[2016 RBS Six Nations] Round 2: Wales vs. Scotland (13/02/2016)

[Hendo74]

Tom James released back to Cardiff. Media suggesting it's because he's going to be dropped for the France game. If true, perhaps a little harsh, or is it tactical...?

 

[YoungScud]

No because we're a 60 minute side who can't get over the line against the top sides.

Except in the 79th minute

 

[Will]

Scotland panic in pressure situations,two weeks running on breakaways players failed to notice Hogg outside them and kicked to touch.They will not win games unless they play heads up rugby.

It would help if teams aren't awarded tries from offside positions against us as well.

 

[AzaMatt]

Tom James released back to Cardiff. Media suggesting it's because he's going to be dropped for the France game. If true, perhaps a little harsh, or is it tactical...?

although harsh on him ive got a feeling gatland and co were disappointed he didnt score that runaway try. it was a great cover tackle by scotland so i wouldnt blame him but i doubt gatland will be so kind hearted. i reckon Amos will start against france

 

[The5thOfficial]

Just a general observation, nothing technical - I remember a few years ago when Wales couldn't quite get over the line (and often they still don't such as against SH teams). It didn't matter what excuses or 'reasons' we came up with at the time, there was just very little sympathy. And Wales had more than their fair share of dodgy decisions go against them (and still do!). And now it does seem, just a tad that Scotland, or their supporters here and in general are whining and whinging about games they feel they should have won, in their opinion. Get over it lads. Move on init?

 

[YoungScud]

Just a general observation, nothing technical - I remember a few years ago when Wales couldn't quite get over the line (and often they still don't such as against SH teams). It didn't matter what excuses or 'reasons' we came up with at the time, there was just very little sympathy. And Wales had more than their fair share of dodgy decisions go against them (and still do!). And now it does seem, just a tad that Scotland, or their supporters here and in general are whining and whinging about games they feel they should have won, in their opinion. Get over it lads. Move on init?

I think that's a little unfair. Of course some people will have a moan about refereeing, myself included, but that's not confined to Scotland supporters. Fot the most part, you'll find we're miffed at poor refereeing, but are not claiming on the whole that eithe of the first two games were stolen by bad reffing. Last weekend, both packs suffered from having to contend with arguably the single most incompetent ref in the international game. His policing of scrums was dire, and directly led to far too many resets. Thaat's not whining, that's factual.

 

[The5thOfficial]

I think that's a little unfair. Of course some people will have a moan about refereeing, myself included, but that's not confined to Scotland supporters. Fot the most part, you'll find we're miffed at poor refereeing, but are not claiming on the whole that eithe of the first two games were stolen by bad reffing. Last weekend, both packs suffered from having to contend with arguably the single most incompetent ref in the international game. His policing of scrums was dire, and directly led to far too many resets. Thaat's not whining, that's factual.

I know I'm having a bad day! Sorry! My point was that there are pretty much bad refereeing decisions in EVERY single game - and like I said, Wales never get any sympathy for any of their bad results - rereree to blame or not. Maybe a single game can be lost on a refereeing decision, but not a string of 9 losses against Wales for instance? Just gotta keep at it. Scotland will come good, like Wales did, sort of! AGAIN this is NOT a technical discussion so for those with itchy fingers........

 

[Will]

Just a general observation, nothing technical - I remember a few years ago when Wales couldn't quite get over the line (and often they still don't such as against SH teams). It didn't matter what excuses or 'reasons' we came up with at the time, there was just very little sympathy. And Wales had more than their fair share of dodgy decisions go against them (and still do!). And now it does seem, just a tad that Scotland, or their supporters here and in general are whining and whinging about games they feel they should have won, in their opinion. Get over it lads. Move on init?

