tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28981888630349915002024-03-16T16:39:25.229+00:00The Rugby Ref.co.ukThe trials and tribulations of a rugby referee.
(Law references may only be accurate at time of posting, please check current law book)The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.comBlogger262125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-850821110743419662023-06-09T10:00:00.000+01:002023-06-09T10:00:10.367+01:00<p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i> Hi Ref,</i></p><p><i>I saw some GMG which mentioned “Rolling the ball back with hands by the scrum half position player during ruck, the ruck is end.</i></p><p><i>How do you think and what laws supports this?</i></p><p><i>Regards,</i></p><p><i>Bly</i></p></blockquote><p><i></i></p><p><br /></p><p>Hi there</p><p>This brings up an interesting discussion around Game Management Guidelines (GMG's). Every Union tends to have either their own set of GMG's, or none at all. If your Union has GMG's then you should follow those, this will put you in step with all the other match officials in your area/country.</p><p>For the purpose of this discussion however let’s stick to the laws of the game. </p><p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>15.11. Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their hands on the ball before the ruck formed and stay on their feet.</i></p><p><i>15.14. Players may play the ball with their feet, provided they do so in a safe manner.</i></p><p><i>15.17. When the ball has been clearly won by a team at the ruck, and is available to be played, the referee calls use it, after which the ball must be played away from the ruck within five seconds.</i></p></blockquote><p><i></i></p><p>So the scrum half may move the ball to the back of the ruck with their foot and then play it away.</p><p>The law would suggest that using the hands to move the ball to the back of the ruck would be a penalty, </p><p>Picking the ball up and playing it away means the ruck is over.</p><p>In reality if the ball is trapped we will allow the scrum half to use their hands to roll it back until it is free, this is to allow the game to flow, otherwise they must use their feet.</p><p><br /></p><p>Thanks</p><p>The Rugby Ref</p><div><br /></div>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-78349318160434573512023-02-24T09:22:00.004+00:002023-02-24T09:22:25.991+00:00Trash Talk<p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i> Hi Ref,</i></p><p><i>Is trash talk illegal in Rugby games?</i></p><p><i>As a ref, should I penalize the trash talker? Based on which law?</i></p><p><i>Here, the trash talks are not dirty talks. For example, “the hooker cannot throw straight” during a line out; they play like a kids….</i></p><p><i>Stuff like that.</i></p><p><i>Bly</i></p><p><i>Regards</i></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>Hi Bly</p><p>This will depend to some degree on which country you are in, but is also covered in Law.</p><p>In England the RFU have rugby values, or TREDS.</p><p>Teamwork: Respect: Enjoyment: Discipline: Safety </p><p>These are the values that players, coaches and referees should be adhering to. Stepping outside these values is against the spirit of the game.</p><p><br /></p><p>The rugby values are covered in law by Law 9.27</p><p><br /></p><p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>Law 9 Foul Play</i></p><p><i>27. A player must not do anything that is against the spirit of good sportsmanship.</i></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p> The sanction for breaking Law 9.27 is a Penalty, but referees should manage this in the first instance by reminding the players of the core values of the game, then escalating if necessary. Ask, Tell, Penalise.</p><p><br /></p><p>Thanks</p><p>The Rugby Ref</p><p><i></i></p><p><i></i></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-34904596635571805412022-09-26T09:50:00.003+01:002022-09-26T09:50:38.133+01:00Kick Forward question<p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>Hi there Ref</i></p><p><i>I saw a situation the other day and was not sure if it was legal or not and request your advice.</i></p><p><i>Situation:</i></p><p><i>Blue team backs have the ball in the middle of the park and the centre chips the ball forward and all the backs advance, The parson who chipped the ball get to the bouncing ball first and kicks it off the ground as its bouncing, a second blue player who was just in front of the this person collects the bouncing ball collects the ball and scores a try.</i></p><p><i>So was he off side if he was in front of the player kicking the ball? I don’t think it could be a forward pass as a kick is not a pass is it ?</i></p></blockquote><p>Hi Alan</p><p>Thanks for your question. </p><p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>Law 10.1 A player is offside in open play if that player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball <b><u>or who last played it</u>.</b> An offside player must not interfere with play. This includes :</i></p><p><i>a. Playing the ball.</i></p><p><i>b. Tackling the ball-carrier.</i></p><p><i>c. Preventing the opposition from playing as they wish.</i></p></blockquote><p><i></i></p><p>So after the second kick, the team-mate in front of the kicker is offside and must not interfere with play. Since the player in front "played the ball" he did interfere with play. Penalty.</p><p>Thanks for the question</p><p>The Rugby Ref</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><i></i></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-30451555824047179452022-09-08T21:14:00.001+01:002022-09-08T21:14:30.538+01:00RIP Her Majesty The Queen<p> <span style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; caret-color: rgb(102, 102, 102); color: #666666; font-family: Roboto, Roboto; font-size: 14px;">On behalf of the rugby union community in England, we offer our condolences to the whole Royal Family at this time.</span></p><p style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; box-sizing: border-box; caret-color: rgb(102, 102, 102); color: #666666; font-family: Roboto, Roboto; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 1em; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;">We are deeply grateful for Her Majesty’s support of our sport over many years, including serving as the RFU’s Patron for 64 years, helping the Union to celebrate its centenary in 1971, her reception at Buckingham Palace after England won the Rugby World Cup in 2003, and honours bestowed on many of those who have served the game.