Law Discussion: That said
We had two finals over the weekend, Super 14 and Guinness Premiership. There are some things to talk about.
We are also looking to try and figure how the sin bin/cooler and yellow and red cards were introduced into rugby. Any input would be gratefully received and could be sent to pauld@365digital.co.za.
Rugby football produces lots of words. Commentators talk, journalists write, referees talk, players talk, coaches talk. A sung le match can produce screeds of things said.
Those who have to talk on the spur of the moment have the toughest time – commentators, referees and -players. Their words are often said under pressure, and there is no correction possible before they are in the ears of the public.
It does seem that more is most in rugby football. More is most for commentators as their viewers can see what is going on. But when they pronounce on laws and refereeing, one would like them to be right. If they cannot be right, then they are better not saying anything.
More is most for referees as well. Referees who are succinct and to the point are best. They get listened to. There is no debate – men like Chris White, Jonathan Kaplan and Lyndon Bray. The worst from a viewer’s point of view is the one who jabbers from start to finish. That spoils watching, which is not the point of the exercise.
The written word also needs care. It’s not spur of the moment stuff.
After the Super 10 Final it was astonishing to hear criticism of the referee. All Out Rugby spoke, cryptically, about dubious decisions.
But then SARU’s own website had a go when it speaks about Wyatt Crockett’s non-try. The movement that led to the try was a long one sweeping down the field from left to right. Crockett was delighted.
SARU’s rugby site then says:
“It was a telling riposte which would have made the score 19-12 with Dan Carter’s conversion to come but the Christchurch crowd’s delight turned to puzzlement as South African referee Mark Lawrence, after the apparent intervention of one of his assistants, called play back because of a previous infringement.
“Although the cause of the transgression was not satisfactorily cleared up, as it had obviously occurred way off the ball, the upshot was that the try was cancelled and that Crusaders lock Brad Thorn was yellow-carded — apparently for having thrown a punch.
“It was not clear (from television) which of the touch judges, Craig Joubert or Cobus Wessels, had called Lawrence’s attention to the infringement, as he had allowed the sequence of play which led to the try, or whether it was the cause of Beale’s injury, but it had a huge impact with 25 minutes left to play.”
The last paragraph is odd. It is perfectly clear from the television that Mark Lawrence talks to Cobus Wessels. Wessels can just be heard to say that it was a punch to the face. Lawrence suggests a yellow card and Wessels agrees. All of this is plain for all to see. There is no need for “apparently” and no need to wonder which assistant referee called the referee’s attention to the incident.
The television broadcast could not find the incident because it was well behind play but during play. A punch of that kind needs attention – the sort of attention which Lawrence correctly gave it.
After the match, while the players were milling around waiting for the presentations, Thorn came to Lawrence and apologised, saying that he had lost it momentarily.
There is another bit that is puzzling: “The Waratahs were determined to contest aggressively at the breakdown and seemed to have found an ally in referee Lawrence who frequently allowed them to push the envelope; especially Phil Waugh. However, the pressure of the Crusaders was so forceful that the Tahs were forced to take greater risks and they were eventually ticked off by Lawrence — going as far as to describe one instance of killing the ball as ‘cheating’.”
Contesting the breakdown aggressively is a good thing to do. Slowing the ball down can be done legally by contesting the breakdown aggressively.
How Lawrence was an ally is not clear.
In the first half an hour of the first half Lawrence free-kicked the Waratahs five times at tackles (to the three of the Crusaders). Then when Tatafu Polota-Nau clearly infringed at the tackle he spoke to Phil Waugh, the Waratahs’ captain in Polota-Nau’s presence. Then he said: “There’s a difference between contesting and cheating. That’s cheating.”
It was the only penalty at a tackle in the match though there would be more free kicks – two against the Waratahs and four against the Crusaders.
It was not a match of many sanctions. The penalty count was 5-1 in favour of the Crusaders.
The match was fast and furious which suggests that the slowing down was not all that obvious, and the referee came in fro much praise afterwards from people in high places in the refereeing world.
The match statistics suggest that the ball was in play more than in any Super Final since 2000. Much of the credit for that was given to the way Lawrence refereed the tackle.
