When did rugby refs become assistant coaches?

[DJ...]

This is really starting to annoy me now. Referees seeing a player in an offside position for example who is clearly interfering with play, either directly or indirectly. He will then shout at the player to get back - why!!!?? Just penalise him already man!!!

A player in an off-side position can indirectly interfere with the dynamics of play by closing gaps that might have been there, or by changing the half-back's decision, or changing a strategy of the opponents, or etc etc.

Sure, the game must flow and fewer penalties helps in this respect, but it is becoming an increasing and unhealthy trend this IMO. It also happens at the scrums regarding the binding of the props, where a clearly illegal bind is made and the ref merely resets the scrum!

Please refs, do your bloody jobs and blow the infringements instead of coaching the players. The more we are blown at a local level, the fewer times we will make the same mistakes at an international one...

 

[Devill]

This is really starting to annoy me now. Referees seeing a player in an offside position for example who is clearly interfering with play, either directly or indirectly. He will then shout at the player to get back - why!!!?? Just penalise him already man!!!

Well yes 315 scrums and 198 freekicks will not hamper the flow of the game at all

They also warn both sides so it is fair.

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

Of course, from a Sharks perspective, I'd point out that the ref will always tell the opposing teams players to 'Get back' but when we do it, he'll blow instantly (happened twice in the game just now in fact).

 

[DJ...]

Well yes 315 scrums and 198 freekicks will not hamper the flow of the game at all

They also warn both sides so it is fair.

It is against the bloody laws and blowing it will result in a positive change for South African rugby. Look at the bigger picture. And your example is totally out of the ball park. I heard the ref tell the cheetahs this about 6 times during the course of play. If that means that it is 6 fewer potential penalties conceded moving forward then I am all for it.

I wasn't questioning whether it is fair or not though - I am questioning why the ref thinks it is his job to actively interfere with play, and not call the game as he should be.

 

[DJ...]

Another one is hands in the ruck. Refs calling for players to leave the ball. Well if he has hands in the ruck which is illegally slowing the ball down (and allows the opposition to regroup defencively), then blow him FFS!!!

 

[Smurfatefrog]

I agree, these guys are professionals & (should) know the laws, if they break them then penalise them

 

[HavocXphere]

Well...we could get the metro police to act as refs. Then every damn thing will get penalized.

 

[DJ...]

Well...we could get the metro police to act as refs. Then every damn thing will get penalized.

Not feasible. Some of the teams like The Valke could never afford the bribes.

"Hands in the ruck!!!!! That'll be 500 bucks and a coke"

 

[Morgoth]

Not feasible. Some of the teams like The Valke could never afford the bribes.

"Hands in the ruck!!!!! That'll be 500 bucks and a coke"

that's what they said about hansie!

 

[Devill]

Of course, from a Sharks perspective, I'd point out that the ref will always tell the opposing teams players to 'Get back' but when we do it, he'll blow instantly (happened twice in the game just now in fact).

It is against the bloody laws and blowing it will result in a positive change for South African rugby. Look at the bigger picture. And your example is totally out of the ball park. I heard the ref tell the cheetahs this about 6 times during the course of play. If that means that it is 6 fewer potential penalties conceded moving forward then I am all for it.

I wasn't questioning whether it is fair or not though - I am questioning why the ref thinks it is his job to actively interfere with play, and not call the game as he should be.

DJ look carefully at the diffrence between someone that is 1)standing offside but has no direct effect on the game, 2)someone that is standing offside and might have an effect on the game and 3)someone standing offside and is having an effect on the game.

The ref will warn nr1 just to remind him, which contributes to the flow of the games. Also you will hear the ref saying roll away tackler...that is to tell the player his time us up to roll away if he then makes no effort he must be penalized.

The ref will also warn nr 2 and if he does not comply almost instantly then the reff should penalize the offending player, which is fair because lets say the Sharks are on the attack and the ref tells a bulls player:" HAnds off blue" at the break down, that lets the bulls player know that a ruck has been formed in the refs opinion. (Some refs differ considerably on some finer points about a lot of rules). Now if the ref warns the bulls player and he lets go it is to the advantage of the sharks (in 95% of the cases) to then be able to keep on playing as oppose to having to stop play and get a free kick BECAUSE this will give the bulls time to reform their deffensive lines!

Nr 3 should always be penalized as soon as it is turning into an advantage for the defending team, and if the bulls player has hand in the ruck and the sharks manages to get it back then the sharks should have advantage.

DJ the reffs talk a lot because they interpret some rules diffrently, if you would really like to know more about these things i will pm you the nr of a reff that is currently part of the new plans to train SA rugby reffs from high school level upwards so that there is less difference (less in the sence of less wider interp) in the interptation of the rules.

Also you will always be a little bias towards your own team, deal with it

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

one can deal with the bias thing but some refs don't 'like' certain teams ....... fact

 

[Devill]

one can deal with the bias thing but some refs don't 'like' certain teams ....... fact

Nope they just interpret the rules diffrent and the style of play by certain teams makes it seem like the reff doesn't like them (except the lions, nobody really like them )

For instance the bulls are more physical thus some reffs will penalize them more for coming into the ruck a bit hard and then going of their feet... others will not penalize them because if you come into the ruck and you are on your feet you are ok.

The WP play a more running game and I have seen reffs penalize them for obstructive running because of the lines they run, but I have also seen some reffs not penalizing it because they feel the dummy runners are far enough away from the real receiver.

And so we can cont. to name certain playing styles that will in some reff's eyes be unlawful while some others will mearly keep a close eye

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

granted ...... but, I'm talking about attitude towards teams, not the interpretation of the laws. It's the attitude that let's you see what a particular ref thinks about a particular team.

 

[Devill]

granted ...... but, I'm talking about attitude towards teams, not the interpretation of the laws. It's the attitude that let's you see what a particular ref thinks about a particular team.

Lol, I really do not believe these guys go out thinking "yeah I can really **** over the sharks/bulls/lions/WP/cheethas today"

Like I said some people see thing differently.

Also they can not afford to be bias towards a team because it will cost them their jobs.

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

hmmmm ........ you a ref?

 

[Devill]

hmmmm ........ you a ref?

No but I know a few

Also my GF dad is one and even though he is a HUGE bulls and Springbok supporter he will critisize the reff's call when it is wrong even if the call favoured his team...and this is just watching the game at home on TV or in the Box.

So I really doubt that he will favour any team when his is in charge of the game

But yes reffs also make mistakes, some just more often (and bigger) than others

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

aaah, so you have a vested interest in sticking up for the bastards eh .........

 

[Devill]

aaah, so you have a vested interest in sticking up for the bastards eh .........

LOL

 

[DJ...]

Today was another prime example of the ref coaching Wales at the breakdown, while penalising SA for the exact same infringements and going as far as too send Fourie to the sin bin - FFS! This might be more of a case of ref bias or being totally fscking useless, but it was again the same infringements as I brought up in this thread.

I lost count of the number of times the ref told the Welsh "no hands". He hardly told SA that because he penalised us on the spot for it! They even went on to turn over rucks AFTER the ref called no hands. WTF!? Useless twat! Besides the fact that the majority of the hands in the ruck issues against SA were in fact perfectly legal (ie: tackler on his feet)!!! And let's forget the fact that I didn't once see Wales in a defensive position BEHIND the last man's feet. Nor did they enter through the gate at many breakdowns.

FSCKING USELESS REF!!!!!