</p><p style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; box-sizing: border-box; caret-color: rgb(102, 102, 102); color: #666666; font-family: Roboto, Roboto; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 1em; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;">Her Majesty earned the respect and affection of generations of rugby players and supporters here in the England and around the world.</p><p style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; box-sizing: border-box; caret-color: rgb(102, 102, 102); color: #666666; font-family: Roboto, Roboto; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 1em; padding-top: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;">The St George’s Flag has been lowered to half mast at Twickenham Stadium.</p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-42418507246544194452022-07-29T09:30:00.002+01:002022-07-29T09:31:35.786+01:00Summary of Law Changes for the 2022 season<p><b> LAW CHANGES 1 JULY 2022</b></p><p>Following the World Rugby Council meeting in May 2022, a number of law changes have</p><p>been made. These all come into force for the whole game on 1 July 2022.</p><p>The five current Global Law Trials Goal Line Drop-out, 50:22, jackler protection, banning pre-bound pods in open play (flying wedge) and approving a single latcher will become full law.</p><p>There are two new Global Law Trials</p><p>- Brake foot - At the scrum, hookers must have a brake foot in place during "Crouch" and "Bind" phases, and is removed on "Set". This is to reduce axial loading on the hookers.</p><p>- Water carriers - New restrictions on medics and water carriers have been introduced as well as formalising technical zones into law. This is primarily related to the elite game, but the principles apply to all levels of the game.</p><p>These will become Global Law Trials until at least the end of 2023. There are also a number of</p><p>minor amends to law that have arisen from previous clarifications.</p><p><a href="https://resources.world.rugby/worldrugby/document/2022/06/23/02832614-d535-4a7d-b02d-4c409de18152/2022-Law-changes-Summary-List.pdf" target="_blank">FULL DOCUMENT HERE</a></p><p><br /></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-30268470938878908432021-10-13T09:38:00.001+01:002021-10-13T09:38:28.049+01:00Leggings now legal for all players.<p>A new law amendment from World Rugby, effective immediately (12 Oct 2021), will mean that all players now have the option of wearing tights/leggings on any playing surface.</p><p>The World Rugby Executive Committee today approved an amendment to the laws of the game and Law 4 will now be extended. Currently permissible for women, Law 4 – covering player’s clothing – will now be extended to all participants with immediate effect, enabling the wearing of tights or leggings that are a cotton blend with a single inside leg seam.</p><p>The announcement has been made on welfare and accessibility grounds and reflects the growing worldwide use of World Rugby Regulation 22 compliant artificial surfaces at both the elite and community levels, which have played a role in increased rugby accessibility and participation. With some players susceptible to abrasions on artificial surfaces, the decision gives players the option to wear tights or leggings as a preventative measure, maximising access to the game.</p><p>World Rugby have said they will continue to work with unions and registered artificial turf providers to ensure that rigorous best-practice maintenance programmes are observed that minimise the risk of abrasions, particularly in relation to brushing and watering especially in hot conditions.</p><p>The wording does not restrict leggings to any particular surface, so leggings may be worn in any match, on any surface.</p><p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>New law wording:</i></p><p><i>Law 4: Players clothing.</i></p><p><i>Section 3: Additional clothing list – new section K added:</i></p><p><i>4.3 Additional items are permitted. These are….:</i></p><p><i>k) Cotton blend long tights or leggings, with single inside leg seam under their shorts and socks.</i></p></blockquote><p>The Rugby Ref </p><p><i></i></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-79602999781864123592021-10-04T11:45:00.000+01:002021-10-04T11:45:14.168+01:00Taken Back In<p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>Hi,</i></p><p><i>Just watching the All Blacks v S Africa game and a Springbok player kicked from his own 22 with the ball landing a metre or so outside the All Black's 22 which obviously is not a 50:22.</i></p><p><i>The All Blacks Outside Half picked the ball up out of play and staying out of play retreated behind his 22 line, he then threw the ball quickly to his winger who was in the 22 who then kicked directly to touch within the Springbok's half - should this have been classed as taking the ball back into your own 22 with the line out throw awarded to the Springboks in the All Blacks 22.</i></p><p><i>Rob</i></p></blockquote><p><i></i></p><p>Hi Rob</p><p>Good question, and yes you are correct, the ball was taken back into the 22, so no gain in ground should have occurred and the resulting lineout should have been in line with where the ball was kicked.</p><p>Law 18.7 refers to this and is accompanied in the Law Book with a diagram to illustrate it.</p><p></p><blockquote style="font-style: italic;">18.7. If the mark of touch is outside the 22, the defending team may take the quick throw inside the 22 but is deemed to have taken the ball into the 22.</blockquote><p>The Rugby Ref </p><p></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-41870927648360965972021-08-18T09:29:00.000+01:002021-08-18T09:29:04.128+01:00Global Law Trials<p>The following global law trials apply to competitions beginning on or after 1st August 2021.</p><p><a href="https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/global-law-trials" target="_blank">World Rugby GLT's LINK</a></p><p><b>50:22</b></p><p><b>The trial</b></p><p>If the team in possession kicks the ball from inside their own half indirectly into touch inside their opponents’ 22, they will throw into the resultant lineout. The ball cannot be passed or carried back into the defensive half for the 50:22 to be played. The phase must originate inside the defensive half.