This is how we do it

[DrSTU]

USA Rugby has released their new guidelines for refs.

http://rugbymag.com/docs/USARR-GMG-2012[3].pdf

Please feel free to read and ask questions about differences in game management.

 

[Ian_Cook]

1. I like this...

4. Referees should allow the contest and may instruct the players, i.e. “release the ball”, “roll away”, etc., as long as these players have not already slowed down ball availability. Referees should be aware that players in National Competitions know their rights and it is not necessary for the referee to communicate verbally at the tackle.

So I take it that means if they have already slowed the ball down... PING!!

Too often we see players acting illegally, waiting for the referee to tell them to stop. Too late by then, the damage has already been done.

2. Not so sure about this...

6. If players enter the tackle in conformance with the required criteria and make contact with the tackler or tackled player and subsequently go to ground during the process, BUT HAS MADE THE BALL AVAILABLE TO BE IMMEDIATELY PLAYED, it will be allowed. Arriving players of the team who have secured the ball may either play the ball or bind onto their players, even if their players are on the ground, to maintain possession.

I don't like this.

You will end up encouraging players to go off their feet at the tackle/ruck. IMO, this prevents any possibility of counter-rucking, or at the very least makes it a lot more difficult. Referring to your diagrams, Red has won the ball by having two players join and go to ground in front of the ball, and have it available to them (so all good according to your guidelines?), but the Red SH is taking a moment to size up his options. This is where the counter-ruck would come in as Blue see an opportunity to commit additional players and ruck their opponents off the their own ball. Only problem is, instead of making the Red players keep their feet, you have allowed them to go to ground. It is much more difficult to drive players on the ground backwards off the ball than it is to drive players on their feet backwards and off the ball.

 

[The Fat]

One of our members (name withheld) should move to the USA. There is one piece of info in there that he is going to love.

 

[Ian_Cook]

One of our members (name withheld) should move to the USA. There is one piece of info in there that he is going to love.

Fat, this thread is in the Referee Only forums, so if you wish, you can reveal the name of our esteemed Pirate! :biggrin:

 

[The Fat]

Fat, this thread is in the Referee Only forums, so if you wish, you can reveal the name of our esteemed Pirate! :biggrin:

Page 8, Item C, Point 1, first sentence.
Chopper would be all over that wording.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Page 8, Item C, Point 1, first sentence.
Chopper would be all over that wording.

...like a rash!!

C. Quick Throw-In
1. Referees are to be more aware of quick throw-ins, within law, and that the throw does not have to be straight, but may not be forward, and has to travel 5m. The quick throw-in can only be taken between where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line.
a. Ball not thrown 5m = opponents’ option scrum or lineout
b. Ball prevented from travelling 5m or played before going 5m. FK

Dr STU... please do not post a link to this document anywhere outside the Referee Only forums!

 

[crossref]

there's lots of interesting stuff there

“Touch” means a full extended arm, touching, with the hand (not fist), the
opposing prop on the shoulder and withdrawing their arms (holding onto the
opposition player prior to engagement is not allowed

I'd say props mostly keep their fist clenched for the touch.
Am I really supposed to care about that?
Obviously I stop them punching, if they start getting silly, but 99% of the time the touch is just a touch, I think they prefer fists as a touching with open hands is, well, a bit gay soft

 

[crossref]

this is also interesting

4. Lifting a player from the ground, turning the body parallel to the ground or
more, and throwing the player to the ground PK and RED CARD

the IRB memo says it's dangerous merely to DROP someone in that situation.
the USA guideines seem to suggest that's it's only a problem if the tackler THROWS him.

Warburton definitely didn't THROW, he DROPPED.
implication is that might not have got a RC if it had been an American ref using these guidelines (don't tell sad4sam)

You really have to wonder why the americans used a different word from the IRB. I mean if you were translating into another language it might be really hard to choose the exact word that means 'drop' in that language, rather than release or throw, or jettison, or cast down etc ... but in english, if the IRB say 'drop' let's stick with drop.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

this is also interesting

4. Lifting a player from the ground, turning the body parallel to the ground or
more, and throwing the player to the ground PK and RED CARD

the IRB memo says it's dangerous merely to DROP someone in that situation.
the USA guideines seem to suggest that's it's only a problem if the tackler THROWS him.

