Non playing staff interfering with play

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Tigerbeat, Rizzo, Tigers Press Office, Tigers Webmaster

Tigerbeat
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 7250
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: The big wide world

Re: Non playing staff interfering with play

Post by Tigerbeat »

mol2 wrote: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:00 pm If the water carriers were not permitted to enter without permission then the issue of getting in the line of kickers would not occur.
Water carriers should not be on the pitch when kicks are being taken. There have been instances where an injured player has been attended to in line of the kicker and the ref has given the kicker the option to take the kick or wait, stopping the clock.
Only when the clock has been stopped are non-medic water carriers supposed to be on the pitch.
SUPPORT THE MATT HAMPSON TRUST
www.matthampson.co.uk
wellstiger
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 896
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:56 am

Re: Non playing staff interfering with play

Post by wellstiger »

I agree water carriers are permitted on to the field of play.
I agree it was an over reaction by 36.
I do not agree with personnel interfering directly with the game. The water"boy" did lean over and touch the ball dead.
What resulted was farcical. 36 gets penalised for his overreaction. (Granted).
The Waterboy gets sent to the stands away from the game. Presumably so he cannot interfere further.
Result Glaws are penalised twice. Once by ref and by the actions of water"boy". The water"boy" has a natural replacement.
Some how does not sit right.
Tiglon
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3887
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 8:54 pm

Re: Non playing staff interfering with play

Post by Tiglon »

wellstiger wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:50 am I agree water carriers are permitted on to the field of play.
I agree it was an over reaction by 36.
I do not agree with personnel interfering directly with the game. The water"boy" did lean over and touch the ball dead.
What resulted was farcical. 36 gets penalised for his overreaction. (Granted).
The Waterboy gets sent to the stands away from the game. Presumably so he cannot interfere further.
Result Glaws are penalised twice. Once by ref and by the actions of water"boy". The water"boy" has a natural replacement.
Some how does not sit right.
It doesn't sit right because the message is "tell your water carriers to interfere with play and you will benefit from it". I'm sure we'll see it much more often now, water carriers and other non playing staff grabbing the ball to try to wind up opposition players and win a penalty and yellow card. Hopefully next time it happens it will be dealt with properly and the correct message will be sent.
GETHIN EXILE
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 290
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:27 pm

Re: Non playing staff interfering with play

Post by GETHIN EXILE »

Any ancillary person interfering with the game should be removed from the ground and banned for at least 4 games. the offending side should also have their captain yellow carded and a penalty awarded against them. This sort of interference is no different to having an extra player on the pitch and needs to be stopped now.
Mayocaz
Top Cat
Top Cat
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun May 19, 2019 9:48 pm

Re: Non playing staff interfering with play

Post by Mayocaz »

Imagine if Billy was playing in the game against Ospreys when with the clock ticking down the full back made a tackle when he had been subbed. :smt007
Wayne Richardson Fan Club
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3838
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:53 am
Location: The Salt Mines

Re: Non playing staff interfering with play

Post by Wayne Richardson Fan Club »

I think it was another example of poor officiating in that game in general...
To win is not as important as playing with style!
mol2
Super User
Super User
Posts: 4581
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 5:48 pm
Location: Cosby

Re: Non playing staff interfering with play

Post by mol2 »

There has to be a significant team punishment.

Carding a water boy is not punishing the team in any way at all.
Post Reply