Not straight. Again. And again.

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
8,939
Post Likes
1,038
Mots pf this season, I've been doing D1 College, and enjoyed it a lot.

I had a D3 Men's game today, just to get a change.

I've done D3 before, so I thought there would be few surprises.

Except...

First red L/O? Not straight.
Second red L/O? Not straight.

Now my heart is starting to sink. I already set a big tunnel, and give the hookers a fair degree of latitude, so if I say not straight, it's really not straight.

Have a quiet word with hooker. "Mate, you're 0 for 2"

Third red L/O? Not straight.

"Next one's a FK. This is getting silly"

You can guess what happens on the 4th.
Fifth was plausible, so I let him have it.
Sixth? Yup. So, now it's a PK and word with the captain. "Look, I'm about of options here, and I've been generous...Maybe you want to swap out throwers?"
"Sorry sir, he's our only thrower"
[sotto voce 'shit'] "Well, OK. That's your problem. I'm telling you what's about to happen."

Reader, I yellow carded him. First time in 23 years of refereeing. Replacement thrower did just fine.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,858
Post Likes
1,236
presumably he was simply rubbish at throwing - as nobody would deliberately do it after warnings surely.

I'm not personally convinced though that somebody shoud end up being YCd because of sheer incompetence?

And as for giving a FK for repeated N/S ... what's the point? a FK is worse than useless for about 70m of the field for the team awarded one.

didds
 

leaguerefaus


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
1,000
Post Likes
226
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I don't think you can justify a YC for someone not throwing-in straight. They are not breaking down the play of their opponent, they are essentially giving up the ball when they have the advantage of the throw. Penalty sufficient every time.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,650
Post Likes
1,717
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I don't think you can justify a YC for someone not throwing-in straight. They are not breaking down the play of their opponent, they are essentially giving up the ball when they have the advantage of the throw. Penalty sufficient every time.

Yep. three times not straight, then escalate to FK and then escalate to PK from then on.

I know its technically repeat/persistent infringements but its not as if what he is doing is disadvantaging the opposition. With a PK at every NS, there is no upside for his team. All he is doing is continually giving up possession and field position. That's punishment enough surely?
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,319
Solutions
1
Post Likes
312
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
But the team have learnt that they do have another, more competent, thrower. So long term win!
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,229
Post Likes
354
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
19.7 Incorrect throw in

(a) If the throw-in at a lineout is incorrect, the opposing team has the choice of throwing in at a
lineout or a scrum on the 15-metre line. If they choose the throw-in to the lineout and it is
again incorrect, a scrum is formed. The team that took the first throw-in throws in the ball.


(c) A player must not intentionally or repeatedly throw the ball in not straight.
Sanction: Penalty kick on the 15-metre line
How the throw-in takes place


I agree with didds, the choice of line-out or scrum is much more of an advantage than a FK.

Escalating to PK is an available option but YC is harsh as the PK is already for repeat offence.
 

The Fat


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
4,204
Post Likes
496
Yep. three times not straight, then escalate to FK and then escalate to PK from then on.

I know its technically repeat/persistent infringements but its not as if what he is doing is disadvantaging the opposition. With a PK at every NS, there is no upside for his team. All he is doing is continually giving up possession and field position. That's punishment enough surely?

And what if you escalate to PK's and during the next 4 or 5 minutes he throws 3 more that you award 3 more quick PKs for? See where I'm going?
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,229
Post Likes
354
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
..... and the team receiving the PKs says "Thank you, Sir". This is 'throwing in crook', not a capitol offence in and of itself.
 

The Fat


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
4,204
Post Likes
496
..... and the team receiving the PKs says "Thank you, Sir". This is 'throwing in crook', not a capitol offence in and of itself.

Sounds like he only wants to throw to 4 or 6. Why doesn't his captain suggest he try the front or 2 just for something different?
How many PKs would you allow for the continual miss throws?
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,229
Post Likes
354
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
As many as go awry. Giving up the throw at a LO and getting hit with a PK in 15m is a smack up the side of the head.

What if they change throwers and it's still not straight? What if he only cocks it up every other throw?

As said before, the LO/scrum option is already a nice reward for a poor throw so chucking in a penalty for repeating is a bonus. No need for a card.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,858
Post Likes
1,236
19.7 Incorrect throw in

(a) If the throw-in at a lineout is incorrect, the opposing team has the choice of throwing in at a
lineout or a scrum on the 15-metre line. If they choose the throw-in to the lineout and it is
again incorrect, a scrum is formed. The team that took the first throw-in throws in the ball.


(c) A player must not intentionally or repeatedly throw the ball in not straight.
Sanction: Penalty kick on the 15-metre line
How the throw-in takes place


I agree with didds, the choice of line-out or scrum is much more of an advantage than a FK.