</p><p><b>Primary intention</b></p><p>To encourage the defensive team to put more players in the backfield, thereby creating more attacking space and reducing defensive line speed.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Goal line drop-out</b></p><p><b>The trial</b></p><p>If the ball is held up in in-goal, there is a knock-on from an attacking player in in-goal or an attacking kick is grounded by the defenders in their own in-goal, then play restarts with a goal line drop-out anywhere along the goal line.</p><p><b>Primary intention</b></p><p>To encourage variety in attacking play close to the goal line and to increase ball in play time by replacing a scrum with a kick that must be taken without delay. An opportunity for counter attack is also created.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Flying wedge</b></p><p><b>The trial</b></p><p>To sanction the three person pre-bound mini-scrum by redefining the flying wedge.</p><p><b>Primary intention</b></p><p>To reduce number of events where the ball carrier and multiple support players are in contact (latched) prior to contact, and to protect the tackler who can be faced with the combined force of three opposing players.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>1-player pre-latched</b></p><p><b>The trial</b></p><p>To recognise the potential for 1-player pre-latching prior to contact, but this player must observe all of the requirements for a first arriving player, particularly the need to stay on their feet.</p><p><b>Primary intention</b></p><p>To be more consistent in the management of the 1-person pre-latched player.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Cleanout and the safety of the jackler</b></p><p><b>The trial</b></p><p>To introduce a sanction for clean outs which target or drop weight onto the lower limbs.</p><p><b>Primary intention</b></p><p>To reduce injury risk to the player being cleaned out.</p><p><br /></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-55496848096284207342021-08-13T11:57:00.004+01:002021-08-13T11:59:09.120+01:00This question has been bugging me for a while<i></i><blockquote><i>Hi,</i></blockquote><blockquote><i>This question has been bugging me for a while, and I'm not sure about the answer.</i> </blockquote><blockquote><i>Scenario: In a 15s match, team A has been awarded a penalty, and they chose to kick for goal by place kicking it. The attempt at goal was genuine, however, it wasn't successful and the ball ended up in touch (either because of the strong wind, poor execution, or the ball bounced off the post) without touching any player.</i><br /><i></i></blockquote><blockquote><i>According to law 18.8.c: "Ball is kicked from a penalty. Event: A player kicks the ball into touch (either directly or first bouncing in the field of play or hitting an opponent or the referee). Who throws in: The kicking team." Seems like team A should get the throw-in of the lineout.</i><br /><i></i></blockquote><blockquote><i>But according to what Clarification 2, 2006 (literally 15 years ago) says: "If the penalty kick is for goal, then it is a lineout defending team to throw in. Law 21.4(d)." Seems like team B should get the throw-in of the lineout.</i><br /><i></i></blockquote><blockquote><i>Should the referee award the throw-in of the resulting lineout to team A or team B?</i> </blockquote><blockquote><i>(Nigel Owens answering a similar question: https://youtu.be/mxBSQoSGn2k?t=91 )</i><br /><i></i></blockquote><blockquote><i>If the same scenario happened in a 7s/10s match, is it correct that team A get the throw-in? (Since they could only drop kick for goal instead of place kicking, therefore no issue regarding "place kick for touch".)</i><br /><i></i></blockquote><blockquote><i>Thanks,</i><br /><p style="text-align: left;"><i>Sam</i></p></blockquote><p>Lots of questions there Sam, we can ignore the clarification since all clarifications were transferred into law before the new simplified law book was written. Unfortunately the simplified law book moved and omitted a lot of useful data!</p><p>We have to go with what the Law Book currently says. The kick at goal must be a credible attempt, however if in the very unlikely circumstances it were to genuinely get blown into touch the kicking team would get the throw in. It is the referees decision however as to whether the attempt at goal was genuine.</p><p>In 7s/10s the drop goal is still a penalty kick, just taken in a different way (in 15s any penalty kick can be taken as a drop goal), it doesn't stop it being a penalty. So the result would be the same.</p><p>Thanks</p><p>The Rugby Ref</p><p><br /></p><p style="text-align: left;"><i></i></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-70922947514412937922021-03-08T10:07:00.002+00:002021-03-08T10:09:16.072+00:00Time on after PK<p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i> Hi Ref,</i></p><p><i>I believe you also watched the match between End and Wales on last Sat.</i></p><p><i>About the first try of Wales, i am curious about the “time on” calling of the ref.</i></p><p><i>Was it a correct or proper time point or management to call “time on” after the ref briefed to England’s captain?</i></p><p><i>I believe the ref knew the England is still in a circle right before he blowed the time on whistle.</i></p><p><i>Bly</i></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p>Thanks for the question Bly.</p><p>Deception and subterfuge are all part of the game in rugby. Dummy runners, switch plays, quick throw in's and taking quick penalties while the opposition are not paying attention, are something we don't want to lose.</p><p>However the referee should not be part of this and should be above reproach. In this instance the referee told the England Captain to talk to his players, this involves calling in the wingers and backs from some distance. It is only common sense that you then have to give the players time to get back into position after they have been spoken to. Calling time on when the players are still in a huddle is a bit of a 'gotcha' and most would say poor management by the referee.