World rugby Laws, no thanks says Sarries

[Ian_Cook]

Wrays suggestion is a direct Conflict of interest for me – rugby clubs / business model owners must be clearly separate from the game’s governance.

Yep, its tantamount to a business organisation wanting to be the sole employers of the tax inspectors and fair trading regulators that are checking on them.

 

[OB..]

OB there is one above: the competition organisers (RFU in this case) have ruled that YC and RC players can be replaced in County U16 games. they have instructed referee societies to referee accordingly.

That is coming from the RFU - the Union in overall charge, not from the organisers of the individual competitions eg mini fesitivals.

 

[crossref]

Yep, its tantamount to a business organisation wanting to be the sole employers of the tax inspectors and fair trading regulators that are checking on them.

So by that logic you would take control of the RWC away from the IRB? So as to separate the powers? Because for the RWC you do indeed have one body in charge of everything: the competition, the Laws, the refereees, the eligibility rules, the MONEY, indeed the whole caboodle.

I am serious : to see the danger in this look at FIFA and the way they organise their world cups. And some RWC decisions in the past have been pretty odd.

There is some precedent for separating the governing body from the leading competition for instance
- in cycling the UCI don't control the Tour de France and the tension between the ASO (who do) and the UCI is very real : epsecially, of course, over the rules.

- in tennis the international tennis federation does not organise (I beleive?) any of the four majors.

 

[Crucial]

With regard to SANZAR and Super Rugby, what Ian hasn't mentioned (and is the probable cause to the thought of difference between the Hemispheres) is that the previous seasons games will be analysed to see what teams are doing that reduces the desire of the comp to have an attractive 'product'.
It's not a case of Law changes or tweaks, but of working with the referees to apply the Laws with particular focus on certain areas that are being exploited. This may be something like being less lenient on players going off their feet past the ball, being harsher on players not rolling away or moving north/south rather than east/west, not being too exact with the mark on taking tap penalties (or making the mark quicker). That kind of thing.
It does cause the odd issue with players having to adjust during the internationals for games outside of the SANZAR directions but is there to encourage a 'style' of game.
I don't see why this can't be the blueprint in other competitions. The SH teams have operated like this for years. The fabric of the game and the Laws themselves don't change. The basic training of the referees doesn't change either, they just get a few areas of focus from their 'employers' during that comp.

 

[crossref]

With regard to SANZAR and Super Rugby, what Ian hasn't mentioned (and is the probable cause to the thought of difference between the Hemispheres) is that the previous seasons games will be analysed to see what teams are doing that reduces the desire of the comp to have an attractive 'product'.
It's not a case of Law changes or tweaks, but of working with the referees to apply the Laws with particular focus on certain areas that are being exploited. This may be something like being less lenient on players going off their feet past the ball, being harsher on players not rolling away or moving north/south rather than east/west, not being too exact with the mark on taking tap penalties (or making the mark quicker). That kind of thing.
It does cause the odd issue with players having to adjust during the internationals for games outside of the SANZAR directions but is there to encourage a 'style' of game.
I don't see why this can't be the blueprint in other competitions. The SH teams have operated like this for years. The fabric of the game and the Laws themselves don't change. The basic training of the referees doesn't change either, they just get a few areas of focus from their 'employers' during that comp.

Indeed.
All competition organisers want to influence the way their comps are refereed, and I would say that both PRL and SANZAR have had much success, evidenced by how different they are from eachother, how different they are from international rubgy above them, and how different they are from the domestic competitions beneath them....

 

[Adam]

How does football do it with PGMOL?

 

[Ian_Cook]

With regard to SANZAR and Super Rugby, what Ian hasn't mentioned (and is the probable cause to the thought of difference between the Hemispheres) is that the previous seasons games will be analysed to see what teams are doing that reduces the desire of the comp to have an attractive 'product'.
It's not a case of Law changes or tweaks, but of working with the referees to apply the Laws with particular focus on certain areas that are being exploited. This may be something like being less lenient on players going off their feet past the ball, being harsher on players not rolling away or moving north/south rather than east/west, not being too exact with the mark on taking tap penalties (or making the mark quicker). That kind of thing.
It does cause the odd issue with players having to adjust during the internationals for games outside of the SANZAR directions but is there to encourage a 'style' of game.
I don't see why this can't be the blueprint in other competitions. The SH teams have operated like this for years. The fabric of the game and the Laws themselves don't change. The basic training of the referees doesn't change either, they just get a few areas of focus from their 'employers' during that comp.

