wrong team throws in line out!

[menace]

My scenarios are analagous to "Sorry fellas, I know I signalled the PK the wrong way and I know I let the wrong team take the penalty and I know they scored from it. You just have to suck it up."

Once the ball is back in play stick by, and live with, your decisions.

- - - Updated - - -



It helped me.

Ok. If that's the way you want to play it. It is your call and you're the sole judge when you're out there.

I guess my problem must be that I choose to fix my known mistakes when (and if ) I can.

 

[Browner]

I bought both skippers a beer when I made a boo boo.

Hey, we all make mistakes ........... or so said the hedgehog, as he climbed off the shoe-brush !

However, beer buying is to be reciprocated. Whenever they make an error or question something without justification - I'd be pissed after every Match !

 

[Account Deleted]

In 1999 the Laws said[LAWS]He cannot alter a decision unless he observes that a touch judge's flag is raised or before he has received a report from either or both of his touch judges relating to Section 4 (a).[/LAWS]
The current Law is phrased differently. The fact that it lists a couple of occasions for changing his mind does not necessarily imply that there are no other such circumstances. The Laws simply do not attempt to spell out all possibilities.

It is our job to make sense of the Laws.

Agreed, BUT it should be very rare for it to happen. Any slight doubt in you mind can be amplified but questioning. The last this anyone wants is a dithering referee.

The current law is an amended form of the old one and is quite specific. Whilst the laws are a mess, we need to be careful with giving never being clear as to what they mean.

The laws contain various examples of the referee changing his mind decision TMO etc. The intervention of a player in that process is excluded and probably for very good reasons.

 

[Browner]

I think Law 6.A.6 [a] gives a wide authority to get the decision correct with help, especially my bold highlight [LAWS] The referee may consult with assistant referees in regard to matters relating to their duties, the Law relating to foul play or timekeeping and may request assistance related to other aspects of the referee’s duties including the adjudication of offside [/LAWS]

 

[OB..]

Once the ball is back in play stick by, and live with, your decisions.

Fortunately you are unlikely ever to have me as your assessor :hap:

 

[OB..]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YyXTwe6eSw (MIke Phillips v Ireland)
I presume we all agree that if the referee had realised the error he should have disallowed the try?

 

[Browner]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YyXTwe6eSw (MIke Phillips v Ireland)
I presume we all agree that if the referee had realised the error he should have disallowed the try?

Just goes to prove that even if you a] are international ref b] have experienced AR's you're not guaranteed to get it right [and so TMO reviews were born ] .

It might've helped if JK had asked the 2nd relevant question of his AR "touched by anyone else"... In the circumstances the AR gave him duff confirmation.

Given the limitations of the AR role , One wonders what the AR was concentrating on at the time..... "ball watching" wasn't it.

 

[Account Deleted]

I think Law 6.A.6 [a] gives a wide authority to get the decision correct with help, especially my bold highlight [LAWS] The referee may consult with assistant referees in regard to matters relating to their duties, the Law relating to foul play or timekeeping and may request assistance related to other aspects of the referee’s duties including the adjudication of offside [/LAWS]

Indeed it does. Nothing about players being "consulted". I wonder why?

 

[Account Deleted]

Fortunately you are unlikely ever to have me as your assessor :hap:

I have to 100% sure I had been wrong to listen to a player suggest that it was wrong. I'd more than happily put my opinion forward if you tried suggesting that "not taking a player's word" was a critical error.

 

[RobLev]

Agreed, BUT it should be very rare for it to happen. Any slight doubt in you mind can be amplified but questioning. The last this anyone wants is a dithering referee.

The current law is an amended form of the old one and is quite specific. Whilst the laws are a mess, we need to be careful with giving never being clear as to what they mean.

The laws contain various examples of the referee changing his mind decision TMO etc. The intervention of a player in that process is excluded and probably for very good reasons.

"You're absolutely right, captain. I did give the line-out to your side, and the opposition did throw it in. But even though I have discretion to change my mind, I'm not going to do so because you brought it to my attention" may be a hard sell...

 

[Account Deleted]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YyXTwe6eSw (MIke Phillips v Ireland)
I presume we all agree that if the referee had realised the error he should have disallowed the try?

Totally agree but he didn't change his view on the basis of the Irish players telling him. He of course could have watched the replays and seen his error. If I have no such independent help I'm not going to be swayed by players. I'd have to be pretty sure in my own mind that something was not right first. Sorry.

One thing I always do when a TJ is just signalling touch and not the side to throw is I ask him who's throw it is, unless it is clear and obvious to me. This tends to avoid this problem.

 

[OB..]

I have to 100% sure I had been wrong to listen to a player suggest that it was wrong. I'd more than happily put my opinion forward if you tried suggesting that "not taking a player's word" was a critical error.

"You're absolutely right, captain. I did give the line-out to your side, and the opposition did throw it in. But even though I have discretion to change my mind, I'm not going to do so because you brought it to my attention" may be a hard sell...

I have seen situations where the moment a player politely queried the decision, the referee knew he had been wrong.

