Easy peasy.. Free kick to defending side. And I tell the scrum half he was a silly sod because if he had put it in straight he would have won a penalty advantage for the defence being offside and I tell the props if they cannot bind properly I will get two alternative players on who can (with both captains present).dailywaffle wrote:Re the scrum: LH slips his bind, which may or may not be due to the THs illegal bind, all of which occurs as the SH gives a squint feed and the defensive line stands 0.5m offside.
Your decision? Given that you do not prioritise or ignore any offences.
WC Refereeing.
Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster
-
- Super User
- Posts: 14868
- Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:23 pm
- Location: Essex
Re: WC Refereeing.
Still keeping the faith!
-
- Super User
- Posts: 14868
- Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:23 pm
- Location: Essex
Re: WC Refereeing.
Bill W (2) wrote:Easy peasy.. Free kick to defending side. And I tell the scrum half he was a silly sod because if he had put it in straight he would have won a penalty advantage for the defence being offside and I tell the props if they cannot bind properly I will get two alternative players on who can (with both captains present).dailywaffle wrote:Re the scrum: LH slips his bind, which may or may not be due to the THs illegal bind, all of which occurs as the SH gives a squint feed and the defensive line stands 0.5m offside.
Your decision? Given that you do not prioritise or ignore any offences.
You may take the view this is how my "managing the game" differs from yours.
Still keeping the faith!
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:40 pm
- Location: NW Leics
Re: WC Refereeing.
Given that many of these events were concurrent, why have you chosen to prioritise the feed? Particularly as the binding issues were potentially dangerous.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 14868
- Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:23 pm
- Location: Essex
Re: WC Refereeing.
The scrum had not collapsed. Both props were potentaillay at fault. The defensive line could have retreated before the ball came out. I have not priotitised - I have penalised a clear and obvious breech of the laws of the game and warned potential offenders and their captains that I will not tolerate future breeches of the laws of the game.dailywaffle wrote:Given that many of these events were concurrent, why have you chosen to prioritise the feed? Particularly as the binding issues were potentially dangerous.
btw who would you have penalised - like most (elete) referees I suspect no-one - thus encouraging props to slip their bind, defences to lie offside and SH's to feed. Exactly my point!
Still keeping the faith!
-
- Super User
- Posts: 7106
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 8:40 pm
- Location: NW Leics
Re: WC Refereeing.
Bill, you have chosen to prioritise. You have elected to apply a free kick ahead of the multiple penalty offences, two of which may potentially have associated safety issues. You have chosen to have your cake and eat it; penalising one offence whilst lecturing players and captains to cover off concurrent offences is all well and good, but doing this at the many multiple offence points within the game will soon ensure that your game is unwatchable.
I also note that you have chosen to apply materiality in respect of the offside offence, which you also did (albeit to make a humourous response) with the prop on the wing.
The point here is that the referee is constantly dealing with multiple offences and having to apply his judgement. You may not like the decision reached, but to expect the officials to deal with each and every one of the hundreds of potential free kicks and penalties in a game is completely unrealistic.
Which would I penalise? At my level I would most probably pick up on the LH and TH.
I also note that you have chosen to apply materiality in respect of the offside offence, which you also did (albeit to make a humourous response) with the prop on the wing.
The point here is that the referee is constantly dealing with multiple offences and having to apply his judgement. You may not like the decision reached, but to expect the officials to deal with each and every one of the hundreds of potential free kicks and penalties in a game is completely unrealistic.
Which would I penalise? At my level I would most probably pick up on the LH and TH.
-
- Super User
- Posts: 6045
- Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2008 1:23 am
- Location: Roaming
Re: WC Refereeing.
According to Andy Gomarsall, commentating on the opening RWC 11 match between NZ and Tonga, the crooked feed should only be penalised if the scrum of the team putting in is going backwards and they are obviously trying to gain an advantage.
But then, he is/was a scrum half.....
But then, he is/was a scrum half.....
Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens.
Re: WC Refereeing.
Perhaps because the crooked feed was the clear cut rule breach.
The props slipping their bindings may prove harder to to assign blame to one or other (or both). This is compounded by letting the fat boys wear skin tight jerseys. Noth a good look and contributes to a lot of bindings slipping accidentally because they can't get a grip of their opponent to bind. Front rows back to conventional cotton kit for me.
The props slipping their bindings may prove harder to to assign blame to one or other (or both). This is compounded by letting the fat boys wear skin tight jerseys. Noth a good look and contributes to a lot of bindings slipping accidentally because they can't get a grip of their opponent to bind. Front rows back to conventional cotton kit for me.
-
- Gold Member
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:18 am
- Location: Over the hill and far away
Re: WC Refereeing.
I'm OK with Refs applying the laws, but surely it has to be to actual incidents - what game is Lawrence seeing?
Re: WC Refereeing.
We have been here before with this bloke, totally one eyed, Cole to bin & it's a good job Argies can't kick straight!!