ComeAllWithin
Rugby => ComeAllWithin Board => Topic started by: claphamquin on Sunday 01-Mar-2020, 00:03*
-
On the replay it looks as though DC would be difficult to stop.
The scrum had wheeled so there was no forwards in defence.
The scrum half was on the wrong side. So, there was basically a bit of a hole.
If the ref was in agreement with this, then a PT is the correct decision as the offending team is disadvantaging us by making the conversion kick more difficult.
A few years ago, I remember Mike Brown was cruising over to score in front of the South Stand but the ref awarded a PT to make it a 7 pointer rather than a 5 pointer.
-
At first I thought definitely not a PT, however as pourfour says if Exeter had scrimmaged properly then we probably would have scored. If teams are deliberately and persistently offending they need to be punished.
I think all of this is also slightly irrelevant as I’m pretty sure DC was about to go over anyway.
-
Looking carefully at the highlights, the Exeter 17 is already almost parallel to the goal line by the time the ball goes in and immediately thereafter releases and retakes his bind. The Quins pack is properly bound and they all have good body positions and give a strong impression that they would be going forward if Exeter weren't folding in and forcing the whole thing sideways.
Arguably, Quins are just painting a better picture for the ref, but given the loosehead is that far out of shape from the put in and the scrum has been shoved backwards the last time it was straight and stayed up, the decision looks less of a stretch than people are claiming.
-
Apparently Mr Ridley tookup the whistle in 2012 after an injury curtailed his playing career.
He moved to Natinal 2 in 2013/14 National 1 in 2014/15 got his first Championship match in 2016 and Premiership since 2017/8. He will hve been assessed and coached throughout.
PT is not for repeated penalties - it is for preventing a probable try. Repeated penalties result in yellow cards. It is the players job to use the space created. If the scrum goes uncontested, it still ties up 8 players.
-
Also, the penalties resulted in 2 yellow cards. Clearly, carding players wasn't working. In fact, carding more players would probably have had a negative effect as the scrums would eventually have gone uncontested.
I watched a Pro 14 game over the weekend. Kings v Connacht. From around the 63 minute mark, Connacht were camped on Kings tryline. After many scrum penalties, Sir carded a Kings player. Connacht persisted with the scrum and on around the 69 minute mark he went under the sticks. In my opinion, it seems a fair response in this sort of situation.
Uncontested scrums with Chiefs down to 12 players should mean that Quins Score anyway.
As far as I can see, there is nothing in the laws that allows for a penalty try except in cases where foul play prevented a try being scored.
One _could_ argue that Quins would have dominated the last scrum if Chiefs has scrummaged legally and scored a push over try but that’s (for me) a big shout. One slip of the prop’s feet (as Lambert had already done) and the drive is stopped.
In my view, more cards would’ve made the try (and therefore the penalty try) more likely.
-
Could've been avoided if he hadn't forgotten to play advantage when Gabs walked over in the corner a few minutes earlier.
He didn’t forget to play advantage. He didn’t see the ball. It’s on the other side of the scrum and is watching the front rows stand up.
-
When the penalty try was awarded Exeter had given away seven penalties on the trot, six in the five metre red zone. It started with the high tackle on Marcus and ended with the eighth as the penalty try. If that wasn’t the right outcome how many penalties can you give away in that area and still come out without loosing points.
Also, the penalties resulted in 2 yellow cards. Clearly, carding players wasn't working. In fact, carding more players would probably have had a negative effect as the scrums would eventually have gone uncontested.
I watched a Pro 14 game over the weekend. Kings v Connacht. From around the 63 minute mark, Connacht were camped on Kings tryline. After many scrum penalties, Sir carded a Kings player. Connacht persisted with the scrum and on around the 69 minute mark he went under the sticks. In my opinion, it seems a fair response in this sort of situation.
-
Could've been avoided if he hadn't forgotten to play advantage when Gabs walked over in the corner a few minutes earlier.