Warburton definitely didn't THROW, he DROPPED.
implication is that might not have got a RC if it had been an American ref using these guidelines (don't tell sad4sam)

This is strange as it always appeared to me that the iRB ruling seemed to be following the practice that the USA had been operating with for a while. I know there have been tackles in US rugby shown on here that have caused handbag sessions and RCs that a few years ago whoud have got rounds of applause over here.

 

[SimonSmith]

Questions will be going into the Refs' Office shortly.

*sigh*

Says the President of the Referees' Society of Virginia

 

[ddjamo]

USA Rugby has released their new guidelines for refs.

http://rugbymag.com/docs/USARR-GMG-2012[3].pdf

Please feel free to read and ask questions about differences in game management.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hiUuL5uTKc

 

[DrSTU]

1. I like this...

4. Referees should allow the contest and may instruct the players, i.e. “release the ball”, “roll away”, etc., as long as these players have not already slowed down ball availability. Referees should be aware that players in National Competitions know their rights and it is not necessary for the referee to communicate verbally at the tackle.

So I take it that means if they have already slowed the ball down... PING!!

Too often we see players acting illegally, waiting for the referee to tell them to stop. Too late by then, the damage has already been done.

2. Not so sure about this...

6. If players enter the tackle in conformance with the required criteria and make contact with the tackler or tackled player and subsequently go to ground during the process, BUT HAS MADE THE BALL AVAILABLE TO BE IMMEDIATELY PLAYED, it will be allowed. Arriving players of the team who have secured the ball may either play the ball or bind onto their players, even if their players are on the ground, to maintain possession.

I don't like this.

You will end up encouraging players to go off their feet at the tackle/ruck. IMO, this prevents any possibility of counter-rucking, or at the very least makes it a lot more difficult. Referring to your diagrams, Red has won the ball by having two players join and go to ground in front of the ball, and have it available to them (so all good according to your guidelines?), but the Red SH is taking a moment to size up his options. This is where the counter-ruck would come in as Blue see an opportunity to commit additional players and ruck their opponents off the their own ball. Only problem is, instead of making the Red players keep their feet, you have allowed them to go to ground. It is much more difficult to drive players on the ground backwards off the ball than it is to drive players on their feet backwards and off the ball.

1 works very well at a good level of game, set your first couple of tackles out with commands and then shut up to see if they are doing what they are supposed to do. Key communication then delineates into differentiating between phases of play. Ruck, maul...

2 isn't meant to be an invite to go off your feet, it's more if the action is positive and results in fast ball then the player shouldn't be penalised for a positive motion. I feel it works well and you still get plenty of counter rucks, in fact I'd say more because there are less players "over" the ball. Had plenty this weekend.

...like a rash!!

C. Quick Throw-In
1. Referees are to be more aware of quick throw-ins, within law, and that the throw does not have to be straight, but may not be forward, and has to travel 5m. The quick throw-in can only be taken between where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line.
a. Ball not thrown 5m = opponents’ option scrum or lineout
b. Ball prevented from travelling 5m or played before going 5m. FK

Dr STU... please do not post a link to this document anywhere outside the Referee Only forums!

It's in the referee only forum for a reason. Don't forget that the IRB law book still trumps all but that these are only guidelines to enhance the game.

this is also interesting

4. Lifting a player from the ground, turning the body parallel to the ground or
more, and throwing the player to the ground PK and RED CARD

the IRB memo says it's dangerous merely to DROP someone in that situation.
the USA guideines seem to suggest that's it's only a problem if the tackler THROWS him.

Warburton definitely didn't THROW, he DROPPED.
implication is that might not have got a RC if it had been an American ref using these guidelines (don't tell sad4sam)

You really have to wonder why the americans used a different word from the IRB. I mean if you were translating into another language it might be really hard to choose the exact word that means 'drop' in that language, rather than release or throw, or jettison, or cast down etc ... but in english, if the IRB say 'drop' let's stick with drop.

