Scrum advantage before 80:00

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,815
Post Likes
2,275
Camquins point is a good one
As a solo ref, you won't normally check your watch when you play advantage (as this would mean taking your eyes off the live action)

So you won't normally know whether your arm went out at 79.58 or 80.02 . But you will know that you blew your whistle at 80.10.

So again, I tend to the view that if you blow your whistle to award a scrum at 80.10. .m that's the end of the game
 

Treadmore

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
405
Post Likes
36
Dare I say the law is clear? ?

In this case we've got the ref applying 7.2.b

The knock-on has been spotted and awarded within game time. With no advantage coming the ref _applies_ the sanction (7.2.b) - a scrum - which can be played because 5.7.a

Will be interesting to see what the clarification says.

As well as the mistake with the lineout, the Leicester scrum-half was offside at the resulting scrum, and interfering with his oppo.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
13,457
Post Likes
1,674
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
a corollary, of sorts.

Ball rolls into touch at time 79:55 and AR sticks his flag up.

Retrieving player with ball in hand fluffs around, unsuccessfully looking for opportunity for a quick throw.

At time 80:10, there are 2 players from each team on line of touch so ref blows whistle for a lineout. Should lineout go ahead or game over?
 

Balones

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,201
Post Likes
327
As well as the mistake with the lineout, the Leicester scrum-half was offside at the resulting scrum, and interfering with his oppo.
Not sure how you can deem him to be offside and interfering with his oppo. He does comply with 19.29 if that is the law you are referring to. Would you allow the actions of the Bristol S/H if you were refereeing? He shoved the Leics S/H very soon after the ball was thrown in. I can’t see any obstruction at that stage by the Leics S/H that deserved the ‘assault’.
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,314
Solutions
1
Post Likes
306
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
a corollary, of sorts.

Ball rolls into touch at time 79:55 and AR sticks his flag up.

Retrieving player with ball in hand fluffs around, unsuccessfully looking for opportunity for a quick throw.

At time 80:10, there are 2 players from each team on line of touch so ref blows whistle for a lineout. Should lineout go ahead or game over?
Laws 6.8e and 6.9a: the whistle is blown as soon as the ball is in touch.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
13,457
Post Likes
1,674
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Laws 6.8e and 6.9a: the whistle is blown as soon as the ball is in touch.
ah yes but the lineout isn't awarded until after the quick throw shenanigans are completed
 

Balones

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,201
Post Likes
327
Outside of nuances of law, in practice the whistles is irrelevant at a quick lineout. Sometimes a whistle is blown and sometimes it isn’t; it depends on how quickly it is taken. If it is taken quickly without a whistle then usually the referee calls something along the lines of ‘play on’. This means that in the mind of the referee a lineout has been awarded and been taken. In turn it means that the lineout was awarded as soon as the ball was in touch, otherwise why allow it? Unless something is written in law about a quick lineout being allowed only after a whistle then I think the whistle in such circumstances is irrelevant and so it becomes a referee decision as to how to manage the situation and therefore a refereeing decision as to when to end the game. If we don’t accept this then we need to have the laws tightened up to include all scenarios surrounding this matter; something I think we all know will not happen. (There may be guidance?)
Going back to the original post, unless we get guidance to the contrary I think we have a precedence where an advantage applied before time can be taken back to the original offence if that advantage is not completed. We will continue to go round in circles if we don’t accept this. Unfortunately the incident in question clouds the picture because the initial decision as shown by the in line video and stills was incorrect anyway.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
13,457
Post Likes
1,674
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
it might be me being dim, but what do you mean by this?

I think it means that he considers the whole topic to be so trivial that it is not worthy of discussion. Could be wrong though
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,815
Post Likes
2,275
Outside of nuances of law, in practice the whistles is irrelevant at a quick lineout. Sometimes a whistle is blown and sometimes it isn’t; it depends on how quickly it is taken. If it is taken quickly without a whistle then usually the referee calls something along the lines of ‘play on’. This means that in the mind of the referee a lineout has been awarded and been taken. In turn it means that the lineout was awarded as soon as the ball was in touch, otherwise why allow it? Unless something is written in law about a quick lineout being allowed only after a whistle then I think the whistle in such circumstances is irrelevant and so it becomes a referee decision as to how to manage the situation and therefore a refereeing decision as to when to end the game. If we don’t accept this then we need to have the laws tightened up to include all scenarios surrounding this matter; something I think we all know will not happen. (There may be guidance?)
Going back to the original post, unless we get guidance to the contrary I think we have a precedence where an advantage applied before time can be taken back to the original offence if that advantage is not completed. We will continue to go round in circles if we don’t accept this. Unfortunately the incident in question clouds the picture because the initial decision as shown by the in line video and stills was incorrect anyway.
The whistle (if there is one) signifies the ball is in touch, which is not the same thing as awarding a lineout ..
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,815
Post Likes
2,275
And, there is also the same thing as before ... You won't know the time that the ball goes into touch (if a quick throw is possible) as you won't want to take your eye off the action to check your watch. Watch checking is done when the ball is dead.
 

Balones

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,201
Post Likes
327
If you award/allow a quick throw in without a whistle then you are also signifying that the ball is in touch, otherwise why allow a quick throw in? A quick throw in can only happen after the ball has gone into touch.
 
