Woeful reffing again

[Noggs]

I agree with you Noggs, but I don't recall many refs in other games spotting this particular infringement.

And I'm also confused about how the ball sometimes gets to the back of the ruck if no one on the ground has touched it. The refs must think that the tackled player has extraordinarily long arms, or they've decided to ignore this law for expediency. But this only makes it more frustrating when they ping another player for handling in the ruck, as it then appears to be inconsistency again.

It has been penalised quite a bit this season but I don't recall it being pinged much last season which is no doubt why the refs have been asked to tighten up on the application of this law.

With respect to the ruck it seems to me that once posession has been secured in contact, an extra hand positioning the ball where it may be more easily picked up by the acting scrum half tends to be ignored. However, where both teams are able to compete for the ball the same hand should and will get pinged. Clearly, there is a degree of both interpritation and observation which come into play in such situations, hence, we are almost bound to have a degree of 'inconsistency'. I also get fustrated but our sport has to be one of if not the most difficult sports in which to officiate

[gimme]

Such piffle....bah!
both sides played to the same ref, both sides had the same crack of the whip, both sides got on with it, pillock or not in your opinions, he did the game and there was a result, in our favour as it happens, and as it happens that fine first try was a forward pass, in my opinion, of course, so, if the officials had been that good we would have been a try less, and of course no victory.
Happy New Blooming Year

[Bill W (2)]

, and as it happens that fine first try was a forward pass, in my opinion, of course,

Ridicuous as it may sound the forward pass is one of the decisions that is difficult to make unless you are running at the same speed and parallel to the guy who throws it (as the touch judge (AR) should be). The TV camera will often make passes that are not forward look forward because it is relatively stationary (compared to the speed of the players).

In comparison early breaking from the scrum and offside at the ruck/maul are easy as is diving over the top. The position of the rearmost foot is also a relatively static thing and therefore easy to judge.

Similarly, the laws do still state that no side shall push in a scrum until the ball is put in. Thus screaming at the scrum half to put the ball in as (the opposition) side advance, demonstrates an ignorance of the law. True, it is also an offence to dummy or delay the put in.

[mike]

The Ref is the same for both sides and realistically refereeing interpretations will continue to differ on a weekly basis .One of the most tedious traits of Tigers Supporters is to moan about every decision that goes against us and it does not make one jot of difference .Given that much of Rugby played is so dull , with that string of players lined up across the Pitch it is perhaps a benefit that Referees liven things up with their own individual tricks .

[gimme]

Bill, come on now, difficult at times to spot a forward pass for sure, but that`s what you`re looking for as a ref, see the ground below the feet before and after, if in doubt leave it out

[Bill W (2)]

Bill, come on now, difficult at times to spot a forward pass for sure, but that`s what you`re looking for as a ref, see the ground below the feet before and after, if in doubt leave it out

Indeed, a well positioned ref (and or AR) do not normally have difficulty because they have been so taught. My point was that that which looks forward from a TV replay often isn't. Manu was travelling at what, 10mph, when he threw the pass, so if the ball was in the air for 1/5th of a second and he threw it totally flat it would end up 3 feet ahead of where he chucked it from!

[gimme]

quite right Bill, forward it was then

[Bill W (2)]

quite right Bill, forward it was then

I have checked the scorecard. In the opinion of the referee (aided by his assistants) it was not forward. And he is the sole arbiter of fact!

[Crumby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgMlDy2jP9s

try this link as an explanation.

[Bill W (2)]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgMlDy2jP9s

try this link as an explanation.

Excellent!

[gimme]

he is not according to this post Bill,
nice one Crumby, just goes to show that the ref was right again, can`t be bad eh, I will retire to another pint to digest all of this info.

[Bill W (2)]

.Given that much of Rugby played is so dull , with that string of players lined up across the Pitch

I would respectfully suggest that this is true it is because of not despite of the eccenticitries (incompetence) of all to many refs.

[RaddonChief]

You give the impression of being less than impressed with some of the refereeing decisions at Sandy Park yesterday. But at least you didn't concede a try following a forward pass that in turn came from an incorrectly called line out!

In the second minute, Alesana Tuilagi caught the ball in the field of play and stepped into touch. (Although marginal, slow motion on ESPN shows it.) However, the touch judge gave the throw-in to Tigers and it was from this lineout that Geordan Murphy kicked the ball that was missed by the Exeter 11 and picked up by (coincidentally) Alesana Tuilagi. He set out for the line, accompanied by his younger brother , to whom he passed the ball once before receiving a pass back that was , unfortunately for Exeter, forward. (ESPN have the evidence, played it and the commentators - ex-Tigers Ben Kayand Austin Healey - commented on it.)

Also, on 15 minutes Geordan Murphy made a mark with his front foot actually on the 22 line, which means that he was not within his 22 and therefore not able to make a mark. (Slow-mo ESPN to confirm.) He did, and made a great kick to put Exeter back into their own 22.

Jordan Crane’s try came after a scrum that, according to the ESPN commentators, should have been Exeter’s put-in, but wasn’t.

The point of me posting is not to complain that Exeter lost because they were the poorer team but it could be argued that they lost as a result of poor and slapdash officiating. Perhaps there were occasions where Exeter gained from similar poor calls, but I haven’t seen them. So when (if?) you make any sort of formal representation, don’t lose sight of the tremendous benefits your team got from what I, as a Chiefs' fan, regard as poor refereeing decisions!

In any event, good luck for the Premiership. If we can't have it, I'd just as soon you did!

[Purebob]

Welcome chief !

Around these parts the state of reffing whether we win or lose is a sore point on these boards. I don't think anybody is whining that we would have stuffed yer with a better ref. Just that refs these days shouldn't be an environmental variable that needs to be compensated for like weather or crowd, but it is.