Bismarck bleeding and the timekeeping

In the programme All Out Rugby on South African television it was stated that the referee had made a bad decision when Bismarck du Plessis was not allowed onto the field after he had gone off bleeding from a cut above his right eye. Was it a bad decision?

Du Plessis of the Sharks bled from a cut over the eye. He went off to get attention and then came to the touch-line wanting to come back on. The referee said that he could not come back on. There was a debate on the touch-line in which some of the Sharks management were obviously upset that Du Plessis was not allowed back on.

It is difficult to give exact times from the television, but as near as possible we give a programme of events. The claim is that Du Plessis had been off for 11 minutes when he presented himself for readmission and that this confirmed to the 15-minute allowance for bleeding players.

The timetable looks roughly like this:

14 minutes 54 seconds: Du Plessis and Keegan Daniels bang heads at a tackle. Du Plessis reels back holding his eye. Medical staff come onto the field and attend to him. Play goes on for some time and does not stop till BJ Botha has scored a try.

16 minutes 30 seconds: Botha scores a try. He plunges over from a tackle/ruck on the Lions line in which Du Plessis was involved. When Du Plessis got involved, it was obvious that his eyebrow was bloodied.

Rory Kockott kicks the conversion and the Lions kick the kick-off out on the full.

18 minutes 49 seconds: The referee sets a scrum and Craig Burden is there to take up the hooking position in Du Plessis’s place.

One can assume that between 16 minutes 30 and 18 minutes 49 Du Plessis left the field.

30 minutes 19 seconds Du Plessis is shown at the touch-line ready to come on. There is a stoppage at this stage and the Lions are about to kick for touch. Because there is a stoppage it is a suitable time for Du Plessis to return to the field. The referee tells him that he may not return.

The times we have given are the times as they appear on the television clock. Even if Du Plessis had gone off exactly when Botha scored he had till 33 minutes 40 before 15 minutes was up on the clock.

The argument is that when he presented himself for readmission he was within a minute of the 15 minutes allowed him.

That is why the decision has been called a wrong one.

But it is not as simple as that.

Let’s start with law and an important little word in brackets.

Law 3.10 10 TEMPORARY REPLACEMENT

(a) When a player leaves the field to have bleeding controlled and/or have an open wound covered, that player may be temporarily replaced. If the player who has been temporarily replaced does not return to the field-of-play within 15 minutes (actual time) of leaving the playing area, the replacement becomes permanent and the replaced player must not return to the field-of-play.

The important little word is actual.

The time that appears on the television set is playing time, not actual time. When the referee calls Time, the clock is stopped. While Du Plessis was off there were three stoppages, three incidents when time was off.

The first was at the first scrum after Ross Geldenhuys had been sent to the sin bin. Time was needed to allow JC Janse van Rensburg to come on into the front row and Joe van Niekerk to go off. Then time was needed to attend to hooker Willie Wepener’s thumb which was strapped.

The second was a short one while a player tied a lace before a scrum.

The third was a long one. First Ross Geldenhuys was allowed back onto the field after being in the sin bin and he was spoken to. Then there was delay for an injury.

Those were the obvious stoppages when the referee called time off.

He called time off because those stoppages were not a part of playing time and so not recorded on the television clock. But that time was a part of actual time.

There is reasoning behind this. The temporary replacement for bleeding is to give time for a minor injury to be attended to – partly for the sake of the other players in days when the possibility of contaminated blood is a worry. It was reckoned that 15 minutes would be enough to get the bleeding stopped and cleaned up in the case of a minor injury. Longer than 15 minutes suggests a more serious injury in which case it would be in the player’s interests not to play on.

Du Plessis had an arch of stitches over his eyebrow. For all anybody knows it may have been in his interests not to come back on – not that that was the referee’s concern but it perhaps explains the lawmakers thinking.

The 15 minutes is not a punishment. People speak of the bloood bin and the sin bin. The sin bin is for punishment, the blood bin to protect the player’s health. It’s not a punishment.

Applying the law is not pedantic any more than blowing a “little” forward pass or a “little” knock-on or a “little” off-side is pedantic. At what stage does 15 minutes cease to be pedantic? At 17? 18? 20?

Now, who keeps time. It is primarily the referee’s responsibility but there are three other people who may come into play in this matter.

On the touch-line there are two men in referees garb who control the coming and going of players.  They are referred top as No.4 and No.5. They are not timekeepers.

Who keeps time?

Law 5.3 TIME KEEPING

The referee keeps the time but may delegate the duty to either or both the touch judges and/or the official time-keeper, in which case the referee signals to them any stoppage of time or time lost. In matches without an official time-keeper, if the referee is in doubt as to the correct time the referee consults either or both the touch judges and may consult others but only if the touch judges cannot help.

That the referee needs a timekeeper to help him is obvious. Just in this match at Ellis Park he would have had to keep match time, allowing for stoppages, check the ten minutes that Geldenhuys was in the sin bin and keep that time exact and keep tabs on the time Du Plessis was away getting stitched – oh, and see to applying all the other Laws of the Game.

At Ellis Park where this match was played, there is an efficient system of timekeeping with two timekeepers. One is the manager of Golden Lions referees, the other the chairman of Golden Lions referees, a former provincial referee. Two are used to make doubly sure in case there is some failure in the system. Both have the ability to contact the referee but only one does so, as the Laws of the Game demand – “the official time-keeper”. The referee deals just with the one – the designated one. That is what happened in this case.

The official timekeeper was able to tell the referee that Du Plessis’s 15-minute allowance had passed.

There was nothing sinister about what happened. It happened in accordance with the Laws of the Game and the times can in fact be verified because the timekeeper keeps a log.