Last edited:

Balones

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,201
Post Likes
327
And, there is also the same thing as before ... You won't know the time that the ball goes into touch (if a quick throw is possible) as you won't want to take your eye off the action to check your watch. Watch checking is done when the ball is dead.
I can concur to some extent with the first part of the response but disagree that referees don’t check their watch while play is ‘live’. A quick glance is all that is required and there is also the audible check that many referees set up on their watch anyway, so you do know time is not up because you can’t hear the watch. Might be worth a different thread to find out how many referees don’t have an audible alarm?
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,958
Post Likes
1,822
We know that the clock doesn't stop while advantage is played

So for me, logically, if advantage persists beyond 80 mins , then time is up

But IMO the Law Book doesnt really address this scenario clearly so WR, when asked, could jump either way. I will be interested to see what they say.

(OB speed of whistle argument is an aristotlean red herring.. . , This question is not about the referees reaction time)

The whistle (if there is one) signifies the ball is in touch, which is not the same thing as awarding a lineout ..
I assume you are arguing that the fact of the ball being in touch constitutes the award of a lineout? The referee usually only blows his whistle if there is some doubt (as here).

In the case of a knock-on, I am arguing that the time when the referee blows his whistle to stop play and allow a scrum to take place should be irrelevant, otherwise we run into problems. The pragmatic approach is to take the time of the offence as the significant event, not the time when the referee whistles.

For most of us there is no official timekeeper anyway (other than the referee) Complicating the issue with an inappropriate legalistic approach is unhelpful.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,815
Post Likes
2,275
When the ball goes into touch , and whistle is blown, there is not necessarily a lineout awarded.
... Ref might be playing advantage already, and goes back for scrum or pk
... QTI might be on, and taken

Being practical a referee can't check her watch when signalling advantage, and can't check her watch while a QTI is a possibility. She can only check her watch when the ball is dead and a scrum or line out awarded. If the clock is then past zero, end of game. If not we have the scrum or lineout

Nothing legalistic here (your routine accusation nowadays OB !) Not even any Law quotes Just pragmatic
 

Treadmore

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
405
Post Likes
36
Not sure how you can deem him to be offside and interfering with his oppo. He does comply with 19.29 if that is the law you are referring to. Would you allow the actions of the Bristol S/H if you were refereeing? He shoved the Leics S/H very soon after the ball was thrown in. I can’t see any obstruction at that stage by the Leics S/H that deserved the ‘assault’.
Screenshot_20211230-135552.jpgScreenshot_20211230-135335.jpg
I'd say he's offside in those 2 shots

I don't agree with the Bristol s/h shoving his oppo either. I won't add any further screenshots as it's not clear where the ball is at the time of that shove, but after it the Leicester s/h is onside ?
 

Balones

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,201
Post Likes
327
View attachment 4320View attachment 4321
I'd say he's offside in those 2 shots

I don't agree with the Bristol s/h shoving his oppo either. I won't add any further screenshots as it's not clear where the ball is at the time of that shove, but after it the Leicester s/h is onside ?
So you admit there was a shove. (Offence.) The Bristol offence happened before the stills that you show. If you look closely at the video you will see that the Leics S/H did react to the shove and simultaneously was pulled offside by the Bristol S/H - which is what your stills actually show. He is clearly being held by the Bristol S/H in your stills. You have decided to look at the second offence, if indeed there was an actual offence by the Leics S/H, instead of the first. If you take a still from just before the shove and when the ball has not made it to the second row in the scrum you will see that the Leics S/H was onside.
Most S/Hs at a scrum could be deemed to be offside if there is a fast hook because it can sometimes be impossible for the S/H to move fast enough before the ball reaches the No8. We have to allow some leeway for the S/H to move. (That doesn’t mean allow an obvious instruction.) Here we don’t have a fast hook so the S/H was allowed to follow it back at the same pace. The video shows him standing up and moving back without any obvious attempt to obstruct and his actions are reasonable. The shove was totally unecessary.
 
Last edited:

Treadmore

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
405
Post Likes
36
So you admit there was a shove. (Offence.) The Bristol offence happened before the stills that you show. If you look closely at the video you will see that the Leics S/H did react to the shove and simultaneously was pulled offside by the Bristol S/H - which is what your stills actually show. He is clearly being held by the Bristol S/H in your stills. You have decided to look at the second offence, if indeed there was an actual offence by the Leics S/H, instead of the first. If you take a still from just before the shove and when the ball has not made it to the second row in the scrum you will see that the Leics S/H was onside.
Most S/Hs at a scrum could be deemed to be offside if there is a fast hook because it can sometimes be impossible for the S/H to move fast enough before the ball reaches the No8. We have to allow some leeway for the S/H to move. (That doesn’t mean allow an obvious instruction.) Here we don’t have a fast hook so the S/H was allowed to follow it back at the same pace. The video shows him standing up and moving back without any obvious attempt to obstruct and his actions are reasonable. The shove was totally unecessary.
"So you admit"??
I only made an observation, was not looking to offer a detailed blow by blow, nor derail the thread.
Out.
 

Balones

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
1,201
Post Likes
327
"So you admit"??
I only made an observation, was not looking to offer a detailed blow by blow, nor derail the thread.
Out.
My apologies - no offence intended. Perhaps ‘so you recognise’ may have been better. I just don’t think that any blame can be directed towards the Leics S/H which seems to have been the premise of your post.

Overall the whole incident from the moment the penalty was kicked was handled far from ideally.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,815
Post Likes
2,275
.
Overall the whole incident from the moment the penalty was kicked was handled far from ideally.
Not the first time a ref leaves the field knowing that the last five minutes didnt go so well !

Most tricky time for a ref
 
Top