There are a number of areas of refereeing in rugby union that are letting down the game.
I don’t believe any of these are drastic issues, or difficult to fix, but with a small amount of housekeeping these updates could seriously add to the spectacle of the game.
I am not proposing law changes in this article. This is simply an appeal for the rules to be adjudicated correctly, or for a particular interpretation to be tidied up.
Disclaimer: I play with a number seven on my back, so obviously I follow rules with great integrity.
1. Letting the halfback take an age with the ball in the ruck
The referees invariably give the scrumhalf enough time with the ball to take it out on a date. Wine and dine it in style. Player and ball have a three-course meal with dessert, a lovely walk along the waterfront, before a cheeky kiss at the doorstep at home. “Oh, now if you don’t mind passing that ball from the ruck please.”
Even with a clean and fast ruck the referee doesn’t mind if three or four forwards meander over to create a chain while the half rolls the ball out with his foot or claws it and places it exactly where he wants it. The call of “use it” is as useful as an ashtray on a motorcycle as the halfback doesn’t even react to this call. They feign deafness and proceed to take their sweet time courting the ball with dreamy innocence.
This issue slows the game down, it diminishes the challenge for the ball and doesn’t add anything of positive substance to the contest. The chains that forwards make to protect the halfback look terrible, and these players are not seriously a part of the ruck. However if the halfback is given less time to clear the ball the forwards won’t have time to create this abhorrence.
(Photo by Anthony Au-Yeung/Getty Images)
And it’s such an easy fix. The law doesn’t need to be changed, it just needs to be adjudicated clearly and a less amount of time given to the number nine.
2. Letting the halfback fake the pass
Sorry to keep hating on you little blokes, but this is a complete misuse of a rule. It’s plain and simple, it is illegal for the man at the base of the ruck to fake the pass. No one is throwing huge dummies, but subliminal movements, which indicate the beginning of a pass are definitely being carried out. Even TJ Perenara, unarguably the most honest and law-abiding player in the game, does this just about every game, with other players also using this sham pass recently.
This was a law that seemed to be clearly called out in the past, but it seems the little shoulder fakes or head movements that make an opposing player believe the ball has exited to the ruck are now being given more leniency. This may not seem like a big issue, but what if an attacking team draws a penalty from an overzealous defender being called offside due to its use, leading to points from a penalty or ensuing try. Although I haven’t seen this situation yet, if it is not nipped in the bud it could affect the outcome of an important match.
Again, easy fix. Just don’t allow any leniency here.
(Photo by Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
3. Bringing back scrum advantages after a long play
Hypothetical situation: the attacking team has the ball inside their opposition’s 22, the attacking team knocks on and the defensive team regather. Scrum advantage to the defenders. They control the ball and exit their 22 cleanly with a nice exit kick taking play out to 45 metres.
In this instance I have noticed sometimes the referees (not always) taking the play back to the scrum inside the 22. This is a massive waste of time as nine times out of ten the defending team who now have the ball will kick to touch if they win the scrum. I would argue they have less advantage because they have to win the scrum first.
Another simple fix.
4. Not awarding dominant scrums
The scrum is an incredibly technical area, and one that probably raises the most concerns over referee interpretation. Indeed, it does seem that sometimes the referee makes decisions that are vaguely justified.
This is inevitable in the game. Human error is a real thing and is something that can never be eradicated from the game completely. Yet it appears as though with some referees, they are referring to their astrological birth chart, or spent tea leaves to help make their decision.
So why then, with this occasional ambiguity, when an attacking team clearly has the dominance and is going forward, does the referee call it back because the front rows have popped up? When it’s obvious who has the dominance it seems very easy for the referee to make a decision that few would complain about.
I am very aware that there are a plethora of laws around the scrum that can mitigate a dominant scrum’s right to a penalty. A team going forward is not always in the right. Yet when there have already been several scrum resets and an attacking team has the clear dominance and movement towards the attacking end, do referees who seem to understand little about scrum technicalities not award a penalty?
Very fixable. Take the pressure off yourself, mate, and make the call.
(Photo by Darrian Traynor/Getty Images)
5. Not allowing fake injuries
This is not exactly a law, and it doesn’t particularly need to be written down as one, but seeing players stay down when hit late or during possible obstructions is making this beautiful game more like the round-ball code of football. And I mean this in a negative sense. Acting should be reserved for movies, not the sporting arena.
I hope that referees eradicate this ugly aspect, which is slowly becoming more prominent in our game. The same way that players are not supposed to tell the the referee how to manage the game, players should not be allowed to influence a referee to make a decision based on their staying on the ground.
