Rugby union's referees left exposed

[Jenko]

by findings of IRB examination of the modern scrum

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ru...s-of-IRB-examination-of-the-modern-scrum.html

findings presentation here

The IRB, particularly its refereeing department, is now in an entirely new legal position.

what do we all think?

 

[Simon Thomas]

excellent article by Brian which highlights the current obsession with getting and taking the "hit", with it's potentially dangerous consequences.

Plus his legal training and pov highlights that there is now published IRB / RFU evidence to which reference can be made in litigation.

 

[Dixie]

excellent article by Brian which highlights the current obsession with getting and taking the "hit", with it's potentially dangerous consequences.

Plus his legal training and pov highlights that there is now published IRB / RFU evidence to which reference can be made in litigation.

I very much hope that the powers that be read this article - at least with enough concern to take independent legal advice. Sadly, I lack faith. It might have helped if Brian's sub-editors at the Telegraph had done their job sufficiently well to avoid the typos that detract from the authority of the piece, but I know some people are as bored by that as others are of Brian's "pathological" complaints about the scrum.

 

[Davet]

I entirely agrre with Pitbull.

Remove the "hit" and you remove most of the current crop of problems with the scrum.

As to the legal position - well he's the professional lawyer; and his opinion on legal matters deserves to be respected.

 

[Davet]

sub-editors at the Telegraph had done their job sufficiently well to avoid the typos that detract from the authority of the piece

I spotted only one - scrum rather than scrums.

Maybe you could identify the others for those us who may be grammatically challenged?

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

The Powerpoint is interesting.

Concerning that the scrum is getting more dangerous year on year since 2008.

Interesting that the Bath Study suggests that the "sustained" portion of the scum, which I take to be the pushing after the ball has come in, is about the same irrespective of the mode of engagement/forming up the scrum. Given the law requirement of "restarting safely" it suggests to me that passive engagement with undiminished pushing needs to be implemented sooner rather than later.

Brian's article is good although his pathological stance does irritate some (not me) I know.

 

[Dixie]

I spotted only one - scrum rather than scrums.

Maybe you could identify the others for those us who may be grammatically challenged?

You just want to distract me from work!

Para 2:

at its very foundation is the issue safety.

Para 3:

because of their failure to act over dangers in scrum which were well known

Para 5:

The point it that for the first time these things cannot be dismissed as anecdotal

Para 6:

contrary to the law stating pushing should only begin when the ball leaves the scum-half’s hands.

(or perhaps that one was intentional? :wink:

Para 11:

I, as a no-so-silent Jonah wailing in the wilderness, ...

(ignoring that it was traditionally either Jeremiah or John the Baptist who did the wailing, not Jonah)

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Jonah - Whaling

Did you see what I did there?

 

[Robert Burns]

Strange coincidence on timing with the SARU's powerpoint on the scrums?

Is the noise about removing the hit enough to force a trial? We (the majority here) seem to encourage its introduction.

 

[Davet]

Yes - well if I'm to be distracted then so must you.

Y'know I read it reasonably carefully and at first sight it was only the "dangers in scrum" that struck me.

I haven't re-read it - and following your analysis I don't need to, which is good as I have work to do.

But I don't think the typos are such that they detract from the authority of the message.

Perhaps the Telegraph is now chasing the Grauniad readership?

 

[bcm666]

This is just one of the comments left to my article - it shows the trickle down effect that is happening and that it is dangerous. If you look at the other comments you will see several from people wating for or who have had surgery in their early years which they say is due to power/impact scrums. these are comments from rugby people disinterested from the culpability argument -



hampshirehooker
23 minutes ago

I have to tell you that the "hit" is prevalent at mini level too. Brian, you are welcome to come down and visit us and see what a mess the scrum has become.

At a recent Festival, in our Under 12 age group, I had one prop have to retire with a shoulder injury and another with a sore neck, both the result of the excessive hit on the scrums engaging. So I can see the damage this is having on young bodies.

I tried last season to insist on a soft engage and then push when the ball comes in, on safety grounds, but it was impossible to do unilaterally. Our boys were being pushed back by inferior teams who pushed early, and the referees didn't stop it, so we had to follow suit or lose control of the ball and the match.

If we do not correct this feature of the game, we will lose all techniques in the front row inside a generation, and also lose the game for all shapes and sizes. And as someone who has played, coached and loved rugby for 40 years, I would like to know from the IRB what is more more important than keeping faith with game's roots?

 

[beckett50]

Well considered article and interesting presentation.
Not holding my breath though.

 

[crossref]

I tried last season to insist on a soft engage and then push when the ball comes in, on safety grounds, but it was impossible to do unilaterally. Our boys were being pushed back by inferior teams who pushed early, and the referees didn't stop it, so we had to follow suit or lose control of the ball and the match.

and from the referees we have this the other way round.
influenced no small part by this site, and bcm's views I have tried as a referee to stop the excessive hit, and that leads to conflicts with the coaches (and players when they are older) who can't understand why I want to ref it differently from other refs.