For example the throw at a lineout was crooked and the referee blew his whistle. He offered the choice and the other scrum half said, "But it was their throw in Sir." The referee realised his error, apologised to him and gave his side the scrum.

I certainly do not advocate accepting the judgement of a player.

 

[Dickie E]

Fortunately you are unlikely ever to have me as your assessor :hap:

For both of us

 

[Dickie E]

I have seen situations where the moment a player politely queried the decision, the referee knew he had been wrong.

For example the throw at a lineout was crooked and the referee blew his whistle. He offered the choice and the other scrum half said, "But it was their throw in Sir." The referee realised his error, apologised to him and gave his side the scrum.

I am OK with that. But if he awarded the scrum to the wrong team and the scrum had been completed and THEN the SH said "But it was their throw in Sir." What would you do then? I contend it is too late to come back to start the whole thing again.

 

[crossref]

Agreed, BUT it should be very rare for it to happen. Any slight doubt in you mind can be amplified but questioning. The last this anyone wants is a dithering referee.

The current law is an amended form of the old one and is quite specific. Whilst the laws are a mess, we need to be careful with giving never being clear as to what they mean.

The laws contain various examples of the referee changing his mind decision TMO etc. The intervention of a player in that process is excluded and probably for very good reasons.

"You're absolutely right, captain. I did give the line-out to your side, and the opposition did throw it in. But even though I have discretion to change my mind, I'm not going to do so because you brought it to my attention" may be a hard sell...

I am not convinced. If no one objected at the time , not the opposing team, nor the to nor the Ref noticed anything amiss, are we really 100% certain that that it was the wrong team who took the throw?
Do both captains agree that at it was wrong?
Or if you disallow the try because red tel lot the last lineout went wrong , will blue now tell you, no no, it was touched by red , of course it was our throw! I mean if it wasn't our throw they would have objected wouldn't they?

 

[Dickie E]

Ok. If that's the way you want to play it. It is your call and you're the sole judge when you're out there.

I guess my problem must be that I choose to fix my known mistakes when (and if ) I can.

Let's say the wrong team took the throw, siren went and ball was kicked into touch. No side. As you're all walking back to the sheds someone says "wrong team took the throw". Bring 'em all back and do it again? Or is there something special about the try scenario?

 

[menace]

Let's say the wrong team took the throw, siren went and ball was kicked into touch. No side. As you're all walking back to the sheds someone says "wrong team took the throw". Bring 'em all back and do it again? Or is there something special about the try scenario?

Looking for angels on pin heads?

You may have missed my previous posts, when I mentioned that there obviously is a point that you can't go back and you need to use some common sense and dependant on knowing all the variables at the time. I was advocating that IMO the laws allow the referee to independently change their decision, and I was advocating that I would fix monumental f@ck ups of my own errors (if I can).

As far as I'm concerned there seems little purpose to answer your scenario. Not enough info.

 

[RobLev]

I am not convinced. If no one objected at the time , not the opposing team, nor the to nor the Ref noticed anything amiss, are we really 100% certain that that it was the wrong team who took the throw?
Do both captains agree that at it was wrong?
Or if you disallow the try because red tel lot the last lineout went wrong , will blue now tell you, no no, it was touched by red , of course it was our throw! I mean if it wasn't our throw they would have objected wouldn't they?

In the OP (as clarified), the referee was 100% certain that the wrong team took the throw. He knew to whom he awarded the throw, and he knew who took it - and it was the wrong team.

 

[crossref]

In the OP (as clarified), the referee was 100% certain that the wrong team took the throw. He knew to whom he awarded the throw, and he knew who took it - and it was the wrong team.

it's a very confusing situation
- the TJ didn't signal
- at the time of the throw, red threw in and no one on the pitch seemed to notice anything amiss.
- then there is a passage of play
- and then blue captain says 'hang on, wasn't it our throw?'

I submit that it's very hard to be 100% certain, now, whose throw it really should have been. Especially if the red captain is also at your shoulder saying (presumably) 'hang on, of course it our throw! I mean, if it was wrong you would have objected at the time wouldn't you?'

I don't think this is situation for going back and fixing a 'mistake'

 

[menace]

it's a very confusing situation
- the TJ didn't signal
- at the time of the throw, red threw in and no one on the pitch seemed to notice anything amiss.
- then there is a passage of play
- and then blue captain says 'hang on, wasn't it our throw?'

I submit that it's very hard to be 100% certain, now, whose throw it really should have been. Especially if the red captain is also at your shoulder saying (presumably) 'hang on, of course it our throw! I mean, if it was wrong you would have objected at the time wouldn't you?'

I don't think this is situation for going back and fixing a 'mistake'

Not really...

What if they're a well disciplined team, and 'play to the whistle' first and foremost? Perhaps they were expecting a whistle to stop but when it didn't come, rather than be ill-disciplined at the time with a whinge and a whine, they dutifully played on until they had an opportunity to say something politely? (Yeah I know...not likely :shrug

Does that mean you should screw them over because they didn't chuck a tantrum at the time?