[Law] Munster v toulon

[OB..]

I'm with you. Clear one handed slap out of play.

It is certain that he was trying to slap the ball away from his opponents hands, but is that the same as intending to slap it into touch? As I said he is obviously taking a risk and the risk is greater the closer he is to the touch-in-goal or dead ball line. However it is not dangerous play, so I am a little uncomfortable in equating it to say a PT for foul play.

 

[beckett50]

It is certain that he was trying to slap the ball away from his opponents hands, but is that the same as intending to slap it into touch? As I said he is obviously taking a risk and the risk is greater the closer he is to the touch-in-goal or dead ball line. However it is not dangerous play, so I am a little uncomfortable in equating it to say a PT for foul play.

That close to TiG and with that much momentum?

Frankly, yes.

 

[Pinky]

Think it is caught by the foul play law. 9.7 b does it for me - perhaps a question of intent, but if you are very close to tig or db line, what do you expect to happen if you whack the ball with your hand in the direction of the corner flag?

 

[Butters]

I'm new to this forum and joined a month ago to see what the experts were saying about so many controversial calls in high profile matches. Nearly every game now, there are critical decisions where the refs are getting the calls, IMO, wrong.. Wales should have been awarded a try against England, Ireland shouldn't have been awarded one/ two against England, but this one takes the biscuit. If that was a standard league match, you could possibly forgive a society ref giving a scrum 5m, either way.

However with the technology available that is 100% PT and YC. Nigel's conversation was as if he was talking about a one-handed attempted interception (hand up/ hand down) and not slapping the ball out of the field of play. There was absolutely no way Zebo was ever going to control the ball or keep it in play, so deliberate knock down, PT and YC. I genuinely cannot understand how anyone can argue any other way. Please enlighten me.

And the last penalty against Ashton was a joke. He moved to protect the ball which every single player does at every single ruck. He also had to wiggle to present the ball because the Munster player was offside. Penalty Toulon for the first infringement by Munster.

And finally, the refs have to be at least partial French speakers. I am not pro French and am not demanding Alain Roland every game, but you have to have a fair playing field where the ref can at least explain his decisions and what he is hoping to see to both captains...

 

[OB..]

And finally, the refs have to be at least partial French speakers. I am not pro French and am not demanding Alain Roland every game, but you have to have a fair playing field where the ref can at least explain his decisions and what he is hoping to see to both captains...

I'm afraid that is unrealistic. I remember when Chris White started using some basic French. At first he would shout "Laissez" for "Release". Somebody must have told him that wasn't quite right, because he correctly started using "Lâchez". Then he refereed a French team playing Munster and shouted "Lâchez rouge". The French knew Munster were being told to release, but Munster, hearing French, would have assumed it was a call to their opponents.

Being a top referee is not guarantee of any linguistic competence, and if you start requiring it you immediately reduce the pool of possible referees for each international.

Current practice is inevitably that internationals are refereed in English. That means non-English speaking teams must learn enough to get used to the standard phrases. It is much easier to learn to recognise those than to have to produce the right one yourself (with a good enough accent). Speaking a language well enough to explain your decision is even trickier.

BTW, if French, why not Italian?

 

[Rich_NL]

And the last penalty against Ashton was a joke. He moved to protect the ball which every single player does at every single ruck. He also had to wiggle to present the ball because the Munster player was offside. Penalty Toulon for the first infringement by Munster.

I disagree completely. He was in a position to place the ball and he rolled into the opposition's legs, exposing the ball, in an attempt to buy time.

 

[Balones]

I'm afraid that is unrealistic. I remember when Chris White started using some basic French. At first he would shout "Laissez" for "Release". Somebody must have told him that wasn't quite right, because he correctly started using "Lâchez". Then he refereed a French team playing Munster and shouted "Lâchez rouge". The French knew Munster were being told to release, but Munster, hearing French, would have assumed it was a call to their opponents.

Being a top referee is not guarantee of any linguistic competence, and if you start requiring it you immediately reduce the pool of possible referees for each international.

Current practice is inevitably that internationals are refereed in English. That means non-English speaking teams must learn enough to get used to the standard phrases. It is much easier to learn to recognise those than to have to produce the right one yourself (with a good enough accent). Speaking a language well enough to explain your decision is even trickier.

BTW, if French, why not Italian?

Totally agree. At he top end of the game, other than international, teams are now multinational so using one language is the only practical option. At downtime if you do have some fluency then some extra input may help to develop a better working relationship and perhaps erase some doubt in interpretation.