Tri-Nations, Week 3, Part 2
Referee and injuries
In Week 1, there were complaints by the losing side about the referee – hefty ones. In Week 2, the complaints by the losing side were there, insistent though quieter. In Week 3, the complaints were by the winning side and much, much quieter.
We shall talk about this, look at a little bit of law and take comment from Peter Shortell.
1. Slowing the game down.
This time the complaints came from New Zealand coach, Graham Henry, and were echoed by the New Zealand captain, Richie McCaw. The complaints were that the Springboks were slowing the game down through feigning injury.
Henry is quoted as saying: "We did not play well, but at times is was frustrating the number of times players (Springboks) were going down with injuries. I would have liked to see the referee being more diligent so that the game flowed. "
He also said: "I just think the game was slowed down a lot in the Super 14 too and if you look at the stats you will find that some countries slow it down more than others. It was a frustrating game and I think it was slowed down on purpose."
As Henry advised, we went to Soundsure to get the statistics on stoppages for injuries.
This is what they came up with.
Stoppages:
1st half
All Blacks: 12:21 – 13:29 Piri Weepu and Rodney So'oialo (1:08) – Injury
Springboks/All Blacks: 15:49 – 17:16 Victor Matfield and Daniel Carter (1:27) – Injury
All Blacks: 19:45 - 20:19 Neemia Tialata Shoe lace (0:34) – Lace
Springboks: 21:43 – 22:32 John Smit injured and shoe lace (0:49) – Injury / Lace
Springboks: 27:46 – 28:40 Os du Randt (0:54) – Injury
Springboks/All Blacks: 40:36 – 41:48 Neemia Tialata / Fourie du Preez (1:12) – Injuries
2nd half
Springboks 07:47 – 9:38 Os du Randt Blood bin replacement (0:51) – Blood
New Zealand 17:48 – 19:23 Piri Weepu injured (1:35) – Injured
In the case of the second one in the first half Matfield was up and ready to play well before Carter. The stoppage was exacerbated because there was no ball available for Weepu to put into the scrum when play was about to resume. We have allowed the same injury time for each team.
Add it all up – the time taken for injury stoppages:
All Blacks: 5:56 mins
Springboks: 5.13 mins
There is not much in it.
The total time for these stoppages (injuries and laces) was 8:30 mins.
That said, there is sympathy for what Henry says in refereeing circles and the matter of stoppages is subject to scrutiny.
There is no doubt that some referees seem able to manage to get the match moving along at a better rate than others. But let's look just at injuries.
Firstly, no referee can take a chance at a serious injury. He has to let safety procedures happen at the required rate. That's in there law. It's also in commonsense.
In the match between New Zealand and South Africa, there were no injuries that required serious treatment.
Law 5.4 TIME LOST
Time lost may be due to the following:
(a) Injury. The referee may stop play for not more than one minute so that an injured player can be treated, or for any other permitted delay.
The referee may allow play to continue while a medically trained person treats an injured player in the playing area or the player may go to the touch-line for treatment.
If a player is seriously injured and needs to be removed from the field of play, the referee has the discretion to allow the necessary time to have the injured player removed from the field-of-play.
(b) Replacing players’ clothing. When the ball is dead, the referee allows time for a player to replace or repair a badly torn jersey, shorts or boots. Time is allowed for a player to re-tie a boot-lace.
(c) Replacement and substitution of players. Time is allowed when a player is replaced or substituted.
(d) Reporting of foul play by a touch judge. Time is allowed when a touch judge reports foul play.
In our stats, the minute was exceeded on three occasions, though not by much at all.
Secondly, more time needs to be taken if a front row player is injured and the next play is a scrum. The scrum will take place only with properly trained personnel. That may require longer than usual examination of an injured player.
Thirdly, Medical staff are allowed on during play to attend to the injured player, but it should be stopped if play moves towards the place where the player is being treated.
Law 6.A 8 (g) The referee must blow the whistle when it would be dangerous to let play continue. This includes when a scrum collapses, or when a front-row player is lifted into the air or is forced upwards out of a scrum, or when it is probable that a player has been seriously injured.
(h) The referee may blow the whistle to stop play for any other reason according to the laws.
Law 6.A 9 THE REFEREE AND INJURY
(a) If a player is injured and continuation of play would be dangerous, the referee must blow the whistle immediately.
(c) The referee must blow the whistle if continuation of play would be dangerous for any reason.
Going to the touch-line for treatment seems a good option. Removing a player for bleeding is usually a quick procedure as far as getting the player off is concerned because he can usually go under his own steam. The delay usually comes with getting a replacement onto the field.
It would seem best that the referee stop play and ignore time for a serious injury and stop play if there is danger as when the play is moving towards an injured player who is being attended to but that in other cases he should hurry play along – by allowing a player out of the line of fire to be attended to while play goes on and getting players off and on quickly for bleeding.
Mostly the referee does not need to act as medical consultant. None of the top referees, apart from Tony Spreadbury, is medically trained. All he needs to know is whether the nature of the injury allows play to go on or not.
Henry mentions Super 14, when the most noteworthy matches for injuries were between the Bulls and the Brumbies in Pretoria when the Bulls were angry and between the Waratahs and the Cheetahs in Sydney when the Waratahs were angry. That last match was a particular problem.
2. Protecting the tackled player
There is a belief that the team in possession should not be penalised at the tackle. That is not how the law sees it and not really how the game sees it, for the game is eager to have a fair contest in getting possession. That includes a fair contest at the tackle.
In a sense the tackler is the victor at the tackle and as the victor entitled to a reward for his victory.
The All Blacks' way of protecting the tackled area and stopping opponents from getting to it is doubtfully legal. They seek to have a man on each side of the tackle and beyond the tackle to keep at bay any predatory ambitions of opponents. At times this is good and sensible, at other times excessive.
A line-out to New Zealand becomes a maul which soon falls in ruin. Ali Williams of New Zealand has fallen beyond the ball. Albert van den Berg of South Africa us trying to shove back. He is in physical contact with Rodney So'oialo. The ball is on the ground. That suggests that there is a ruck. Ali Williams is on the ground beyond the ruck, i.e. on the South African side. He rises up on the South African side, grabs Van den Berg by the collar and jerks him back and onto the ground.
This just must be illegal. If it was indeed a ruck – and it gave every impression of so being – he was simply off-side. Grabbing the collar may well have been dangerous.
The question of pillars remains a vexed one and leads to lots of immature pushing and shoving.
Pillars? Players who stand to the side of the tackle/ruck when their side is winning the ball. If they are behind the last feet of their side in the ruck, they are fine. If they are ahead of it they are off-side. Referees try to manage it by moving such players back to the off-side line. They are in fact liable to penalty.
3. No-knock knock
Is there a referee on earth who would not have given it?
Percy Montgomery of South Africa kicks low towards his left where Doug Howlett awaits the ball. The ball strikes Howlett high on his chest and bounces some 15 or so metres forward. The referee awards a scrum.
Say – just say – the ball did not strike Howlett's hand or arms but only his chest, is there a referee on earth who would not have blown for the knock?
4. Penalty count
Reader: "Penalties conceded
New Zealand: 11
South Africa: 15"
Commentator: "The referee seems to be letting the penalty count get away from him."
Dare we suggest that it depends on how many penalty offences the players commit? Should he ignore some in order to achieve some mythical quota or balance? Perhaps he has magical powers to stop players committing such offences? In fact he does – he can award a penalty/yellow card/red card.
Moreover the penalty count was not in fact anything special.
It's easy to criticise after the event. Who'd be a commentator, having to shoot from the lip!
Peter Shortell – Cheltenham
