.
Smiling. Or even, shock, exchanging a joke.

They're all "goodwill points" in the bank in case you ever need to make a withdrawal!

 

[ex-lucy]

(sorry for threadjacking judah - it may be a case of moving these good salient game management points to another thread, Robert)
i have been told by assessors that my 'style' is more atune to higher levels ....It is recommended that i should referee at a higher level ... is this a backhanded criticism of my match management style?
i know that i endeavour to use the same 'tricks' (as described above by Simon) in my games to gain 'goodwill credit' but i get better response from say level 8 than level 11/12. And so, when i have to card players at lower levels they seem surprised and complain.
And the backchat is far far worse at level 11/12 than level 8, yet even after prematch briefngs requesting none and warnings to capts, it continues ...
Should I be more lenient for cards for technical offences and backchat at lower levels?
Are expectations of players such that they should be allowed some backchat with refs at level 11?

 

[beckett50]

Agree with Judah and Simon on all those points.

Also always find it useful to gently touch a player when talking to him. For example when approaching a lineout go up to a player, gently touch his arm and impart your message - be it good or bad.

On Saturday Green 5 had slowed the ball twice at the tackle, but Red had used the advantage well. At the next lineout as we approached the line of touch just touched him and said "Please don't slow the ball at the tackle again, otherwise my options are limited." Surprise, surprise he didn't do it again (not that I saw, anyway ).

Agree also with taking the deep breaths before issuing a card or dealing with handbags etc. You were brave to restart with a scrum though!

 

[ex-lucy]

You were brave to restart with a scrum though!

yes, i thought that strange. I was always told to restart after a brawl with a pen to defending team.
Good confidence!

 

[SimonSmith]

(sorry for threadjacking judah - it may be a case of moving these good salient game management points to another thread, Robert)
i have been told by assessors that my 'style' is more atune to higher levels ....It is recommended that i should referee at a higher level ... is this a backhanded criticism of my match management style?

It's probably more a case of not being able to flex your style to suit what's in front of you.

i know that i endeavour to use the same 'tricks' (as described above by Simon) in my games to gain 'goodwill credit' but i get better response from say level 8 than level 11/12. And so, when i have to card players at lower levels they seem surprised and complain.
And the backchat is far far worse at level 11/12 than level 8, yet even after prematch briefngs requesting none and warnings to capts, it continues ...
Should I be more lenient for cards for technical offences and backchat at lower levels?
Are expectations of players such that they should be allowed some backchat with refs at level 11?

Nope. I'd tend more to leniency on technical stuff on the grounds that there will be a skills issue. Discipline and backchat is entirely within their control, and I see no reason for lessening your standards.

 

[jboulet4648]

You were brave to restart with a scrum though!

The fault lay on both sides of the ball, both teams showed lack of discipline and poor spirit. Why penalize one side when both teams deserved it?

That tactic I learned only the Tuesday before my trip from my ref coach, figured I would try it, and it worked. Hell it could not have made things worse.
Both the assessor, and the A Panels who were present agreed with my choice as well, so....

 

[Robert Burns]

With 5 minutes left a 15 on 15 brawl started. I blew my whistle, and sat back. Unfortunately, I had to get closer than I wanted and repeatedly blow my whistle since the TJ on the side decided to try to get in and pull players out. While the players sorted it out, I sat back. When it was over, once again, calmly had all players go at least 10 m from each other, took the captains over and said we have 5 to go gents. Your teams will play rugby. I could card all 30 players, however we will be restarting with a scrum atatcking side.

We would be heavily critisised if we did this, if you have a mass brawl and you didn't see what started it you should be looking for the runner ins, or heavy punches and catching the numbers, when it finishes, unless you have certainly seen different then at least one from each team has to go (equity). and penalty restart against the worst thing you saw, if all equal then to defending team, why, beacuse it's much less likely to lead to a try/points that could win the game.

 

[jboulet4648]

I saw everything which happened, but what would I do, send off 30 players? It was all piss poor....the worse thing I saw from my perspective was the TJ trying to pull people apart...caused me to get closer to the melee than i wanted.

if both teams are to blame, and all players were equally at fault, what purpose does a penalty do? Why award a team in any which way for conduct that does not belong on the pitch?

 

[Robert Burns]

It shows that serious fighting won't be tolerated, but not giving anything it may in some instances give the opinion that it's ok to have a fight if you don't see what starts it.

Mass brawl must have repercussions. There has to be reds. IMO.

 

[SimonSmith]

So if everything is evenly balanced, who do you penalize?

You don't penalize to get yourself out of a hole and to send a message - you can do that w/out a penalty

 

[Bryan]

Mass brawl must have repercussions. There has to be reds. IMO.

