Making a mark

[colesy]

Match on Sunday between two U15 sides. Red 10 puts up a high ball which blue 15 catches inside his 22. Blue 15 calls for the mark. Only one problem – he called ‘mark’ while the ball was still about 20 ft in the air and therefore about 3 seconds before he actually caught the ball. All the players stopped in their tracks on hearing the mark called. LOTG state “The player must make a clean catch direct from an opponent’s kick and at the same time shout ‘Mark’.” So, the call of ‘mark’ needs to be contemporaneous with the ball being caught.

I have two choices. 1. Apply the law, ‘mark’ called incorrectly, play on. I should note here that blue 15 actually had plenty of space to run the ball as advancing reds were quite a long way away, so no safety issues i.e. he wasn’t going to be clobbered by a gang of hairy forwards. 2. Award the mark – everyone had stopped and were expecting it to be given and it was U15 after all.

So, what should I have done? I’ll tell you later what I actually did.

 

[ddjamo]

2. don't be a jobsworth....the whole park knew he wanted the mark.

 

[Phil E]

At that age group, in those circumstances, award the mark, but re-educate before he takes the kick.

 

[Davet]

U15 - Players had all stopped anyway. Go with the flow, if you don't give the Mark you'll simply create lots of confusion, and it could be dangerous. Award the Mark, then have a word.

 

[SimonSmith]

At that age group, in those circumstances, award the mark, but re-educate before he takes the kick.

This.

 

[Phil E]

Originally Posted by Phil E

At that age group, in those circumstances, award the mark, but re-educate before he takes the kick.

This.

I think we just described Contextual Judgement epper:

 

[colesy]

I gave the mark and had a word. However, if it had been a senior match, my thinking might have been a little different.

 

[Taff]

Whenever I suggest making an allowance for youngsters I seem to get shot down in flames, so forget for a minute that this was an U19 game.

On reading the OP, my initial reaction was don't award the Mark - having read the lawbook I still think that, because one of the conditions for a Mark hasn't been met.

The book says ... "The player must make a clean catch direct from an opponent’s kick and at the same time shout “Mark”. The key words here are obviously "at the same time". He shouted way too early, so failed that condition. Would you give the Mark if he didn't catch the ball cleanly or if he wasn't inside the 22 but very close to it?

If you wouldn't - why would you ignore the time condition - it's just as important as the other conditions?

Having said that, given that everybody had stopped you're now in the aukward position of either giving him the Mark (which he didn't qualify for) or giving a scrum - opposition put in. Personally I'd go with a scrum and explain why he didn't get the Mark and remind them to always "play to the whistle".

 

[crossref]

I am probably one who usually shoots down in flames (I do think that refs used to the adult game can tend to over compensate and make too much alowance for U13-U15, who are cannier than refs not used to them realise).

I didn't answer your question because
- I wasn't sure what I would have done
- TBH I am not sure what's the right thing.

This is different from other canards like "how many attempts is a 15 yr old scrum-half allowed at a quick tap" or "they probably don't know where the offside line is after a kick" as in this incident there is a clear safety concern: you don't want everyone stopped, except for a 13 stone centre approaching at 20mph to perform a chest high tackle on someone who isn't expecting it.


In this instance you say that the oppos were some way away so you probably did have time to mitigiate the safety risk by shouting "play on, no mark, play on" loudly, and looking to be sure sure this was understood, and only blowing if confusion still reigned and accident was about to happen.

But on the other hand : everyone stopped.

My experience (the hard way) is that if everyone stops, then it's almost impossible to play on sensibly: nothing good comes of it, and it's best to blow the whistle and explain and restart with a scrum. So that's probably what i would have done.

 

[Phil E]

Having said that, given that everybody had stopped you're now in the aukward position of either giving him the Mark (which he didn't qualify for) or giving a scrum - opposition put in. Personally I'd go with a scrum and explain why he didn't get the Mark and remind them to always "play to the whistle".