This one may be hard to adjudicate on as it is not always clear cut, and we certainly don’t want to be risking injuries by accusing a player of faking when he is not. Yet often it is very clear cut. A player gets hit late, they lay prone on the ground like a five-day-old corpse, then once they hear the magical whistle they’re up on their feet and bounding around like Bambi after a triple latte. It looks pathetic.
What’s worse is they are reducing the amount of care that should be shown to genuinely injured players. If rugby teams are given more and more free rein to bung on injuries, it will be harder to take serious action or differentiate between real and fake issues.
This doesn’t need to be a law because the players should just be better at this. We want to see our players competing with integrity. A bit of gamesmanship is always a good part of the game, but faking an injury is downright lame.
Summary
The laws have been updated a lot in recent years, and many of them for good reasons. Some of the new laws being trialled in the Super Rugby Aotearoa and Super Rugby AU competitions are there to create a faster and more attacking display, or to create a genuine competition.
The recent tightness brought in around head high or dangerous collisions was annoying at first, but now that everyone is used to it there are very few complaints about decisions in this area. And even better, the players are safer.
Any rule updates that allow the game to speed up, be a more exciting spectacle or to keep players healthier is a great thing, yet we mustn’t forget the existing laws and why they are there.
I believe that rugby is one of the best refereed games on the planet.
I hope that it continues down this path.
Rugby Geek
Roar Rookie
PK refs are schooled with Advantage being a mix of Choice, the team get to choose the way they want to play, Opportunity to accrue their advantage or not and Place ie the location on the field and tactical position( they get the best of both worlds). All these options make Advantage a key issue of the game and if reffed well the game becomes spectacular!
Rugby Geek
Roar Rookie
the GMG for Refs is a nominal 4-5 seconds which is an eternity! Usually a strong bark of "USE it!!" from the ref and it's gone in 2-3.
Armchair Halfback
Roar Rookie
How an AFL style interchange bench? Could use it when a prop needs to change his contact lenses and the out half needs his hairbrush.. ;)
Busted Fullback
Roar Rookie
Congrats RS69. I'm sure it takes some guts to put your thoughts out there the first time. Fake injuries. I hate them. I played in the day, 70's, when as a 15 you could easily be hit as you jumped in the air for the high ball, but you got up and played on. Here's my solution. If a player is hit so that play is stopped to attend to him, then s/he should be taken from the field and assessed by a health professional. Game continues without substitution until health pro can deliver his verdict. That verdict, for a genuine injury or not, will be made during the next passage of play so that the injured player's team will be undermanned for a minimum amount of time. It may seem a little harsh for a genuine injury, but I don't think coaches will take too kindly to being one player down for the sake of milking a penalty. We want players playing the game, not nominating for an Oscar. I think it might also reduce those "late" tackle penalty yellow cards like Tupou's against the Tahs. Tupou wasn't smart, but my Grandma could have taken that hit.
Busted Fullback
Roar Rookie
Unless wildly crooked, the throw-in for lineout seems to be let go when the defending team does not compete for the ball. The scrum law says both hookers should strike for the ball, but when was the last time you saw that? Similar attitude to the scrum as lineout from the refs? Sadly though, it seems to me that scrums have become penalty factories, rather than competitive re-starts to the game which was, and I believe should always be, the intention. You should not be penalised because an opponent dominates you in a situation (the scrum). Free kick at the most.
soapit
Roar Guru
id still allow a scrum off the free kick, if a team has a strength let them use it. but if a team wants to get moving they should be able to. i also think time off will just give them more reason to catch their breath making it harder to attack in general.
soapit
Roar Guru
1. Letting the halfback take an age with the ball in the ruck. dont have a problem with this. the 'use it' rule is really only for times when there is a specific advantage to running the clock down (ie before half and full time) outside this let them take their time. it not the referees job to improve the style of a teams play or the spectacle while the ball is live. 2. Letting the halfback fake the pass to me id rather fully allow the dummy. gives the attack an extra split second. we've seen what pushing the offside back a fraction has done, allowing dummies would do the same 3. Bringing back scrum advantages after a long play. this one i agree with. any kick off a static ruck under knock on advantage should be pretty much play on 4. Not awarding dominant scrums. rewarding dominance regardless of any rules will lead to dangerous play and potentially catastrophic injuries. 5. Not allowing fake injuries havent noticed this as an issue. would need to be a fair bit worse to warrant a change
JD Kiwi
Roar Rookie
Excellent article RS. The first three especially would greatly enhance the game and reduce half back posing. Win win!
Ankle-tapped Waterboy
Guest
I agree about putting the ball in straight for a contest. It's refereed in lineouts but not in scrums and I've never understood why for one and not the other. Sometimes the refs will announce a focus on straight put-ins to the scrum. The attention lasts just long enough to create a sense of nostalgia and then come Week 2 of the competition it's all forgotten. Anyway, Week 1 of Super Rugby 2018 I clearly saw a straight put-in, and I hope to see one again sometime before I die.