</p><p>I believe the referee himself has acknowledged that this was a mistake on his part. We all make mistakes, it's how we learn, luckily most of us don't make them on such a large stage.</p><p>The Rugby Ref</p><p><br /></p><p><i></i></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-43501754224562719422020-11-24T10:06:00.005+00:002020-11-24T10:06:45.668+00:00Grounding with delay!<p></p><blockquote><p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>Hi Ref,</i></p><p><i>In 13.9 of the law book before 2018, </i></p><p><i>13.9 LAW 13 - KICK OFF AND RESTART KICKS</i></p><p><i>13.9 BALL GOES INTO THE IN-GOAL</i></p><p><i>(b) If the opposing team grounds the ball, or if they make it dead, or if the ball becomes dead </i><i>by going into touch-in-goal, or on or over the dead ball line, they have two choices:</i></p><p><i>• To have a scrum formed at the centre, and they throw in the ball, or</i></p><p><i>• To have the other team kick off again.</i></p><p><i>(c) If they opt to ground the ball or make it dead, they must do so without delay. Any other </i><i>action with the ball by a defending player means the player has elected to play on.</i></p><p><i>We found in law book after 2018,</i></p><p><i>it became 12.9 as below description</i></p><p><i>If the ball is kicked into the opponents’ in-goal without touching any player and an opponent grounds the ball without delay or it goes dead through in-goal, the non-kicking team has the option of having the kick retaken or a scrum.</i></p><p><i>In the past we awarded 22 drop out instead of center scrum or retaken when the defense player delayed grounding the ball.</i></p><p><i>According to the wording of new law book, shall we do the same decision as before since they deleted the 13.9(c).</i></p><p><i>Regards,</i></p><p><i>Bly</i></p></blockquote><p><i></i></p></blockquote><p></p><div>Hi Bly</div><div><br /></div><div>Good questions. If the defender does not ground the ball without delay then the have elected to play on, and we are effectively in open play, so do whatever you would do if the team hadn't just kicked off.</div><div><br /></div><div>In practise this means they can run it out of in-goal, or ground it. If they ground it (having delayed) we look at who took the ball into in-goal (the attackers) and thus award a 22 drop out. They have effectively waived their right to any other options.</div><div><br /></div><div>You should also note that they need to press down on the ball to ground it. Merely picking up the ball is not grounding it.</div><div><br /></div><div>Thanks for the questions, sometimes simplifying the Law book doesn't always make it clearer.</div><div><br /></div><div>The Rugby Ref</div>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-6204358540115884032020-11-16T09:08:00.001+00:002020-11-16T09:08:43.578+00:00Law 21.17 Doubt about grounding<p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i> Hi Ref,</i></p><p><i>About law 21.17, here we have a scenario:</i></p><p><i>In open play and the time is up. What about the situation when neither the ref and AR don’t know if the ball is grounded or not. (No TMO in that pitch)</i></p><p><i>Should we blow the whistle to finish the game or make the last scrum call, attacking team throw in?</i></p><p><i>Regards,</i></p><p><i>Bly</i></p></blockquote><p>Hi there</p><p>Law 21.17 says "If there is any doubt about which team first grounded the ball in in-goal, play is restarts with a five metre scrum.."</p><p>In your example we don't know if the ball as grounded or not, assuming the ball was taken into in-goal by the attacking team, and we can't see it grounded, then the call would be held up, which would also result in a five metre scrum.</p><p>So now we have to look at the law on time. </p><p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>Law 5.7</i></p><p><i>A half ends when the ball becomes dead after time has expired unless:</i></p><p><i>A scrum, lineout or restart kick following a try or touchdown, awarded before time expired, has not been completed and the ball has not returned to open play. This includes when the scrum, lineout or restart kick is taken incorrectly.</i></p></blockquote><p>The key phrase in this law is "awarded before time expires". Since time had already expired in your example, the scrum was awarded after time had expired, so the game ends. </p><p>Hope that answers your question.</p><p>The Rugby Ref</p><p><br /></p><p><i></i></p><p><i></i></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-27683735703146617242020-10-29T16:07:00.004+00:002020-10-29T16:07:54.449+00:00Take any action to make the opponents believe that the ruck has ended, when it has not.<p><i></i></p><blockquote><p><i>Hi Ref,</i></p><p><i>One situation I faced in today’s game.</i></p><p><i>Ruck formed and the ball was possessed by team A. A’ no.9 was behind the ruck and put his hand on the ball (not picked up yet, that we know the ruck was not end.).</i></p><p><i>One of A’s forward asked the no.9 to leave because they changed their strategy to move forward by some big men. The no.9 left but no players of B were misled to move cross the offside line. Should I let the ball play on or?</i></p><p><i>What if team B’s player were misled to be offside? Manage them to be back on line or FK to team B</i></p><p><i>Regards</i></p><p><i>Bly</i></p></blockquote><p>Hi Bly</p><p>So let's look at the facts. The ball hasn't been lifted and the ruck hasn't ended. No player has made any move to dummy the ball or fake the ball being out.</p><p>The law states that <i>"Players must not take any action to make opponents believe that the ruck has ended when it has not"</i>.</p><p>From your description Team A did nothing to make the opposition think the ruck was over, they just repositioned their players.</p><p>So to answer your questions:</p><p><i>Should I play on?</i> Yes definitely, we are looking for reasons not to blow the whistle and allow play to continue wherever possible. No laws have been broken, so play on.</p><p><i>If team B came offside should I manage them back or Free Kick them?</i> Same answer, manage them back onside and allow play to continue. Don't blow the whistle unless they have a material effect.</p><p>Thanks for the scenario.