Player with minor injury not in play, but ref not aware of this

[OB..]

Defined in law

Up to 1999 the law said "He cannot alter a decision unless he observes that a touch judge's flag is raised or before he has received a report from either or both of his touch judges relating to Section 4 (a).."

In the 2000 rewrite this was changed to "The referee may alter a decision when a touch judge has raised the flag to signal touch or an act of foul play " which seems to leave open the possibility that he can also change it at other times.

 

[Taff]

... In the 2000 rewrite this was changed to "The referee may alter a decision when a touch judge has raised the flag to signal touch or an act of foul play " which seems to leave open the possibility that he can also change it at other times.

Sorry OB, but I read that differently. By giving specific instances of when a ref can change his decision, my reading says it effectively prohibits him changing his mind at other times.

If the IRBs intention was to let the ref change his mind for any reason, it may as well just say "The referee may alter a decision". To me anyway the fact that it doesn't say that suggests that was never their intention.

I would say however that I have been wrong before.

 

[OB..]

My point was simply that the change introduces an element of ambiguity that was not there before. I preferred the earlier version.

That said, if I heard "Scrum Blue - sorry lads, I mean scrum Red" I would be more likely to congratulate the referee than criticise him (if I mentioned it at all).

 

[tim White]

All



One query, was: "You can change your decision!".

So they were more worried about the score than the injured player?????:wow:

 

[Davet]

OB

Not sure there is an ambiguity.

You may drive on when the traffic light is green doesn't imply that that you may also do so when it is red.

 

[David J.]

Assuming a referee can change his decision, I doubt anyone would think he can change a decision after play has restarted.

 

[OB..]

Not sure there is an ambiguity.

One is a specific prohibition, the other is implied. The former is clearer and to my mind better.