Screw that. I'm sure as hell not going to spend my sunday writing 30 sending-off reports. It also depends what you have in front of you- are 30 players really involved, or is it 30 players holding and shoving each other with no more than handbags? Honestly, if there was a mass brawl, you'd be better off abandoning the match, apart from the Borders where you'd think "yeah, 20 minutes in for Hawick, they're around 10 minutes late by my count". Referee what's in front of you- there's no hard and fast rule for brawls, apart from them generally being a pain in the arse and it delays the match for a few minutes.

penalty restart against the worst thing you saw, if all equal then to defending team...

I'm not so sure a scrum is unfounded for certain instances. Sure, if the mass brawl was due to a retaliatory punch then penalise that, but if it's just 2 guys who start brawling, which leads to everything else, then I can see a scrum being an option, or whatever restart you might have. Remember in the England v. Argentina match, Cohen punches the Argentinian hooker, who then punches him back. What does Deaker do? He separates them, then they get on with the lineout. No cards, but sound management.

 

[jboulet4648]

So I should have sent 29 players off? They were all fighting....

I disagree.

IMO what I did worked, the assessor agreed, two former Scottish A Panels agreed, and my ref coach agreed, that it was handled well on my part....

 

[jboulet4648]

No cards, but sound management.

I like to think that's what I did

Boy do Gala and hawick dislike one another

 

[Robert Burns]

Not saying you should send off 30 people, 1 each would do. I'm also not saying that Judah's approach didn't work, in this case it obviously did, and that may have as much to do with Judah's Management style as it did the intent of the players or indeed just a touch of fortune.

However, what I am saying is that if a mass brawl was started and it went 100% unpunished (in London i'm certain), the referee would probably be marked down on a critical point as it would seem to have been condoned.

What I was saying was if you had not seen the original incident to deal with then you would generally (interfering TJ's not taken into account) try to get a wider view, whilst blowing the whistle, to see people coming in or any major blows etc. It must be seen to be unacceptable.

May I ask you all if a player or players became injured is it still acceptable to start with a scrum with no punishment, just because you didn't see who hit them?

And as before, if you can't find a penalty offence when 30 people are punching each other there is a problem, make your stance, and if in your head it's just as much one side as the other, then give the penalty to the defending team.

I can't see how we as referees would bin two players for having a good scrap (not handbags) but can give nothing to two teams fighting.

Is it just me that thinks this?

 

[jboulet4648]

if two players have a good scrap, why bin either.....tit for tat gents you done, can we get back to the game....

 

[Gareth-Lee Smith]

Judah - I'm not entirely sure about that stance. Where do you draw the line of applying that? It's idealistic for senior rugby and for those who yearn for the good ol' days, but the phrase quoted most often in these situations is "we all have work/school tomorrow". What happens on the rugby pitch can easily affect outside life.

How about tit-for-tat and then punishment of equal measure?

 

[Robert Burns]

As I said, what if someone gets injured? If you haven't penalised anything, where do you stand as a referee if it goes further? You can't say you didn't see it. Dodgy ground I think.

 

[Bryan]

However, what I am saying is that if a mass brawl was started and it went 100% unpunished (in London i'm certain), the referee would probably be marked down on a critical point as it would seem to have been condoned.

If you separate the teams, take your time to manage the players and yourself, and speak to the captains about it, then you're managing it and trying to prevent further goings-on- I certainly don't think anyone would accuse you of condoning it.

You just saw a fight, you don't know who started it, two players involved. You could send them both off, you could bin them both, and you could admonish them, tell them not to do it again and spoil the rugby for the other 28 players, and get on with it. The choice comes down to various factors, but to say "the option that does not involve a penalty is out of the question", is too harsh given all the unknowns.

May I ask you all if a player or players became injured is it still acceptable to start with a scrum with no punishment, just because you didn't see who hit them?...I can't see how we as referees would bin two players for having a good scrap (not handbags) but can give nothing to two teams fighting.

Robert, we're now in the land of hypotheticals and What-ifs. Injuries will no doubt factor into our decision, as will the trend of the match, relationships with teams up to that point, etc.

What Judah had in front of him was dealt with effectively for that scenario. On a different day, in a different match, with different things at stake, the consequences may have been different. As long as the referee can justify his actions for what he sees (or doesn't see) and how he manages the game, then that's the most you can ask. I've binned players after repeated warnings to captains, and I've brought the captains over after an isolated incident 65mins in to remind them of discipline, and had positive results from both (I've also had negative results).

As one NorCal referee told me a few years ago: Good judgement comes from experience....experience comes from bad judgement.

 

[Robert Burns]

Bryan,

I agree the game, tempo, attitude of players etc all comes into play. I'm quite happy that Judah got his one ok, and it worked well for him, so no critisism of him.

I am just stating that I believe if I as a London referee had the same situation, and the same outcome, I believe I would be marked down on it, regardless how the players responded after.

Is this just London being strict on their refs? or do other refs think their societies would do the same?

Do any of our assessors have an opinion? OB.., Simon Thomas, Mike, others?