</p><p>The Rugby Ref</p><p><i></i></p>The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-2578457760272053192020-03-04T10:10:00.003+00:002020-03-04T10:10:57.693+00:00Taking a penalty kick incorrectly<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Has the law on how to take a penalty kick been changed?</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>2017 Law 21.4 "Sanction: Unless otherwise stated in Law any infringement by the kicker's team results in a scrum at the mark. The opposing team throw in the ball."</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The current Law book uses the same criteria but gives no specific Sanction.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>We were told there were no changes in the "simplified" rewrite, so is this an error or a change? Should we apply 9.7 (a) " A player must not intentionally infringe any law of the game" and award a Free Kick?</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Locally referees often merely require a correct retake for the first offence. </i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Peter</i></blockquote>
Hi Peter<br />
<br />
Been a while since you submitted this question, but The Rugby Ref has only recently been able to get a definitive answer.<br />
<br />
You are correct in saying that match officials were told there were no changes in law when the law book was "rewritten" for clarity. However we have to be pragmatic, that information is now three years old and we have to work with what we have, which is the current 2020 law book.<br />
<br />
The Rugby Ref has now sought advice from three or four Premiership Referees, who all came to the same conclusion. If a kick is taken incorrectly (from the wrong spot, wrong type of kick etc) then the kick has in fact not legally taken place, and the game has not restarted. So we bring them back to take it again correctly.<br />
<br />
However if this is done repeatedly then the referee may consider "repeat offending" or "intentionally infringing", but good game management should prevent things getting that far.<br />
<br />
Thanks<br />
The Rugby Ref<br />
<br />The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-43259943517684150052020-01-02T09:26:00.000+00:002020-01-02T09:26:22.440+00:00Lazy runners & deliberate actions<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Dear Ref,</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I am familiar with the rules\laws for lazy runners, but I want to question the actions of the attacking team if the scrum half deliberately passes a ball into a retreating lazy runner who has his hands up signalling that he knows he is offside.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I am not saying that he was making a pass and the ball hit a lazy runner; what I’m saying is that he picked up the wall and post it directly into the lazy river and there was no one in line of the boss so he deliberately, almost cynically, threw the ball at a player and then shouted “lazy runner”</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Simon</i></blockquote>
Hi Simon<br />
<br />
Technically the lazy runner is offside and interfering with play and this will result in a penalty. The fact that the lazy runner puts his hands in the air just highlights the fact that he is offside.<br />
<br />
The simple answer is that if the lazy runner is not in the vicinity of the scrum half this can't happen, so don't put yourself in a position where the opposition can take advantage of you being offside.<br />
<br />
However The Rugby Ref would be talking to the scrum half about appealing and not trying to "buy a penalty".<br />
<br />
<br />
The Rugby RefThe Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-63368090478662843782019-12-05T11:20:00.002+00:002019-12-05T11:20:20.883+00:00Offside at a Quick Throw In?<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Law 10.9 A player who is offside at a ruck, maul, scrum or lineout remains offside, even after the ruck, maul, scrum or lineout has ended.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Does this apply to a QTI?</blockquote>
Law 10 is the offside law.<br />
<br />
Technically Quick Throw ins (QTI) fall under the same law as Lineouts...Law 18, so you could say yes. But we usually say that offside lines disappear when the ball goes dead, so you could say no?<br />
<br />
Sometimes as a referee you just have to think about what the law makers were trying to achieve, combined with the principles and spirit of the game.<br />
<br />
So we have to look at the purpose of the offside law, which is to create space and allow free flowing rugby rather than a static slogfest. When the ball goes into touch the purpose of a QTI is to get the game going quickly. There are specific laws that stop the opposition preventing a QTI by standing in the 5m channel, again to allow quick free flowing rugby.<br />
<br />
Essentially if a player is in an offside position when the ball goes into touch (in front of a kick which bounces into touch for instance) he shouldn't benefit from being offside. So if he inhibits the QTI (but is outside the 5m channel) the referee could penalise him for being in an offside position prior to the ball going into touch.<br />
<br />
If the QTI is taken and that team carry the ball 5m, or pass or kick the ball then the offside player would be put onside, so let's play on.<br />
<br />
The last scenario is that a QTI is taken and the receiver is immediately tackled (before he can pass or run) by a player who was in an offside position when the ball went into touch. In that case he should be penalised for being offside prior to the QTI because he is shutting down space and not playing within the spirit of the law. <br />
<br />
Otherwise we could have the scenario where a player is offside after a breakdown way up the field in the opposition half, but instead of getting onside he just stays there (not interfering with play) until the opposition have put him onside by passing and running the ball, allowing him to then benefit by being in their defense. Clearly that would be ridiculous.<br />
<br />
