Head down to your Tardis and set the clock for Saturday the ninth of July, destination Suncorp Stadium. Tonight Is the Super Rugby final of 2011, and you’re going to be watching referee Bryce Lawrence.
Some of you may have noticed the spray of criticism that came out of the comments section in several News Limited publications the following day regarding the way in which the final was refereed.
Rest assured, this article won’t be joining in and ridiculing the way It was, but will be analysing the attitude a rugby union referee should have to the concept of ‘flow’. During the Super Rugby final, there were countless examples of players from both sides deliberately breaking the laws of rugby.
These included:
• Consistently being in front of the last man’s feet at the breakdown
• Consistently being offside
• Killing the ball by going off feet
• Entering the ruck from the side
• Not releasing the tackled player
• Not rolling away
Referee Bryce Lawrence let a majority of these offences go unpenalised by both teams. I’m 100 percent sure that if you where to ask Bryce why, his response would have been, “Because the game needs to flow.”
As such, the game was a bitter territorial war, each team not really going anywhere on attack, or relying on moments of individual brilliance to achieve gains in territory.
The rucks, without proper enforcement by the referee, let’s face it, were about as clean as a bunch of pigs. And so, I question whether not blowing the game up really makes it flow more.
In fact, some of the higher scoring games I have seen have had high penalty counts. Why? Read on.
The reason the teams couldn’t get anywhere on attack at times was because the opposition was constantly marching up out of the line offside, catching the ball carrier behind the gain line.
The reason no-one could get quick ball from the ruck was that no-one was rolling away.
The reason that players were caught Isolated in their own half was that no-one had to release the tackled player before going for the ball.
And this situation was much similar to the Wallabies playing the All Blacks in Auckland a month later. Same referee, same problems for the Wallabies – but the All Blacks know how to play the game with Bryce Lawrence.
Enter Wayne Barnes. Ridiculed for his handling of the 2007 quarter final (for those of you who don’t know, he was twenty metres behind a huge break by the French and didn’t see a marginally forward pass) Barnes hasn’t had the easiest road into the rugby referee’s world.
But he is the best referee going around at the moment.
What Barnes does is let the game flow. He stops teams from making the game into a scrapheap where the attacking team doesn’t go anywhere. When I see that Wayne Barnes is refereeing, I know I’m In for a premium game of rugby.
Just look at Australia versus South Africa In Bloemfontein last year. Barnes ensured that everyone was onside and obeyed the rules around the ruck zone.
As such, the players got quick ball and eight magnificent tries were scored before Kurtley Beale kicked a penalty on full-time to win the game for Australia.
Around about now, most of you are screaming, “How does that work? Wouldn’t there just be a million penalties and the score end up being 6 – 3?”
The answer ladies and gentlemen, lies in another example, this time the week before Bloemfontein, at Loftus Versfield In Pretoria. Referee Nigel Owens made it clear that players flopping on to the ball off their feet at the breakdown would not be tolerated.
If someone even lost their footing for an instant, he penalised them. The first ten minutes of this game was a try-athon, with five tries in 13 minutes.
Both teams made the advantage line easily, and when the opposition slowed the ball down they got pinged off the park and someone would usually score a try. One of the tries was even directly from a quick tap, where Habana was caught isolated, support arrived but went off its feet for an instant, referee blew for a penalty, and Kurtley Beale quick tapped for Dean Mumm to score his first and only Test try.
After around ten minutes of continuous tries and penalties for going off feet, the game settles into a great contest, whereby no one violates the rules, and it becomes rugby union at its pulsating best.
Referees who go on a blitz in the first ten minutes let the players know not to violate the rules in any way, and the players adopt this mindset.
This is how to referee the game, enforce all of the rules for ten minutes, letting the players know where you stand, and then watch as the best of a game comes out.
And that’s exactly what Wayne Barnes did on Saturday, when the Wallabies defeated the All Blacks 25–20.
