What refereeing interpretations are you worried about this weekend

Just a thought. I've been watching the games this last few weeks and it struck me we have a differences in interpretation between North and South. I guess having split seasons and little cross over of referees means it's inevitable to some degree. In terms of the AB/France and also the Scotland/SA games struck me as the difference the rules in the rucks have been played. Presumably this hankers back to the club games.

IN NZ we've really taken on board the IRB's guidance re: the rucks. We are no doubt getting away with other things, but you notice opposition offending more than your own team. In this case we have much stricter refereeing on hands in the ruck, tackler releasing the tackled player and rolling away. If France played like that in provincial rugby or super 15 they run the risk of a penalty count. Obviously, you have to adjust to the referee and  I think we struggled in this instance. We should have played a bit more conservatively close to the ruck and committed a few more players at times.

I think the Lions may strike a similar issue this weekend. I think they are a very good side. This about adjusting to a referee. I wouldn't be surprised if they get penalised a bit at the breakdown for hands in the ruck, not releasing the tackled player. They may also get pinged for offside on the blindside of rucks. The Australians will also have their issues (no one will be surprised if their scrummaging comes under scrutiny, or if the ref looks at obstruction).

What are your fairs regarding the referreeing this weekend. What are your hopes in terms of the way he rules the game?

The scrum. The current engagement laws are useless and due for yet another tweak in September (probably another futile exercise in meddling).

Teams from all over the World are using the knowledge that early hitters will get pinged so are trying to con the ref by deliberately delaying it.

From a neutral perspective the biggest fear for the Lions series is that the refereeing becomes a talking point. With three different refs and the increased voice of the linesmen the threat of a talking point in this regard is very much real. 

I guess it comes down to knowing beforehand what a refs view of the game is. Coaches try to influence adjudication of certain things like the scrum or the breakdown but it's important the players know what to expect. They also need to be able to think on their feet when and if the situation arises. That responsibility in large part falls on the shoulders of the captain. You need a calm voice that can placate a ref at times to put him on board with your view of things.

Interesting, while watching the France v  New Zealand game I couldnt help but notice how differently Mr. Rolland interpreted the 5 Second "use it" rule compared to what we are used to in Super xv. Was I the only one that noticed it?

I didn't see the game properly Auk - just catch-up bits - the telly was on but didn't watch as such. Please talk us through your observations.

In terms of the Lions tests I think I just worry about the onus being placed on the Lions 'beasting' the Aussies at scrum time. Firstly, because the Aussie scrum is better than many think and secondly the scrum lottery could end up negating one of the Lions' perceived strengths. I hope there's a Plan B in there too if it goes that way. Having said that, it's all up to the players to adapt on the day and not annoy the ref too much. The way it is at the moment you don't quite know what to expect. I guess that's what makes it enthrallying and frustrating.

On a slightly off-topic note (and I've watched so much rugby over the last few weeks that my brain is melting) I actually saw a squint feed penalised. I think it was in the Argentina/England game. If it was that game, well done Mr Owens!

I don't buy this NH vs. SH ref interpretations issue at all.

So they say that NH and SH refs control the game differently. So what. You play to the ref.

Everyone knows the ins and outs of all tier 1 test referees these days given their are only 12 of them or so. Romain Poite for instance likes his scrums, Steve Walsh likes to be the biggest guy in the room so never try and bully him or give him an excuse. You can't push your luck with SW.

NH teams are well used to playing SH refs. I had a quick look and I saw that the following games were administered by SH refs in this years 6N.

Eng vs. Fra
Sco vs. Ita
Sco vs. Wal
Ire vs. Fra
Wal vs. Eng

and thats just in the 6N.

Its the same for the SH teams playing NH refs. They will have the same problems etc.

Sure NH domestic rugby is controlled by NH refs and SH domestic rugby likewise... but its not an excuse. You play to the ref.

Grey Tiger,m rolland waits 5 seconds then says use it then waits another 5 seconds, refs like Jackson and Peyper would have awarded a scrum to the other side. as it was it didnt matter as the ones who wanted to slow it down were France, and the ABs could have waited all day (they were at all times ahead on the scorboard) and just used the time to reestablish the defesive line.

Cyril wrote:I actually saw a squint feed penalised. I think it was in the Argentina/England game. If it was that game, well done Mr Owens!

The squint feed is being hailed as soon to be a thing of the past.
I foresee a situation that the ball is fed straight in the first minute against two equal packs and there it stays until the ref blows for half time.
Front rows will have to think of a new and creative way to get the ball to their back row.

The scrum. I can see the Lions only ever getting free kicks for Aussie infringements in the scrum.

I noticed that too Laurie. A frantic Use It cry from the ref and an ensuing relaxed clearing of the ball as in your own free time think about clearing the ball in the next short while but no rush. When you're good and ready type attitude. That could be a problem for Phillips who may not be accustomed to such urgency in this aspect. Not a criticism of his delivery but what he might be used to with some refs.

Whew thats a relief Kia, (I thought I might of been the only one that noticed it) its when I saw the title of this thread that I remembered it.

Isn't the new law that the ref calls 'use it' and allows 5sec for the ball to be gone? That's the way I understand it.

Well it depends on whether hes waited five seconds before calling use it

Auk wrote:Well it depends on whether hes waited five seconds before calling use it

Precisely. Do SH have time machines at their disposal? The law was put in place to prevent excessive loitering in the ruck/maul. The ref calls 'use it' for the 5sec clock to start.

How do SH refs interpret the law differently? I very rarely watch non-Jeff/Rabo league games other than internationals.

What the main difference here is that the use it is called at moment "the ball becomes available', it may not be actually out of the ruck to the point where the defending team can attack the ball, but the half back can play it.

 What Rolland was doing was waiting well after the ball became available before he called use it, then not actually calling any up with the whistle. Like I said above it didnt have any affect on the match, but it was definitely different to what weve been playing down here in Super XV.

The TMO - whose the TMO for the lions matches ? Shane Warne ?

auk wrote:What Rolland was doing was waiting well after the ball became available before he called use it, then not actually calling any up with the whistle. Like I said above it didnt have any affect on the match, but it was definitely different to what weve been playing down here in Super

Tbh auk, it was Rolland who in some ways is like Walsh - a prima-donna.

Oh just how much would I love professional refs to be hauled up in front of the assembled journos to explain their decisions in press conferences?

Who - Stephen Jones interrogating a ref?

As good a comedy as any, I suppose.

"Allain, is it true you like the sound of your own voice?"

Why is it that TMO's can be from one of the same countries as the players?

Refs don't administer the games involving their home country... why should TMO's be allowed to?
The TMO on the Scotland vs SA game was trying to influence the game all the time... when the ref asked him to confirm Scotts 2nd try he highlighted something which the ref didn't ask and tried to state obstruction was called 1 phase back. The ref ignored him and gave the try.

The TMO was a Saffa no?

Well it would be different. Seeing Stuart Barnes having to emerge out of the ref's arse hole do deliver a caustic question on YouTube might go viral.

SecretFly wrote:Who - Stephen Jones interrogating a ref?

As good a comedy as any, I suppose.

"Allain, is it true you like the sound of your own voice?"

Then again, there may be some educational benefit as well, Stephen Jones might learn something.

fa:

Good point about the neutral TMOs, the widened powers do offer some opportunity for mischief.