Great question, difficult to answer.The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-76137084493226793972019-11-20T10:25:00.000+00:002019-11-20T10:25:39.958+00:00In Goal warm up equipment<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>At the weekend there was a point in the game at Northampton when a player had been warming up in the in goal area.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>There was a tackle bag in in-goal 5 cones and over 10 strips (old ladder sprint warm up kit) If the ball had hit any of these what would the referee have done. Does it matter whether attack or defence had left it there?</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Cannot find anything in the laws that cater for this.</i><i><br /></i><i></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Also in the match from a kick off the ball went long and was going straight out. The attacker leapt and with one hand batted the ball back in play. It went forward. He had made no attempt to catch it and had very little chance of doing so. In this current climate of deliberate knock on being so harsh on poorly judged attempted interceptions. Would you (general refereeing) consider this a deliberate knock on?</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Do you think this should be relaxed again to be just deliberate blocking of a pass, should this include deliberate blocking of a pass even if the ball does not go forward?</i><i><br /></i><i></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I am so glad I have found a site that might help with my knowledge of the game.</i><i><br /></i><i></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Many Thanks</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Graham Sutton</i></blockquote>
Hi Graham<br />
<br />
A couple of good questions there.<br />
<br />
Equipment in-goal. Really this shouldn't be allowed. Players warming up in-goal are fine as they have to warm up somewhere and in-goal is usually the only place available at that level. But equipment should be banned from in-goal during the game.<br />
<br />
You are correct in the law being silent on this situation. The closest example is Law 6.12<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>12. If the ball is touched by the referee or other non-player in in-goal, the referee judges<br />what would have happened next and awards a try or a touch down at the place where<br />the contact took place.</i></blockquote>
In your example the ball touches equipment not a player, so strictly by the letter of the law we would play on unless there is a danger to players from the equipment. In that case a stoppage for any other reason would come into play, which would result in a scrum to the team going forward, which would usually be the attacking team.<br />
<br />
Regarding your second question, it would be very harsh to giver a deliberate knock on under those circumstances. The player is trying to keep the ball in play (positive play) and is probably unaware, once in the air, of exactly which direction he is facing.<br />
<br />
The deliberate blocking of a pass versus a genuine attempt at an interception is very much up to the referee to decide. There are so many variables that sometimes we just have to accept the referees decision based on his knowledge of the game and empathy with the players. Blocking a pass without knocking it on will always be allowed, otherwise interceptions would cease to exist, in The Rugby Referees opinion. <br />
<br />
Having said all that guidelines are released from time to time on how referees should judge what is a deliberate knock on. This is to try and gain consistency in refereeing.<br />
<br />
Glad you like the site<br />
The Rugby Ref<br />
<br />The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-83736648957602313382019-11-18T11:08:00.002+00:002019-11-18T11:09:15.712+00:00Player running with the ball is about to be tackled...<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Hi<br />Is a player going forward with the ball allowed to go to the ground to avoid being tackled by an opponent?</i></blockquote>
Hi and thanks for the question. There is no law that prevents a player from voluntarily going to ground with the ball. However once he has done so he is out of the game and must immediately do one of three things.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Law 13</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>The game is played only by players who are on their feet.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>1. Players, who go to ground to gather the ball or who go to ground with the ball, must </i><i>immediately:</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>a. Get up with the ball; or</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>b. Play (but not kick) the ball; or</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>c. Release the ball.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Sanction: Penalty.</i> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>2. Once the ball is played or released, players on the ground must immediately either move </i><i>away from the ball or get up. </i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Sanction: Penalty.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>3. A player on the ground without the ball is out of the game and must:</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>a. Allow opponents who are not on the ground to play or gain possession of the ball.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>b. Not play the ball.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>c. Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Sanction: Penalty.</i></blockquote>
<br />
Thanks<br />
The Rugby RefThe Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-58731616216863273522019-10-01T15:34:00.002+01:002019-10-01T15:36:10.273+01:00Keeping the ball out of touch<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>During the Wales v Australia game when the Australian number 10 kicked the ball for touch a Welsh player jumped from the touchline out of play to knock the ball back in field before his feet touched the ground. Haven’t the rules changed so that as soon as the ball has crossed over the touchline the ball is deemed to be in touch and can’t be knocked back in (as opposed to previous law)</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>David</i></blockquote>
Hi David<br />
<br />
Thanks for the question, it's a good one. You are correct that the law changed, but the part you are thinking of is when a player catches the ball while stood on the ground, then the plane of touch is relevant as to who has taken the ball into touch.<br />
