[
PLEASE LOGIN TO POST TO THE FORUM
]
|
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Wed, 23 April 08 19:29 GMT
|
Ed - FAR more like it - glad to hear that THAT was the message being promulgated!
:-)
didds
|
|
|
milligani
- iandmilligan@btinternet.com
|
Wed, 23 April 08 11:32 GMT
|
all,
apologies for setting hares running. The discussions were in a wider context and I haven't really given them due explaination in my original post so could you please ignore that.
cheers
spike
|
-------------------------
Spike |
|
|
ballsie
|
Tue, 22 April 08 13:09 GMT
|
WOW thats a first,for me too.
Sending of the captain is not the way, and I would really like to meet the ELRA instructor that told you that. as tough as it seems you yellow the player who commits the offence that breaks the camels back so to speak, as haRSH as it may seem as he/she may have only committed one transgression in the whole game but if you have issued a general warning (which isnt wise imho you must do something or you look like a right NANA) but thats the way it is. Interesting obsevation about talking out of rear end.. He sure is on that one.. and if this doesnt get a response nothing will..glad I aint taking the ELRA with you ...ENJOY THE SUN SHINE...
|
-------------------------
Ballsie |
|
|
Nigib3
|
Tue, 22 April 08 12:53 GMT
|
Thanks gentlemen - I had always gone for the 3rd of the three taking the walk, but adjusted after my assessor's comments. Glad I checked with the august band of messageboarders!
In retrospect I should have checked the laws more thoroughly and stuck to my guns. I will feedback and check with him/my society. Perhaps more worrying is the ELRA advice - is there someone in ELRA-land that can comment?
|
|
|
HighsideUK
|
Tue, 22 April 08 11:55 GMT
|
Not having a go at Nigib3 specifically as there are obviously others here that were labouring under the same missaprehension but ......
What is truly appalling is that here we have a point of law that could not be dealt with any more clearly in the LOTG and this is the RFUs referees' forum and yet there still seems to be confusion. Until Whistleblower blew up it was all set to agree on completely the wrong outcome.
I think it is wrong that a lot of players and coaches do not make more effort to read the Laws but its a sorry state of affairs if the referees aren't reading them either.
|
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Tue, 22 April 08 08:30 GMT
|
spike - if that is what you were told on an ELRA then I am totally appalled.
didds
|
|
|
didds
- scrumtime@hotmail.com
|
Tue, 22 April 08 08:30 GMT
|
nigib3 - whoever advised you of that was/is talking out of their rear end.
Totally ridiculous suggestion.
Give it to the next perpetrator of a no-no, but NEVER give it to the skipper just because he is the skipper.
didds
|
|
|
ob
|
Mon, 21 April 08 22:00 GMT
|
I agree with the whistleblower.
You speak to the captain because he has authority over all his players, and it is his responsibility to make sure they all know the likely consequences of further infringements.
You cannot penalise him if he has not committed an offence himself. Failing to get his team in line is not an offence.
|
|
|
the whistleblower
|
Mon, 21 April 08 18:57 GMT
|
IMO it is completely incorrect to YC the skipper for the offences of his team. The law is very clear about who gets the card:
Law 10.3 (b) When different players of the same team repeatedly commit the same offence, the referee must decide whether or not this amounts to repeated infringement. If it does, the referee gives a general warning to the team and if they then repeat the offence, the referee cautions and temporarily suspends THE GUILTY PLAYER(s) for a period of 10 minutes playing time.
So Blue skipper is the fullback. The forwards are repeatedly killing the ball at the breakdown. You warn the skipper, he warns his forwards. Next ruck, you get hands in by a Blue prop and YC the fullback - how does this help? You've removed a blameless player from the pitch (acting, incidentally, beyond your authority) and left untouched the guilty party, who's chuckling away sotto voce. Blue then drop the flanker to the backs. Next ruck, in danger of losing the ball, a forward flops over the top - who do you YC? Perhaps a red to the skipper for his second offence?
See this Rugbyrefs.com thread for a good discussion on repeat infringments:
http://tinyurl.com/3vsqy7
|
-------------------------
Whistleblower |
|
|
arurs880
|
Mon, 21 April 08 17:22 GMT
|
I GLAD I LOOK AT THIS THREAD NOW GAVES ME MORE LEAVER WITH THE CAPTAINS AS I SENT OFF THE CAPTAIN THE OTHER WEEK AS HE GOT A YELLOW FOR STAMPING THEN HE WENT BACK TOLD HIS TEAM THAT THEY ALL COULD PUNCH BUT NOT STAMP. I PULLED BOTH CAPTAINS IN AS THERE WAS A BIT OFF THE BALL WHICH I STOP PLAY FOR
|
|
|
arurs880
|
Mon, 21 April 08 17:22 GMT
|
I GLAD I LOOK AT THIS THREAD NOW GAVES ME MORE LEAVER WITH THE CAPTAINS AS I SENT OFF THE CAPTAIN THE OTHER WEEK AS HE GOT A YELLOW FOR STAMPING THEN HE WENT BACK TOLD HIS TEAM THAT THEY ALL COULD PUNCH BUT NOT STAMP. I PULLED BOTH CAPTAINS IN AS THERE WAS A BIT OFF THE BALL WHICH I STOP PLAY FOR
|
|
|
Nigib3
|
Mon, 21 April 08 14:58 GMT
|
Thanks Spike - useful to know that it's given as guidance. I've used it a couple of times since, including on my 16 yr old son as his team's captain (! not well received in the car afterwards!), and there doesn't appear to be an awareness of this sanction at the grass roots. Interested in other experiences.
|
|
|
milligani
- iandmilligan@btinternet.com
|
Mon, 21 April 08 14:27 GMT
|
was on a ELRA 1&2 this weekend and the tutor was asked that question. His reply was that at the point of warning the captain that his options were being reduced should repeat offences continue he would indicate that the captain was responsible for the other 14 players and he might have to take the sanction should one occur.
Not sure it is 'in law' but it makes sense in game management terms.
|
-------------------------
Spike |
|
|
Nigib3
|
Mon, 21 April 08 12:48 GMT
|
I'd appreciate some clarification on this.
At my last assessment I was told that for a yellow for a repeat offence should go to the captain, not the perpetrator of the last of the three (unless it was the same person each time).
Does anyone know if this is enshrined in law anywhere, and what do others do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