Why a scrum? You didn't stop the game.

Surely its "Mark", or "Play On".

 

[Ian_Cook]

But on the other hand : everyone stopped.

My experience (the hard way) is that if everyone stops, then it's almost impossible to play on sensibly: nothing good comes of it, and it's best to blow the whistle and explain and restart with a scrum. So that's probably what i would have done.

Yep, I've seen that happen (and I've had that happen to me too).

A player knocked the ball forward! It happened on the other side of a scrum from where the referee was, and he wasn't looking exactly at it, so he missed it, but everyone stopped... it was like one of those moments in a crowded room where everyone is standing in groups talking, and through a fluky coincidence, everyone stops talking at the same time, and the whole room goes silent.

Strictly speaking, the referee didn't see the knock on, so he can't rule on what he didn't see, so it should be play on, but the common-sense thing to do is to understand what happened and award a scrum somewhere near where he thought the knock-forward occurred. Anything else is going to made the referee look like a prize dick head!!

 

[crossref]

. Anything else is going to made the referee look like a prize dick head!!

yes one time a few years ago when I was reffing everyone stopped (I can't even remember exactly why) they were kids...

- I went 'play on, play on' .
- for another moment nothing happened
- and I said 'play on, don't stop' and still nothing

then one kid, quicker on the uptake then the others, grabbed the ball and haired off for the line about 20m away and scored unopposed, while the other 29 players stayed where they were, becasue they all 'knew' the ball was dead.

I had the choice of awarding a try or saying 'no, hang on, that wasn't what I expected, come back'
given that they were kids neither option was attractive and I did, indeed, feel like a prize dick head.

 

[Taff]

Why a scrum? You didn't stop the game.

Correct, the referee didn't stop the game, but in effect the kids stopped it themselves.

It's happened to me a couple of times where everyone stops because they've seen a knock-on or a foot in touch. Advantage seems to be an alien concept to a lot of them. When you've got about 30 kids standing and looking at you thinking "Why isn't he blowing the whistle" it's aukward.

In both cases (different teams) after an explanation that they should always "play to the histle" we started with a scrum. Nobody complained.

 

[SimonSmith]

I get the 'mark' scenario more often than I like here because of the American Football "fair catch". It plays out in one of two ways - either I get the 'propeller' arm signal, or he shouts 'mark' far too early.

Which usually results with me shouting "play on' as loud as I can and then explaining at the next break down. Why? Because for every full back who gets it wrong, there's someone in the opposition who knows the laws (or, at least the one for the mark) and is chasing. I'm not going to deny him his rights under law.

 

[OB..]

Why a scrum? You didn't stop the game.

The players stopped, but the game didn't - until he blew his whistle.

 

[Davet]

My experience (the hard way) is that if everyone stops, then it's almost impossible to play on sensibly: nothing good comes of it, and it's best to blow the whistle and explain and restart with a scrum

.

Exactly.

But if you award the scrum not the mark who are you giving the put in to?

Side in possession, but which is that, have you blown your whistle while the ball is in the air or after it landed?

 

[Taff]

... But if you award the scrum not the mark who are you giving the put in to? Side in possession, but which is that, have you blown your whistle while the ball is in the air or after it landed?

In this case equity suggests the team that didn't cock it up get the put in.

It doesn't seem fair to let the team who called for the mark (wrongly) get the put in at a scrum brought about by their mistake.

 

[MrQeu]

May you treat it as a player trying to misguide the opposition?

 

[Taff]

May you treat it as a player trying to misguide the opposition?

Mmmmmm .... But what's he going to gain by that?

It doesn't look like a player trying to misguide the opposition. It looks like somebody who didn't know the mark law, trying to claim a mark ... and failing. My best guess is that he probably knew most of the conditions - but he didn't know all of them.

As my old boss used to say "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing". :biggrin:

 

[MrQeu]

Mmmmmm .... But what's he going to gain by that?

An uncontested catch?