Wales vs Eng - Knock on and Time back on after asking captain to speak to players

[Camquin]

Why should he give the offending time to get ready.
If the ref had not needed to warn the offending captain that the next offence would be a card, the non-offending team can go quickly.
Why does worse behavoiur gain you time to set.
Even the usual "give him tiem to leave the ptich" after a card gives the non-offending side time they do not deserve.

 

[crossref]

Why should he give the offending time to get ready.
If the ref had not needed to warn the offending captain that the next offence would be a card, the non-offending team can go quickly.
Why does worse behavoiur gain you time to set.
Even the usual "give him tiem to leave the ptich" after a card gives the non-offending side time they do not deserve.

which leads to the question of whether this whole 'captain come here, now have a word with your team' thing is even a good idea. I do think it can be over-used. It slows down the non-offending team, and makes the ref unavoidably in charge of supervising the timing of the restart.

And I am not convinced that captains really often use it to pass on anything but the vaguest of warnings.

It's good tool when you deliberately want to slow down both sides, and let everyone calm down (say after a scuffle or after some foul play), but not so much when one team is attacking hard and has the other on the ropes.

 

[crossref]

Is the consensus here that PG should have blown time-on but then prohibited Wales from taking the penalty until he blew his whistle a second time (or made a mark, or some other thing) and should have delayed that until England were ready? Or should he have gone over to England (or blown his whistle with a 'look at me' tone and gestured/shouted for everyone to get ready/non-players to leave) before then putting time back on?

I'm not sure that it's appropriate to have time on and a team entitled to take a penalty kick, but not to let them decide when to take the kick - and presumably Wales's intent was to take the kick as soon as they were permitted, given the question they asked.

for me - it never occurred to PG that Wales were going to do that, he thought they were kicking for touch.

if it had occurred to him he would not have started the game when England were in the huddle

 

[KoolFork]

Why do you think that? Wales rarely spurn opportunities to score points early in the game against major opposition. I suspect Neil Jenkins might have had something to do with this. The execution was brilliant. We will never know what went through PG's mind

 

[Jz558]

Why should he give the offending time to get ready?

Because by asking the Captain of the offending team to have a word with his players the referee has actively made the decision not to allow the penalty to be taken quickly anyway. In general, offending teams should not be allowed to benefit by being given time to organise themselves but disadvantaging that side further by restarting the game whilst they are in a worse disposition than when the offence occurred, at your request, is also not equitable.

 

[crossref]

Why do you think that?

because I don't think he meant to gift Wales a try !

it would be very poor game management to deliberately punish a team by starting the game when they are in a huddle. I am certain that's not what PG was doing, for a moment. (Indeed, I don't think any ref would really do that)

(and absolutely full marks to Wales who scored from two PK when England were asleep.)

 

[Rich_NL]

which leads to the question of whether this whole 'captain come here, now have a word with your team' thing is even a good idea. I do think it can be over-used. It slows down the non-offending team, and makes the ref unavoidably in charge of supervising the timing of the restart.

And I am not convinced that captains really often use it to pass on anything but the vaguest of warnings.

It's good tool when you deliberately want to slow down both sides, and let everyone calm down (say after a scuffle or after some foul play), but not so much when one team is attacking hard and has the other on the ropes.

I agree it can be overused. For repeated offences something like "Captain, too many penalties in your 22, next one's off/I'm going to have to escalate sanctions" doesn't need to be shared with the whole team. Similarly, to cool the game down a chat with the captains is enough to keep the teams apart and let them pause a moment.

The main reason for a captain to talk to the team is that there's a specific pattern of behaviour throughout the team that you want to control - persistently off feet at the breakdown, maybe, or appealing to the ref, or lots of borderline cynical niggle - that you want everyone to know you've seen and will be punishing. Given it advantages the offending team, it has to be serious and likely to escalate, and preferably not done where the other team will want the quick tap.

 

[KoolFork]

If you think about it a bit more, PG should have been wondering why DB was trying to hurry him up. Time was off and there's no need for haste for either a kick to touch or at goal. No election had been made to kick at goal (what is immediate in these circumstances where time is off?), so PG should have been alert to this.

Or are we suggesting that a quick penatly isn't allowed after a time off? This seems very unfair to the non-offending team.

I never asked a captain to talk to his team. I did. So what do I know?

 

[Jz558]

All penalties need to be taken without delay. I think a quick penalty is only referred to in the laws with reference to it being taken before the opposition have had time to retire the full distance (in which they need to keep retreating). A quick penalty following a time off is surely counter intuitive.

 

[didds]

and so we continue - merely proving was a total and abject mess it all was from just about everyone involved, bar two (and arguably 13 disinterested red shirts)

didds

 

[crossref]

I agree it can be overused. For repeated offences something like "Captain, too many penalties in your 22, next one's off/I'm going to have to escalate sanctions" doesn't need to be shared with the whole team. Similarly, to cool the game down a chat with the captains is enough to keep the teams apart and let them pause a moment.

The main reason for a captain to talk to the team is that there's a specific pattern of behaviour throughout the team that you want to control - persistently off feet at the breakdown, maybe, or appealing to the ref, or lots of borderline cynical niggle - that you want everyone to know you've seen and will be punishing. Given it advantages the offending team, it has to be serious and likely to escalate, and preferably not done where the other team will want the quick tap.

yes, i am going to return with a resolution to think more about what do I want to achieve here.
If the objective is merely to warn the captain - better done at a moment of down time, rather than holding everyone up
Of course the objective sometimes is also be to be SEEN to deliver a warning. Eg after high tackle or something, if red captain gets a very vissible warning it can help to calm down blue, as they can see you dealing with it.