As before, the drop is still a RC but don't forget that we deal with people that have played American football as well and that style of lift and press i.e. is a technique used and this is merely to add clarity.

I did find it interesting that cheap shots are to be dealt with by a YC. I'm still trying to decide if that means that all punches are YC this year. Ala Simon, questions will be asked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hiUuL5uTKc

 

[crossref]

As before, the drop is still a RC but don't forget that we deal with people that have played American football as well and that style of lift and press i.e. is a technique used and this is merely to add clarity.

.

maybe (in this context) 'throw him to the ground' is simply the american word for 'drop him

Have you ever seen Life Of Brian?

definitely a wed card for that

 

[barker14610]

As before, the drop is still a RC but don't forget that we deal with people that have played American football as well and that style of lift and press i.e. is a technique used and this is merely to add clarity.

I think the intent here is more about making sure everyone issues a red card versus redefining a spear tackle.

Interestingly, these guideline are written by a South African.

 

[crossref]

I think the intent here is more about making sure everyone issues a red card versus redefining a spear tackle.

Interestingly, these guideline are written by a South African.

yes, but I not sure these are helpful, I can see people say 'but sir I didn't THROW him, I just dropped him'

 

[DrSTU]

These supplement the law book not replace them.

yes, but I not sure these are helpful, I can see people say 'but sir I didn't THROW him, I just dropped him'

 

[OB..]

These supplement the law book not replace them.

But the RC for the tip tackle is in an IRB memo ....

 

[crossref]

Good point OB, I wonder what has more authority in the US , a 2009 memo from paddy I Brien (not published on any IRB website) or 2012 guidance published to all refs by the us union
I am guessing the guidance .. If I was reffing in the us that's what I would choose

 

[B52 REF]

All pretty sound- like the manage first not fk advice for LO formation though it is common practice here to FK numbers.
don't like scrum c.2 -no basis in law to require both props to advance before they wheel, really don't like ruck - ball out if receiver "holding" the ball -implies handson is out -experience over here suggests better to use ball out when off the ground in receivers hands (lsrfur protocol) (after all you can't tackle him if he is not in possession i.e. carrying the ball)
"use it once" call at maul is just not English (but what would one expect).
bit risky to drop the "probable" from PT requirement.
Tackle A.1. -No leading shoulder/swinging arm - who's going to tell the Islanders in Vegas ??? (baggsie not me after the fuss after i RC'd the fijan coach last year

 

[ddjamo]

All pretty sound- like the manage first not fk advice for LO formation though it is common practice here to FK numbers.
don't like scrum c.2 -no basis in law to require both props to advance before they wheel, really don't like ruck - ball out if receiver "holding" the ball -implies handson is out -experience over here suggests better to use ball out when off the ground in receivers hands (lsrfur protocol) (after all you can't tackle him if he is not in possession i.e. carrying the ball)
"use it once" call at maul is just not English (but what would one expect).
bit risky to drop the "probable" from PT requirement.
Tackle A.1. -No leading shoulder/swinging arm - who's going to tell the Islanders in Vegas ??? (baggsie not me after the fuss after i RC'd the fijan coach last year

I'm not defending the document as I didn't have a say in what was written - but you're paraphrasing some just to make it look bad. like your, "ball out if receiver "holding" the ball -implies handson is out -experience over here suggests better to use ball out when off the ground in receivers hands (lsrfur protocol) (after all you can't tackle him if he is not in possession i.e. carrying the ball)" when it really says, "If a player in the scrum half position is not retrieving (digging for) the ball, but
holding the ball, with one or two hands, the BALL IS OUT."

what is wrong with that? the 9 pick the ball up holds it and does nothing with it...it's out!

also - the comment on the maul - there is a comma missing or the write up would make sense. sooo...why you are bashing it - no idea - but your write up is not factual (but what would one expect).