<br />
For the incident in questions we have to look at Law 18.2.C<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>18.2 The ball is <u>not</u> in touch or touch-in-goal if :<br />c. A player jumps from the playing area and knocks (or catches and releases) the ball<br />back into the playing area, before landing in touch or touch-in-goal, regardless of<br />whether the ball reached the plane of touch.</i></blockquote>
So the Assistant Referee on the touchline (I think it was Nigel Owens) got it absolutely correct.<br />
<br />
Thanks for highlighting it<br />
The Rugby Ref<br />
<br />The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-35003544103362890152019-09-23T10:50:00.003+01:002019-09-23T10:50:33.235+01:00Player clothing - Padded shorts<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I see that law 4.5f f. Shorts with padding sewn into them, can't be worn.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Does this include the lycra type under shorts or just to the typical cotton over shorts?</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I have noticed several players in the opening games of the WC wearing what appear to be thigh/hip padding in their lycra under shirts. French No 6 for example.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I appreciate some 2nd rows tape padding to the tops of their thighs.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Cheers</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Rob</blockquote>
<br />
Hi Rob<br />
<br />
You are quite correct.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>5. A player may not wear:</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>f. Shorts with padding sewn into them.</i></blockquote>
Shorts are defined as being worn 'over' underwear, the "lycra type under shorts" you mention are defined as underwear. So strictly speaking what you have described is legal. It would however need to satisfy Regulation 12 on players clothing.<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>4. Banned items of clothing</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Other than the items of clothing set out at 1(a)-(f), 2 and 3 above, a player must not wear any item of which any part is thicker than 5mm when uncompressed or is denser than 60 kilograms per cubic metre unless specified within this Regulation 12/Law 4. Where this overall thickness consists of padded material covered by fabric, 5mm is the maximum measured thickness for the combination of the uncompressed padding and the fabric. The fabric can contribute up to a maximum measured thickness of 1mm on each side of the padding.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>This standard concerns manufacturers and testers of Rugby players’ clothing and should be read in conjunction with the current version of the World Rugby’s LAW 4 concerning players’ dress and Regulation 12. Particular attention is drawn to Regulation 12, Clause 4 above.</i></blockquote>
<br />
The Rugby RefThe Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-41292131968615852072019-09-09T10:15:00.002+01:002019-09-09T10:15:50.890+01:00Dissent<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A fellow referee asked me this today, wasn’t 100% sure of the answer, though I thought it was limited only by the length of the pitch.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
How many times can you march players back for dissent?</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Jim Hawkins</blockquote>
<br />
Hi Jim<br />
<br />
The law states that a second infringement can be marched back 10m, but doesn't mention a third or fourth infringement. In theory you could keep marching them back, but this would be poor management. You could also issue a yellow card for a subsequent infringement.<br />
<br />
The Rugby Ref would suggest though that at this point you could call time off, speak to the Captains about your decision and allow everyone to calm down. If players are annoyed about something it serves no good to wind them up further by constantly marching them back. Instead deal with and diffuse the situation.<br />
<br />
Remember also that if you do have to march a team back 10m you can march slowly (to allow people to calm down) explaining your decision as you go.<br />
<br />
This is all about good management.<br />
<br />
The Rugby Ref<br />
<br />The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-12784464455458588852019-08-29T15:12:00.000+01:002019-08-29T15:12:15.664+01:00Kick Off Not 10<blockquote class="tr_bq">
At the start of the second half in yesterday's Bledisloe Cup match, the ABs tried a short kick. It hit the ground short of the 10m line and was promptly snaffled by an Australian - still short of the 10m line. Unfortunately he knocked on.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Jaco Peyper explained that when the ball hit the ground first, it had not reached the 10m line, so that was the first infringement and he offered Australia the options.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
My understanding is that the sanction only applies if the fact that the ball fails to reach the 10m line is the fault of the kicking team. The law does not specify that the ball must reach the 10m line while in the air. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
It is well established that the opponents can play the ball before it reaches the 10m line and Peyper's explanation implies that the referee is playing advantage if the opponents gather the ball after a short bounce and play continues.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Was Peyper wrong?</blockquote>
Hi<br />
<br />
The law states:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Law 12</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>6. The ball must reach the 10-metre line. Sanction: The non-kicking team has the option</i><i>of the kick being retaken or a scrum.</i><i></i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>7. If the ball reaches the 10-metre line but is then blown back <b>or if an opponent plays the</b></i><i><b>ball </b>before it reaches the 10-metre line, play continues.</i></blockquote>
