Should Refs apply zero tolerance?

If the Laws of the game were refereed to the letter I believe we would, after a painful hiatus, have a much quicker game.

We see a lot of stuff that is let go, arguably on teh context of letting the game flow. However I reckon if refs started to penalise every offense, teams would be forced to start playing to the law which would give us a better game.

I would start with the scrum - no early pushing, prompt/straight put in would give us a contest and remove any number of reset scrums.
Breakdown - first player to commit an offence is pinged.
Offside - TJs to officiate on.

etc etc

Strict application of the Laws and early use of yellow cards would be beneficial to teh game.

initially i thought, yes.

however. i saw a few early engagements at scrum over the weekend but a few times both packs engaged at the same time, and near enough to the command 'engage' as damn it. i think refs should let this go. no advantage has been unfairly won and the game can be played.

the tiptackle is a good case. after warburtons card it seemed every pro12 ref wanted to give a card for a tiptackle-no one gave a red though. if we employed a zero tollerance for tiptackles, going by the letter of the law rather than the spirit, then how long before tackled players are sticking their legs in the air in an attempt to win a penalty, and a card for the opposition. we would be in a situation where we would have to display zero tollerance for gamesmanship too.

there are problems with reffing the game but i dont think pinging every player for every infraction of the law is the way to go. sometimes we need to be a bit broadminded, something rugbyplayers and fans are pretty good at.

To be honest I don't mind minor stuff being ignored if it has no direct bearing on the game...

i.e. the 3 on 1 overlap and the last pass is 'flat' if there was no defender there to stop it and it had no real bearing on the outcome then it should be let go.

Again you see players get pinged for a technical offside when they are half a mile from play and have no involvement in the move... why?

But I do understand your point... zero tolerance would level the playing field but to bring a halt to play for every offence would be dangerous ground.... getting into NFL territory here with dozens of officials watching everything and 'flags on the play' with the end result of a 80 minute match taking 4 hours to play.

It may be worth the pain for a year or two if it truly cut out all the shanannigans but not convinced.

The problem is - the touch judges.

A ref will give in the side if it happens infront of him.

If it happens around the other side of the ruck, then it's up to the touch judge to spot it. 9 times out of 10 the 2nd and 3rd officials will NOT stop the game, yet the 10,000 people in the crowd have just seen the opposition team get away with something that their team got punished for 2 minutes ago.

yes, chunky. the touch judges.

the ref should use his assistants more at scrumtime, and maybe the ref can ask the tmo to back or dispute any decision given by an assistant

LT

First few weeks we'd be playing half the game with 9 v 8 because of the numbe of cards that would be given out - would certainly speed things up, but perhaps might spoil the game as a spectacle.

To be honest, I don't think you can play the game to the Laes as written - just take the tackle and formation of a ruck:
Tackled player must be held on the ground for the tackle to be made, but the tackler must release immediately .
Tackled player is allowed to place the ball in any position he wants, but must do this immediately also.

Contradictory (if they are able to handle the ball, it is not a ruck...):
Players must not handle the ball in a ruck except after a tackle if they are on their feet and
have their hands on the ball before the ruck is formed.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Here's one that I don't think gets applied:
'All players forming, joining or taking part in a ruck must have their heads and shoulders no
lower than their hips.
Sanction: Free Kick'

If the referee penalized every offence, then no team would bother putting anybody into the breakdown. They'd all just fan out across the field to defend, making it even harder to score tries.

I feel that refs are often contributing to the scrum problems by taking an inordinate length of time to get the packs engaged.

I think you are right to some extent - i also would like to see 5 officials to make sure nothing is missed

You can contest a breakdown legally.

An aeroplane, designed to carry hundreds of people in safety at close to 40,000 feet has allowable tolerances...and all because everyone believes that in a real world, zero tolerance is unachievable.

But for argument's sake, let's suggest the impossible is possible with the right rules, regulations and downright committment from the authorities to stamp all the wrongdoing out. Well, we all remember a moment in time when what one set of fans have seen as a blatant infringement, perfectly viewable in HD playback, was seen by another set of fans as perfectly legal as evidenced in HD playback....! As long as fans exist, rugby and all sport will remain imperfectly beautiful.

Zero tolerance is unachievable because the application of the Laws has to be subject to the referee's interpretation. How wide is the "gate" at the back of a ruck?!

More defined Laws that need less interpretation would certainly offer more chance of consistency.

In response to the call about the use of the touch judges above, i would say that I am in agreement, I have always advocated their importance and the referees lack of teamwork in adjudicating the game.

But i have noticed the communication from touch judges far more, in recent games since the RWC.

I guess there is a gradual progression of law development will continue with verve now that the RWC cycle kicks in again. I hope that the laws are less open to interpretation. The game works for me on the whole at the moment as a fan, not a playing fan. I am also glad that the game is refereed between the North and Southern Hemisphere with more cohesion than we have ever seen before.

It is consistency between referees and between games that is my core issue. I know that a referee and his team can not perfectly call a game. That it is inhuman to be without mistake.

But the IRB could contrive to make the game easier for referees to call.

If I'm honest I'm thinking of watching more league. Never thought it was as good but I'm getting a bit sick of union. I don't know if it's getting worse or my tolerance of it is slipping. Every game seems to have a different interpretation of the ruck, scrums deliberately collapsed to con the ref into giving penalties, loads of forwards passes misses/ignored in ever game, the definition of a forward pass isn't even properly defined, blocking seem to be involved in most set move line breaks.

As I said it may just be me noticing it more but I find it really boring.

EDIT: Oh and I loved Nigel Owen's calling at the scrum in whatever game he was reffing. Crouch, touch [players engage], pause,engage (the last two spoken very quickly after the ball had been put in)

Sure referees have very little discretion when it comes to foul play and by and large they are competent in this area.
However I am not convinced that zero tolerance when it comes to general play would lead to a better game,I have no problems with half backs not feeding the scrum straight,its been years since a team won a "tighthead" via the hookers strike/heal/rake.What is described as a tighthead these days is as a result of a team having the better hit and push.