(yes, before everyone leaps in, I am the ref and I don't allow dispute on field, and I enforce my decisions etc - but in general consistency is important and you can't be a lone ref, reffing games differently from every other ref in the country)

 

[bcm666]

This is another about the trickle down.


myopia
4 minutes ago

I have to agree that this sort of pressure is being encouraged at a junior level .. I regularly referee at under 13s and whilst (I would like to think) I follow the letter of the law when it comes to pushing before the ball is in and a straight put in I have noticed even at this young age now that the numbers 8s have spotted the practice (probably on TV) of pulling their second rows back before the engagement ..and then on the word set they add an extra impetus of shove when the word 'set' occurs and we have the collision and a more intense level .. it cannot be healthy ..but is within the laws of the game.

You might ask is it in my control to influence and change the practice, however this is where I have concerns with 'Hampshire Hooker' changing the laws in his own games ..as the laws are not only there to protect the players but are there to protect the officials when it comes to the litigation .. perhaps the law makers are not so protected?


Re crossref's problems - I sympathise and all the more reason for the lower ranks of referees to finally stop defending their elite brethren and to speak up at every opportunity and demand change. It is in your and everyone's best interests; even elite referees though they seem to know it not.

 

[bcm666]

The only practical way to deal with this (until they all get in line and help you) is to have the discussion before the game when players and coaches in dressing room and to tell them whatever anyone else does/has done this is how yhuou are going to interpret and referee. Don't do it in a slam your fist way but remind them that you have given them the heads up; at least throughout the game and after they cannot deny they were told.

 

[Simon Thomas]

In a recent Colts match I had a prop complain to me regarding the force of "the engagement hit" and that he was getting a sore neck - the complainant was a big enough lad and had a reasonable technique, but was against an England U16 prop who was 'making his point' and did not respond to my request to reduce the force of impact. Next scrum I got them so close he had no room to get a hit on, then the next scrum he did the forehead thing, so after the next line-out and a quiet word with his Coach, he was in the back row at the next scrum

 

[TheBFG]

This is my approach at "youth" rugby, i get them so close there's no room for impact! That said on a Saturday i'm in charge of the "set", we do it my way :wink:

As for the "slingshot" that myopia discribes, this was outlawed some seasons ago, but my guess is with a lack of training (oh no, emails from on high) clubs refs might not be aware of it?

 

[crossref]

The only practical way to deal with this (until they all get in line and help you) is to have the discussion before the game when players and coaches in dressing room and to tell them whatever anyone else does/has done this is how yhuou are going to interpret and referee. Don't do it in a slam your fist way but remind them that you have given them the heads up; at least throughout the game and after they cannot deny they were told.

yes, but , yes but

you are effectively getting everyone together and saying

'I am going to deliberately referee this game differently from how every other other ref does'

I just don't think that is a sustainable position for a referee.
Consistency is very important, and as a ref you can't be in a minority of one: I am right while everyone else is wrong.

Obviously you could enforce whatever you want in one game - you are the ref - but I think that quite quickly word would get back to your society and you'd be asked to ref the game the same as everyone else, please.

 

[Robert Burns]

Brian,

I have been a supporter of the removal of the hit for a long time, and agree with your article. If you remember, I wrote my own article about it in June, and whilst I am aware you do not agree with all of my opinions, we seem to be aligned with the fact the hit is a problem. http://www.rugbyrefs.com/content.php?266-Crouch-Touch-Set!-Will-it-work

In regards to the angle you add about the legal position of a Referees' Society, I believe that a Referees' Society wouldn't be so much in danger, due to the fact that the instruction comes from their home union and the iRB (i.e. it's an institutional issue, not a specific negligence). I believe a Society that went against what their home union and the iRB instructed would be much more in danger of litigation.

I believe similarities can be taken from the Clapham Junction rail crash where the 'system' was found to be at blame more than the individual that carried out the work. Out of all the people interviewed, none would have carried out the work any differently to the person that caused it, so it cannot be just the fault of the individual. The same would be here, all the referees are taught and perform the scrum sequence in the same way, so it would not be the individual at fault. (Though I agree this is little comfort to someone that has lost a loved one, and more effort should be made to prevent, than correct the issue).

I am not a solicitor though, and I fully respect that you are, so perhaps my comparison of a systemic failure has some holes?

(No disrespect meant to any people or families involved the Clapham Junction Rail Crash, or those who have been hurt, or lost loved ones as a result of scrum in the game of rugby).

 

[bcm666]

Another -

Scott‏@SMcC443

@dave_harrison @brianmoore666 Agreed Dave. Great article Brian. Son is a 16 yr old tighthead and is involved in the train crashes of scrums.


I won't post any more, unless they are significant. Suffice to say that when I claim that I get many people saying a paricular thing, I am not making things up. Until recently I had not appreciated the extent of the trickle down effect on players and referees. What eltie players and referees do not understnd sufficeintly is the extent to which they are copied; players to do things; referees to ref like their 'betters.'

The refs who volunteer at festivals are only doing what they see, hear and think is the norm and if there is nobody of higher authority to tell them otherwise they do what they think is current thinking. The effects are there for everyone to see if they want to look properly.

My discussion around this reveal an alarming point regarding eltie officials - fear of 'getting it from all and sundry' if they do things to the letter of the law. This is exactly how football referees now act - they wanbt to use their powers but they darenot and they know they will not be supported by their own Body. Elite officials are being influenced by internaitonal and top level coaches and officials and are seeking a collaborative approach instead if setting out their stall and making others adapt.