-
When the penalty try was awarded Exeter had given away seven penalties on the trot, six in the five metre red zone. It started with the high tackle on Marcus and ended with the eighth as the penalty try. If that wasn’t the right outcome how many penalties can you give away in that area and still come out without loosing points.
-
Players flying into rucks shoulder first, no use of arms, usually from the side. I have no idea why it's not penalised.
-
But that's the point. These days referees make up their own minds about what laws to apply, how to apply them and what to ignore. When did you last see a straight scrum feed for example? I've seen other refs give a penalty try for repeated infringements.
I was somewhat annoyed that early on Robshaw got pinged for coming in at the side and that was the last time the ref bothered to apply that law to either side.
Yeah I think everyone just wants a consistent approach from ref to ref, game to game.
I think Robbo got pinged for jackling as the second man rather than side entrance. But side entrance has almost been forgotten across the board this season.
-
Unfortunately I agree that the penalty try was wrong looking at the Laws. There’s no allowance for repeated infringement just if an infringement stops a team from scoring a probable try or scoring in a more beneficial position ie under the posts.
But that's the point. These days referees make up their own minds about what laws to apply, how to apply them and what to ignore. When did you last see a straight scrum feed for example? I've seen other refs give a penalty try for repeated infringements.
I was somewhat annoyed that early on Robshaw got pinged for coming in at the side and that was the last time the ref bothered to apply that law to either side.
-
Have to say thought he referred it really well thought - though could argue he lost the plot in last 5 mins of game. Saying that his assistant called the final scrum penalty that lead to try - might have been one to many for him and could argue (though not sure I would agree) Care/backs likely to score!
Allowed a flowing game of rugby. Allowed attacking team to dominate breakdown - not sure any holding on pens at ruck time. Scrum time was even and listened to assistants.
Overall think neither team could complain about 95% of his game and that is not normal.
-
Unfortunately I agree that the penalty try was wrong looking at the Laws. There’s no allowance for repeated infringement just if an infringement stops a team from scoring a probable try or scoring in a more beneficial position ie under the posts.
I agree refs need to work their way up the leagues and imagine this happens with may some getting fast tracked (Dickson being an example). Unfortunately I think we are in a position of short supply of decent refs and it does take a certain type of person to ref a game. How you fix this problem I don’t know but I suspect for the next few season we will probably just see the same refs.
In regards to the refs ‘focusing on one area’ I absolutely hate this. It seems that they focus on one area at the expense of another area or two. Just apply the laws evenly across the board, that’s all anyone wants and if you did it then you wouldn’t need to focus on one area.
-
The decision at the end made sense to me. Exe were repeatedly infringing and had been warned, then had a player carded, and continued to infringe. I believe a penalty try can be given in such circumstances.
The usual stuff was missed today, for both teams. For me, the worst is ruck time, with players going in at the side, going over the top, going beyond the ruck. It rarely gets refereed properly.
-
I can’t argue with the notion that the standards of refereeing just aren’t good enough at the moment. I worry we have gone too far down the rabbit hole in terms of letting little things slide, to the point where every breakdown is a free for all mess that is pretty much impossible to ref. Then you throw in the constant law changes and changing which laws to ‘focus’ on, the higher tempo and greater physicality, the scrutiny of television cameras etc and it’s an unenviable task for the refs.
-
Another average display from a premiership referee today. How he deemed that we’d probably have scored a try at the end is beyond me but it offset another few horrific decisions that went against us.
Surely with the money now involved in the game, they should be investing in training referees properly and they should be spending 3/4 seasons in the lower leagues before reffing a big game. It’s not an easy job but that’s where experience comes into play. A 26 year old with limited experience shouldn’t be out there in the middle. Maybe there’s just a bit shortage of top class refs but the variance between the best and worst even within the premiership is worrying.
Karl Dickson is an example of what can positively be done so there should be positive encouragement for other ex players to step up to professional referees rather than school kids who have little idea of how a professional game of rugby is actually played (apologies if that sounds harsh)