So the Australian player 'played' the ball.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i><b>Played</b>: The ball is played when it is intentionally touched by a player</i></blockquote>
So play continues, if the Australian then knocks it would be a scrum. The Rugby Ref has never seen a precedent for playing advantage because the ball didn't go 10m. By playing the ball the Australian has accepted the kick off; what happens after that is up to him.<br />
<br />
Was Peyper wrong? Let's just say his interpretation was different to the accepted norm'?<br />
<br />
Thanks for a good observation<br />
The Rugby Ref<br />
<br />The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-44226466291271752522019-08-11T11:43:00.000+01:002019-08-11T11:43:31.630+01:00Jumping into contact<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Hey Rugby Ref</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I'm a newly qualified ref in 2019.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I am watching the SA v Argentina game on Saturday 10 Aug evening, in the first few mins an SA player jumps into contact, refere Poite awards a penalty to SA for Argentina player tackling player in the air. Why wasn't the SA player penalised for dangerous play...</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Why was their no offence for jumping into contact, as this seems open to abuse to draw a penalty, if a player is about to be tackled he/she can jump or lift feet off the ground.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Interested to hear your thoughts.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Cheers</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Rob</i></blockquote>
<br />
Hi Rob<br />
Good question.The law does say that you cannot tackle a player who is off the ground.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Law 9</i><i>17. A player must not tackle, charge, pull, push or grasp an opponent whose feet are off the </i><i>ground.</i></blockquote>
However we have to consider that a player running with the ball has his feet off the ground most of the time. In addition a player should not be able to avoid a tackle by jumping at the last moment so that he cannot be tackled.<br />
<br />
The general principle that most referees apply is that if a player as to jump to intercept a catch or a kicked ball, he should be allowed to return to the ground before being tackled. This is a simple safety issue.<br />
<br />
There is no specific offence of jumping into a tackle (maybe there should be), but there is a catch all offence of reckless play that puts the player or other players into danger.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Law 9</i><i>11. Players must not do anything that is reckless or dangerous to others.</i></blockquote>
If a player jumps into a tackle and leads with his boot or knee, that would be dangerous.<br />
<br />
At the end of the day its a judgement call and sometimes referees will get it wrong.<br />
<br />
Thanks for the question<br />
The Rugby Ref<br />
<br />The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-64108000502208685732019-08-11T11:04:00.001+01:002019-08-11T11:04:22.963+01:00Scrum put in...<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Why do referees allow scrum halves to put the ball into their own second rows now</i><i><br /></i><i>when the law says he has to put the ball in straight.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>You can even see from the angle the scrum half stands at that this is exactly what he is</i><i><br /></i><i>going to do.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>If referees are not going to enforce the law what is the point of having a scrum when</i><i><br /></i><i>you could just have a play the ball as in rugby league?</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Regards,</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Don. </i> </blockquote>
Hi Don<br />
<br />
Most referees would agree with you on this. Most referees officiate at grass roots rugby where the straight put in is enforced. Don't confuse TV showbiz rugby with proper rugby as played every Saturday and Sunday by thousands of players. TV rugby is under pressure to keep the game going and minimise stoppages. <br />
<br />
The Rugby RefThe Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2898188863034991500.post-27045228097338404002019-07-29T10:11:00.001+01:002019-07-29T10:11:41.609+01:00Position of thrower's feet at a lineout<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>In the 2017 laws, the only requirement in Law 19.6 is "The player must not step into the field of play when the ball is thrown". However Law 6.B.5 (d) Exception 1 says: "When the player throwing in puts any part of either foot in the field of play the touch judge or assistant referee keeps the flag up."</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>This was never enforced - all throwers stand with feet crossing the line.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>I was therefore pleased to see that in 2018, Law 18.22 says: "The player throwing in the ball stands on the mark of touch with both feet outside the field of play . The player may not step into the field of play until the ball has been thrown." </i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Standing with a foot on the touchline means the foot (and player) is out of play. Excellent! Unfortunately Law 6.26 c. still says: "When the ball is thrown in, the assistant referee or touch judge lowers the flag, with the following exceptions:</i><i><br /></i><i>i. when the player throwing in puts any part of either foot in the field of play."</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Personally I shall continue to regard "both feet on the touchline" as legal even if the toes do overlap it.</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Peter Shortell</i></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>Gloucester & District Referees Society</i></blockquote>
<br />
Thanks for raising this Peter. <br />
<br />
The Rugby Ref is in full agreement. Feet on the line being ok would seem to be a pragmatic position to take. There are bigger fish to fry and more important battles to fight than stopping play for this.<br />
<br />
<br />The Rugby Refhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17438716958167838919noreply@blogger.com7