Escalating to PK is an available option but YC is harsh as the PK is already for repeat offence.

what I actually meant (though I appreciate the agreement :) is that betweena team's own 22 and deep into the oppo 22, an FK award ends up in a scrum anyway for most teams. so awarding a FK is in itself meanigless... and removes the LO option to the other team that they would otherwise have.

I can see that its an escalation process to go from scrum-or-lineout to eventual PK... but even then this is now PKing somebody for incomptence... which _personally_ I am not sure I can agree with. (see above).



didds
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,858
Post Likes
1,236
a secondary thought...

IF one were to YC a thrower for persistent not straight, and the next thrower stands forward and he throws not straight... is that a YC for him then as well for continuation of repeated NS? Who on earth is going to stand up to throw in with the prospect of a YC hanging over them?

didds
 

Pegleg

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
3,330
Post Likes
536
Current Referee grade:
Level 3
At a scrum for not straight the rule is: Warning --- FK --- PK --- YC. What is the difference with a line out? I can see the point of missing out the FK but YC and maybe he'll practice a bit more.

Also who is to say he is throwing not straight because the other side has a very good line out?
 

ChrisR

Player or Coach
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
3,229
Post Likes
354
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
It's a moot point since the FK isn't an option but I agree (again) that a FK inside own 22 or a quick tap can be a benefit. Otherwise I think the LO/scrum is a better option.
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
8,939
Post Likes
1,038
He was throwing to the front more than the middle or back. In fact, he didn't go to the back at all that I remember.

My Coach - who didn't come to coach, just to watch some rugby - suggested I could have gone to my pocket earlier.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,858
Post Likes
1,236
My Coach - who didn't come to coach, just to watch some rugby - suggested I could have gone to my pocket earlier.

how - on the day - would that have actually "helped" anyone though (except the oppo presumably!). Surely YC is a deterrent in terms of it potentially being shown. How can you deter someone that hasn't the skills to do any better (as clearly was the case here). You can YC him, he comes back on and the next LO he does it again, so presumably at that juncture RC him. What does that ultimately achieve except being RCd for incompetence?

We can make arguments about its the team's punishment etc - with some validity - but in the weeds this may be a bloke that doesn't normally throw but all the throwers are sick/injured/away/dragged up a team cos their normal thrower is sick/injured/away etc. cards are a literal progression, but not very "safety-ENJOYMENT-law" orientated in this scenario. Especially for the individual concerned.

I am conflicted here - but overall I am not convinced that carding someone for straight incompetence is really a solution.

Taken to an extreme, that potentially means that team X could end up with (say) two - or more! - RCs for incompetence per game .. because lets face it team B will kick to touch quite happily and conceed the throw because they know they will always end up with the ball back, so you could see a lot more LOs than normal, for team A to throw in. It isn;t really of any benefit at all. Its not an offence like offside. And frankly takes far more ability than to put the ball into a scrum straight!

didds
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,858
Post Likes
1,236
but YC and maybe he'll practice a bit more.

maybe - but that doesn't help at this juncture at that moment in time.

And maybe he never normally throws but through exceptional circumstances his team has no thrower and he volunteered/got volunteered. Its happened to me.

didds
 

Pegleg

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
3,330
Post Likes
536
Current Referee grade:
Level 3
I think "in the weeds" we apply different standards for repeated offences. So we'd not be going to YC on the third occasion. Common sense also would apply in windy conditions. Especially if the hooker was throwing to the front rather than middle or back.

I leave the question on the table though about the scrum. We go through the process of warning ect up to red card. Again this may be a technical issue too. Of course many line out throwers are off target deliberately just as much a SHs.

Do those who object to the YC for the Hooker also opposing for the SH?
 

merge

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2016
Messages
26
Post Likes
5
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
... and removes the LO option to the other team that they would otherwise have.

Surely 21.4 (b) applies and they do have they lineout option from a FK or PK for not straight?
 

Pegleg

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
3,330
Post Likes
536
Current Referee grade:
Level 3
19.7 INCORRECT THROW-IN

(c) A player must not intentionally or repeatedly throw the ball in not straight.
Sanction: Penalty kick on the 15-metre line

Make it clear that the law makers expect a PK for the lack of skill. Also the other side can chose a scrum or a line out ifthe prefer it to the PK. Of course, there is no FK option at the line out we go straight to the PK. Perhaps the line out chould be brought into line with the scum and Law 19.7 (c) should carry a FK sanction instead of the PK.

21.4 PENALTY AND FREE KICK OPTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
(a) Scrum alternative. A team awarded a penalty or free kick may choose a scrum instead.
They throw in the ball.
(b) Lineout alternative. A team awarded a penalty or a free kick at a lineout may choose a
further lineout into which they throw in. This is in addition to the scrum option.
 
Top