This is not the same as what Wray wants though. He wants the referees to be on PRL's payroll, to take instructions on how the game is to be played only from them and to be accountable to them.

SANZAR Referees are on the payrolls of the individual National Unions in SANZAR, and are responsible and accountable to both their own unions as well as World Rugby.

Having referees on PRL's payroll is too much like having Policemen on the Mafia's payroll for my liking.

 

[Crucial]

This is not the same as what Wray wants though. He wants the referees to be on PRL's payroll, to take instructions on how the game is to be played only from them and to be accountable to them.

SANZAR Referees are on the payrolls of the individual National Unions in SANZAR, and are responsible and accountable to both their own unions as well as World Rugby.

Having referees on PRL's payroll is too much like having Policemen on the Mafia's payroll for my liking.

I don't disagree with you, just that someone earlier in the thread suggested that SANZAR directed the Laws they want the game played under in their comp and your post was then the only one to touch on the situation. I was just adding to your post to explain how it works.

 

[FightOrFlight]

This idea harks back to the powerplay the PRL made over the HEC. They attempted to start their own competition which it would control and which other unions had to come to cap in hand to. This new competition would have been pretty much fixed so that a PRL club won it. If you cant beat them take your ball home and change the laws so that they suit you best basically. The French rode on their train while it was worth it for them and when it was not any longer they got off.

The big issue with this new tournament was where they would source referees? It would not have been IRB sanctioned and so any IRB elite referee who refereed in it would no doubt be dropped from the panel.
For me Wray's rubbish here is an attempt to try and create a situation where the money men own the referee contracts and you can tempt referees away from the glamour of the test stage for what may be a very attractive yearly wage under the control of the likes of the PRL.

 

[Ian_Cook]

How does football do it with PGMOL?

AIUI, PGMOL is an independent organisation over which the Priemer League and clubs have no direct influence, as evidenced by that Mark Clattenburg v Southampton business.

 

[Pegleg]

In my limited experience of County festivals, the briefing is to ensure that everybody is playing the same interpretation of the NRoP and explain some admin matters. I have not come across invented variations.

Here the Union (WRU) is the organiser of the tournaments and the "employer" of the referees. even the European cup has union involvement / sanction. The IRB "instructs" referees to "interpret" the laws in a certain way to "enhance the product".

So whilst I agree that there is a problem in Wray's comments. We have this issue already, to a degree. Clearly we cannot have every small competition being run to suit a small group of clubs with no regard for the rest of the rugby world.

 

[crossref]

well, for anyone who says that it would be intolerable for any organiser of a high-profile, money making, professional competition to also have complete control over the Laws and to employ the Referees, I say: Rugby World Cup.

 

[RobLev]

This idea harks back to the powerplay the PRL made over the HEC. They attempted to start their own competition which it would control and which other unions had to come to cap in hand to. This new competition would have been pretty much fixed so that a PRL club won it. If you cant beat them take your ball home and change the laws so that they suit you best basically. The French rode on their train while it was worth it for them and when it was not any longer they got off.

The big issue with this new tournament was where they would source referees? It would not have been IRB sanctioned and so any IRB elite referee who refereed in it would no doubt be dropped from the panel.
For me Wray's rubbish here is an attempt to try and create a situation where the money men own the referee contracts and you can tempt referees away from the glamour of the test stage for what may be a very attractive yearly wage under the control of the likes of the PRL.

Would it be appropriate for referees to be beholden to the league they referee in? No

Is it necessary continually to hark back to the clusterf**k that was the dispute over HC last year, venting spleen as necessary at the English? No.

 

[Stanc]

I think it is a great idea fot the clubs to have their own refs on the books, for some teams this could be they only way to win a games because they have a biassed ref,

is this guy for real?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Is it necessary continually to hark back to the clusterf**k that was the dispute over HC last year, venting spleen as necessary at the English? No.

Perhaps, but these kinds of things are not discussed or thought of in isolation.

I have no doubt that Wray will have had a little of that in mind.. "if we own the competition, the players AND and the referees we are beholden to no-one , and can tell the RFU & WR to fack off!"