Nashi
Guest
I just love that idea sixer, pity the poor front rower given three laps punishment followed by the winger, the poor bugger would probably be lapped. Still if you get carded you can sprint and get back on asap. I'd love hear the jeers as the player trotted round the ground and you can see where the player is up to as the play evolves on the field. If there's a break he can back off a little but if his team is pinned and defending he has to put in the big ones. Classic!
sixo_clock
Roar Guru
What I think or hope most fans of Rugby would like to see is a range of sin bin options for different degrees of offences. I favour the trot around the pitch type binning to the energy recovering layover on the sideline. Offenders could be sent for 1, 2 or 3 or more laps of the pitch. They can sprint it and return buggered or trot it out and spend more time away from the action. Secondly, early offences are usually of the type to test the refs mindset and having players going for laps of the oval is not something a captain would want when the other side is fresh and fired up. This will concentrate coaches and captains on penalty free efforts. The refs job is to maintain the spirit of the contest as well as the letter of the Laws and at the moment he has only 2 options. That is not enough. The lesser sinbin options will ensure the ref can penalise the individual infringements right from the off without cruelling the entire game. Spikhaza is right in asserting that when the ref puts his whistle away the scoring goes up. As long as the infringement does not affect the flow or possession then don't blow it up. Rugby needs more tries for the entertainment of the game to improve and attact or reinforce our punters faith.
AndyS
Guest
After all the comments about the ABs being offside last weekend I went back and watched the game just keeping an eye on the last feet in the ruck. I wanted to see how biased Kearn's commentary really was (as claimed by many posters). The first actually wan't to bad. Some offside but nothing out of the ordinary. The second half was incredible. Wallabies well offside in 4 rucks that I could see. The All Blacks were behind the last feet in only 3 rucks in the whole half as far as I could tell! There was a huge difference evident. I hope I wasn't being biased myself - be good if someone could do the sane thing and confirm or otherwise. My conclusion is that Horwill failed in this aspect of the game. He should have been doing one of two things. Either asking his team to take advantage of the same latitude or pointing out the front feet of the AB forwards to the ref at every ruck. Either option would have stopped the pick and drive tactics in their tracks. He needs to smarten up quickly on this or Aus is going to get bundled out by the first ref who wants to let the game 'flow'. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
soapit
Guest
i think the ref should be able to officially caution people after play has stopped. for example if a player infringes but the ref lets the game flow at the next break in play he talks to the captain and the player and gives him a caution and if he gets to three of these he goes to the bin (maybe with the proviso that the one he goes to the bin for has to be an actual blown penalty). you could do it as a team as well "ritchie/james, there was a player infringing at that last ruck, this is an official warning. two more from you guys and someone will go to the bin". best of both worlds there.
WQ
Guest
Rugby Realist, you have hit the nail on the head! The forward pass was disappointing however forward passes often get missed. The fact that Barnes missed about 8 genuine penalties in the second half was unbelievable! This flys in the face of this article completely. If Barnes was so good at enforcing the rules then what happened then? The same thing happened on Saturday night as well. I agree he blew a few early penalties to set a standard, but he was inconsistent. Watch the game and have a look, he got stuck into Richie McCaw early about not releasing the tackled player, which was fine because he was right. However, Pocock, Elsom and Faingaa did exactly the same thing in the early minutes of the Test with no penalty. I only hope that he does not Ref the All Blacks again through the World Cup.
allblackfan
Guest
What seems to be missed about Barnes performance in 2007 was that the touch judges were not allowed to talk to the refs in the playoffs. Afterwards, the touch judge in that NZ game said he saw the forward pass but was not allowed to report it to Barnes or even flag it! Agreed with what you said about French hands all over the ball. One think I like about this current team is that they seemed to have learned from 2007. Even when the ref's made a shocker and the ABs appeal to the, they are still playing to the whistle. Not playing to the whistle cost them in 2007, I think.
Rugby Realist
Guest
Interesting analysis. I also consider that referees need to make the game flow, however, not as far as to allow a team to infringe in the rucks, but choose to let play go on because a side has eventually recycled the ball.......which you also conveniently neglect to include comment on when discussing why Barnes was criticized following the 2007 quarter final. I think you will find most NZ supporters who had a problem with the Barnes performance that day could handle the missed pass (surely that is a touch judges job), but were up in arms about almost a half of rugby with French hands all over the ball, but no penalty. A good article, but you chose to focus on certain facts that helped you, and omitted others