not sure this is the best advertisement for rugby

Pablo


Referees in England
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
1,413
Post Likes
112
Current Referee grade:
Level 6
Maybe not. But in the context of that individual game, I don’t see what the players did that merits sanction.
 

TigerCraig


Referees in Australia
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,463
Post Likes
234
Seems fine to me. No different to a team trailing by 8 when time is up and the oppos have scored 3 tries electing to tap and kick out to deny a bonus point chance rather than playing on
 

Volun-selected


Referees in America
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
109
Post Likes
33
Location
United States
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
Not a great advert, and the crowd were not appreciative but I think the commentator sums it up perfectly - “It might be gamesmanship, but this is the game.”

Could an argument be made that this is foul play:
[LAW]
9.7 A player must not:
d. Waste time.
[/LAW]

Tell him to use it, otherwise free kick to the oppo?
 

Balones

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,180
Post Likes
318
The situation here is complicated by the fact that both teams playing in the game benefitted from the lack of action. Under normal circumstances you could easily and credibly penalise a side (time-wasting or gamesmanship) if the other was being disadvantaged. In reality here both teams wasted time and both showed a degree of unsportsmanlike behaviour, so who do you penalise?
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,292
Solutions
1
Post Likes
290
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Not a great advert, and the crowd were not appreciative but I think the commentator sums it up perfectly - “It might be gamesmanship, but this is the game.”

Could an argument be made that this is foul play:
[LAW]
9.7 A player must not:
d. Waste time.
[/LAW]

Tell him to use it, otherwise free kick to the oppo?
The ball is in play, no time is being 'wasted'. This has been on the cards for years, so WR could have legislated to prevent it.

I seem to remember that referees used to, in practice, require players to ground the ball within a reasonable time, but the lack of a requirement in Law put a stop to it.
 

Zebra1922


Referees in Scotland
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
683
Post Likes
199
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Maybe not. But in the context of that individual game, I don’t see what the players did that merits sanction.
Acts contrary to good sportsmanship?

Would you be happy if they did this after the first 10 seconds for the rest of the half?
 

Decorily

Coach/Referee
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
1,230
Post Likes
248
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Not entirely clear on the reason for this action/inaction.
However it seems to imply some form of match fixing!
 

Volun-selected


Referees in America
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
109
Post Likes
33
Location
United States
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
Not entirely clear on the reason for this action/inaction.
However it seems to imply some form of match fixing!
I think it’s less nefarious than out and out fixing, more a case of both teams knowing the rest of the draw and deciding that this silly little episode, whilst embarrassing, ensures a better path in the next rounds for both of them so why not ease up and leave plenty of gas in the tank.

To @chbg point - this has been around for a while and WR have decided no explicit law, ruling, or guidance is necessary.
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
8,892
Post Likes
983
The ball is in play, no time is being 'wasted'. This has been on the cards for years, so WR could have legislated to prevent it.

I seem to remember that referees used to, in practice, require players to ground the ball within a reasonable time, but the lack of a requirement in Law put a stop to it.
My memory - possibly flawed - was that the guideline was the attacking team were under no obligation to ground the ball, and that any obligation was on the defending team to provide the chaser to force the issue.

I'm waiting for new guidelines to come out of this.
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,292
Solutions
1
Post Likes
290
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
To @chbg point - this has been around for a while and WR have decided no explicit law, ruling, or guidance is necessary.
And therefore it must be an accepted part of the game. Until ...
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,700
Post Likes
2,239
My memory - possibly flawed - was that the guideline was the attacking team were under no obligation to ground the ball, and that any obligation was on the defending team to provide the chaser to force the issue.

I'm waiting for new guidelines to come out of this.
in this instance both teams were content to let time pass -- as both were set to qualify for the next round.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,780
Post Likes
1,198
from stuff I've read elsewhere...

both sides wer4e already through to the next round. QED the result of this game was immaterial. Both sides were content with not running around like proverbial flies, and retaining energy or whatever.

Much elsewhere has been made of acts contrary - and i would imagine that that is a possibility here.

BUT

(and this was the bit elsewhere people were not getting)

There is one sole judge of law etc. and that sole judge did not deem it an act contrary etc.

QED, it was not an act contrary etc and so this is what happened.

I can understand paying punters were disgruntled. I can understand it looks "stupid" and potentially doesn't do the game any good from a public perception.

But if it IS a problem - its a problem for WR to sort out.



They won't. In the same way they don't/won't sort out other perceived blights on the game - scrummages, caterpillars, wide field trench defences
 
Last edited:

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,366
Post Likes
569
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Seems fine to me. No different to a team trailing by 8 when time is up and the oppos have scored 3 tries electing to tap and kick out to deny a bonus point chance rather than playing on
The underlined bit is a crucial difference which, for me, destroys your argument.
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,366
Post Likes
569
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Not entirely clear on the reason for this action/inaction.
However it seems to imply some form of match fixing!
Apparently the score meant both sides went through at the expence of Canada.
 

Volun-selected


Referees in America
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
109
Post Likes
33
Location
United States
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
I think the 7s format amplifies the farce, but unless it is illegal under the laws gamesmanship like this will continue.

But even in 15s, how many examples do we see each match? A kicker taking almost the full 90 seconds to get the ball setup just right on the tee for a conversion directly in front of the posts, or the SH "struggling" to get the ball out of the ruck and then very gingerly rolling the ball back along the (inevitable) caterpillar and then taking time to marshal the troops before taking 4.5s after being told to use it, or a team slowly jogging back to the center for a restart, etc., etc... ?

Watching Squidge break down the Red Roses' almost flawless W6N performance, at one point he highlights a sin bin against France (So can anyone stop the Red Roses? | Women's Six Nations 2022 - about 17m in). Despite France chomping at the bit to go fast at every chance, England managed the game ruthlessly by taking a little extra time everywhere they could and limited the ball-in-play to just 160 seconds across 10 minutes. And this management is seen as a strength of the team. (And it was still a great match to watch! Roll on October...)

If this specific example spurs WR to call out specific scenarios as time wasting or against the spirit of good sportsmanship and issue targeted law changes or clarifications, I can only hope that they take their time and think things through - rather than rush out a quick fix and leave us to deal with ambiguities in the language and their unintended consequences.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,780
Post Likes
1,198
I

But even in 15s, how many examples do we see each match? A kicker taking almost the full 90 seconds to get the ball setup just right on the tee for a conversion directly in front of the posts, or the SH "struggling" to get the ball out of the ruck and then very gingerly rolling the ball back along the (inevitable) caterpillar and then taking time to marshal the troops before taking 4.5s after being told to use it, or a team slowly jogging back to the center for a restart, etc., etc... ?
and the eleventy billion scrum resets interspersed with a front rower taking a knee etc etc to take the rhythm out of a game, that also has the effect of running the clock out? Huddles before lineouts and taking a minute to set up a simple front ball lineout ?
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,780
Post Likes
1,198
.... rather than rush out a quick fix and leave us to deal with ambiguities in the language and their unintended consequences.
which is of cousre all they ever do, between the soup and fish courses
 
Top