I'm going to cut out ever telling the captain to speak to his team, I suspect the cons outweigh the pros - see if I can do without it. captains can find plenty of time to communicate to their team when they want to - without my help

 

[didds]

Purely out of interest how would you handle a captain subseuqntly asking you for time to chat to his team?

Im not calling you out in anyway - in fact I think your suggestion is sensible. I just see a backup plan is also needed.

FTR I thinik Id suggest a "next dead ball, and then for 30 seconds". Though I can see you being iopebn to various compaints iof between that PK and the next dead ball you then carded a player who said "but we didnt get a warning" (Yes I know players need to be a bit more savvy! But then again your elite nrethren have painted you community guys in a corner somewhat ...)

didds

 

[crossref]

Purely out of interest how would you handle a captain subseuqntly asking you for time to chat to his team?

Im not calling you out in anyway - in fact I think your suggestion is sensible. I just see a backup plan is also needed.

didds

I think it depends on the circumstances - in a situation where red are attacking and chomping at bit I really try hard never to slow them up by talking to blue in the first place, so hopefully that would never occur .

if there is nothing on for red (eg it's going to be a lineout or scrum) and blue capt said 'can I have a word with my team' I'd just say yes. Why not.


Generally, when one team is attacking hard I am big fan of enabling them to keep the pressure up, by taking PKs quickly. It's not the time for a chat. A lot can be communicated in very few words if necessary.

'side entry, adv blue ---- RED! too many PKs' canbe all is needed

 

[Pedro]

and so we continue - merely proving was a total and abject mess it all was from just about everyone involved, bar two (and arguably 13 disinterested red shirts)

didds

Actually I think most of the Wales squad knew what was happening. The wide angle shot- Wales have two or three players on either side of the pitch awaiting the quick cross kick- with Biggar in the middle waiting to see what’s on.

And again, I still- having watched the squidge rugby video, think that this was a perfectly reasonable refereeing decision.
The England players are ready on one side of the pitch- had Watson, Farrell et al not been half asleep- this wouldn’t be being discussed.

 

[crossref]

Actually I think most of the Wales squad knew what was happening. The wide angle shot- Wales have two or three players on either side of the pitch awaiting the quick cross kick- with Biggar in the middle waiting to see what’s on.

i think you might be right - which is quite a thought.

I suspect they had identified in advance that England can be dopey at PKs

 

[ChuckieB]

Still down to game management in my eyes. Not sure a cozy little fireside chat about the clock going back on is particularly equitable. If I was PG I might think I had also been made a fool of. And I'd be talking it as a learning point! I am in command of the clock and the clock is on when I blow the whistle with fair and equal warning to both.

Bigger knew what he was doing all along

 

[SimonSmith]

Purely out of interest how would you handle a captain subseuqntly asking you for time to chat to his team?

Im not calling you out in anyway - in fact I think your suggestion is sensible. I just see a backup plan is also needed.

FTR I thinik Id suggest a "next dead ball, and then for 30 seconds". Though I can see you being iopebn to various compaints iof between that PK and the next dead ball you then carded a player who said "but we didnt get a warning" (Yes I know players need to be a bit more savvy! But then again your elite nrethren have painted you community guys in a corner somewhat ...)

didds

Theres almost a circular argument here.
If I don’t think the pattern has warranted speaking to the captain, I’m not stopping the game so he can regroup.
If on the other hand I’ve dragged him over to have a word, time is probably off, or the ball is very dead, so I lose nothing by letting him have a chat...

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Still down to game management in my eyes. Not sure a cozy little fireside chat about the clock going back on is particularly equitable. If I was PG I might think I had also been made a fool of. And I'd be talking it as a learning point! I am in command of the clock and the clock is on when I blow the whistle with fair and equal warning to both.

Bigger knew what he was doing all along

Nothing t odo wit hBigger. He played it completely within the Laws. The error (in terms of game management) was PG's and PG's alone!

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Purely out of interest how would you handle a captain subseuqntly asking you for time to chat to his team?

Im not calling you out in anyway - in fact I think your suggestion is sensible. I just see a backup plan is also needed.

FTR I thinik Id suggest a "next dead ball, and then for 30 seconds". Though I can see you being iopebn to various compaints iof between that PK and the next dead ball you then carded a player who said "but we didnt get a warning" (Yes I know players need to be a bit more savvy! But then again your elite nrethren have painted you community guys in a corner somewhat ...)

didds

The problem was not the Time off and chat. The problem is with how PG managed it. If the captain asks you if he can chat to his team, you make a call dependent on the situation bearing in mind the maxim "Don't prevent then from going quick please captain.". lets bury the "No card without a warning nonsense".

PG could have avoided this by telling OF: "Time is going on in X seconds get your team ready captain!" Once that is done OF has no room for complaint.

Weve all done it (or very similar) its not a hanging offence and PG will come away from this a better ref.

 

[ChuckieB]

Nothing t odo wit hBigger. He played it completely within the Laws. The error (in terms of game management) was PG's and PG's alone!

I didn't say it had anything to do with Biggar. I applaud him. I just said he knew what he was doing.