In brief
Guest
Five metres out is probably one time teams have a good reason to exert dominance. However, playing devil's advocate, if the Red's scrum was stronger, which team caused the collapse? If it was the Reds forcing the collapse through exerting dominance, than under the laws you could penalise them for 'dangerous play'.
The Late News
Roar Rookie
I guess so. Great first up article.
Rubbish Surf 69
Roar Rookie
Couple of things Dave: Pretty sure the way that refs are supposed to police the halfback clearing the ball from the ruck is to call "ball is out" once they've taken too long. Don't quote me on that though. However, whether or not I'm right, I also think it's the best way to deal with it as there's no stoppage in play and it will encourage the halves to clear quicker rather than to possibly get smashed by that rabid flanker staring at them from five feet away. Secondly, I definitely should have been more clear in the article. I definitely would prefer more general play than penalties give. If the ball is available I would always prefer it to be used rather than the whistle being blown. I love the scrum, I want to see big and fair battles, but if the referee can't make a decision and the ball is repeatedly not coming out I think there are times when they could be quicker to adjudicate.
Rubbish Surf 69
Roar Rookie
It's always Rubbish from me mate!
Rubbish Surf 69
Roar Rookie
Thanks RG for the ref's perspective, great info! I'd be very interested to know how you police the length of time given to the half to clear the ball at the back of rucks?
Butcher
Roar Rookie
Great article, Would like to add, that Aussie rugby does not need law changes. only better skills. the one law I would look at changing is no place kicks, all drop goals, quicker and more skilful (not a fan of the Mark, but this can go either way). I would like build on the faking of injuries, also the water boys (or coach) should not be allowed on the field, if they need water, go to the sideline like soccer.
DaveJ
Roar Rookie
Good points, especially about the call to “use it”. But is this something the refs can actually enforce? Can they give a short-arm or call a scrum if the halfback doesn’t comply? I ask through ignorance. It would almost make it worse if they could pack scrums after this. Should have it a short arm with no option for a scrum for this sort of thing. On the point about scrum dominance, I disagree slightly. Rugby needs to have scrums as a platform, not an end in themselves where penalties are awarded all the time, and worse where there are kicks at goal just because one prop gets pushed back or slips over. It’s one of the game’s main disadvantages as a spectacle.
The Late News
Roar Rookie
Disclaimer, useful as an ashtray on a motorcycle, spent tea leaves, Bambi after a triple latte! Cool first up article RS69. A load of Rubbish perhaps??
Rugby Geek
Roar Rookie
RS69, Congrats on your post. Never easy with this crowd of Roarers! Scrums are something of a love affair of mine both as a ref and coach. It's too true that elite ref often doesn't get into wtf is actually happening and believe much of what's talked without actually knowing. One fact is coordinating 16 exhausted men to do anything is tough but to perform the technical trick of a legit scrum is a test. Then put the layer of competition of opposite positions on it and flavour it with scrum coaches bag of tricks on how to get an advantage legal or not. (this included dumping FR for a reset to get a better position on bind) Our refs are always in for a tricky time. But what they do not do at the elite level is force responsibility onto the attacking hooker (non-feed) for the gap, offset and level which accounts for clear responsibility for PK's for the scrum set up an issue which causes many a scrum collapse. Couple this with a ref focus on dangerous play (ie no lifting or losing footings) will cause props to be on height, staying flat and pushing straight. The scrum will become a fairer competition. Time periods for the scrum set is good but player welfare is also a consideration. Scrums are intensely technical and lots can go wrong. But I would always insist on keeping resets to a minimum. If a team wants to use their scrum as weapon (Syd Uni default position) then I believe they have the right to do so. So allow penalties and YC's but keep it legal and safe.
Purdo
Roar Rookie
HN: I don't want to see a short or long arm penalty on every scrum. What I want to see is the dominant scrummaging team controlling the ball, and getting it out of the scrum to use as they've decided is best. I want the ball to be won and used from each scrum, but there will sometimes need to be penalties if teams infringe the laws. I want scrums to be real competitions for the ball. There should be an advantage to having the put in and loose head, but I think the ball should be put in straight, which might mean that a good pack can win more often against the head. I would be happy with that. So I think putting the ball in straight is a law that should actually be policed.
Rubbish Surf 69
Roar Rookie
Thanks Mz. That’s what we want right? Quick ruck speed and the chance to smash the halfback (that’s the openside in me again ????) A little bit of time to set up doesn’t really worry me, but they are given just a ridiculous amount of time, and really I can’t see a benefit to the spectacle of the game from this.