I know I'm having a bad day! Sorry! My point was that there are pretty much bad refereeing decisions in EVERY single game - and like I said, Wales never get any sympathy for any of their bad results - rereree to blame or not. Maybe a single game can be lost on a refereeing decision, but not a string of 9 losses against Wales for instance? Just gotta keep at it. Scotland will come good, like Wales did, sort of! AGAIN this is NOT a technical discussion so for those with itchy fingers........

That old chesnut. I shouldn't be surprised.
So am I to assume then that Welsh or English fans wouldn't complain about losing out on a world cup semi-final* because of an incorrect referring decison? Or neither set of fans would complain about a try being given against them which was offside even when the video referee has viewed it time and time again and still got the decision wrong?


Scotland don't have the strength in depth of Wales for example. Whilst we are strong in certain positions, in others we are lacking, and a few injuries here and there and we struggle. You only have to look at the difference in what was availble from the bench between the two teams at the weekend. So as if going to Cardiff to play wasn't difficult enough I don't think it's beyond reasonable to hope that the officials would get their job right so we could at least play against Wales on as even a playing field as possible.

And it's nothing about whining or looking for sympathy. I don't want anyone's sympathy. And I really don't take to the inference that should the Scots complain then they are simply being 'upity' and should know their place. When Scotland are fighting the odds anyway against an arguibly stronger team away from home I don't think it's unreasonable to complain when major decisions are wrong and go against us and have such a major influence on the game.


*I appreciate I'm dragging up old news mentioning that game against Australia and Scotland made numerous mistakes in that game which put them in the position they found themselves, but regardless it was still a wrong referreing decision which cost them that game. Last said on that particular topic.

 

[AzaMatt]

with the RWC quarter final i can see how that decision would have changed the game as it was at the end, but even if the welsh try was disallowed in the scotland game there is no way of knowing what would have happened afterwards. its impossible to say that the same chain of events would have happened so no way of knowing who would have won, scotland might not have come back as they did with their try

 

[Will]

That's not really the point at all. A wrong decision in the 28th minute can have as much a bearing on the game as a wrong decision in the 78th. Just a little easier to take is all.

 

[AzaMatt]

That's not really the point at all. A wrong decision in the 28th minute can have as much a bearing on the game as a wrong decision in the 78th. Just a little easier to take is all.

i agree, it could have a bearing on the game but not necessarily a different outcome, although its of course possible

 

[Saint4805]

That's not really the point at all. A wrong decision in the 28th minute can have as much a bearing on the game as a wrong decision in the 78th. Just a little easier to take is all.

Yes it can have a significant bearing but we'll never know if, at the end of the day, it was to be the decisive factor.

I agree that we are much more dependant on competent officiating and incorrect refereeing decisions are most likely to cost us more given our limitations compared to the top sides.

 

[YoungScud]

One of my major concerns is that we were told, when TMOs were first mooted, that it would put a virtual end to refereeing errors. I'll leave it to you to decide whether you think that happened or not. I also thought at the time (and obviously I think I was right) that it would lead to refs abrogating responsibility. To give an example of just how this came about, about three seasons ago, The Best Referee in the World (you know, the Welsh variety act), in two different games, acting as touch judge, and standing under the crossbar, sent two different kick decisions to the TMO. Now, I don't know what you expect of a professional referee, but I do know what most of us expect of professional players and that we're quite happy to criticise them when they cock up.

Have a look at the following. At (2) we have a nonsensical video featruing Owens describing a 'credible feed' (one where the least part of the ball touches the middle of the scrum apparently) while we're watching Conor Murray popping the ball right into the second row, standing well to his side of the midline. It is this total disrespect of the Laws which infuriates me. Owens says, "As referees, we need to be better." Yes, Nigel, you do. You need to do the job for which you're paid, that is, to apply the Laws of the Game, not to 'manage the game'.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zwdxp39#z8whfrd

 

[johnmac99]

So which would I rather see, a game that is clinically refereed to the letter of the Laws of the Game, or one that is 'managed' fairly and sensibly in order to maximise entertainment?

Referees need to learn to work with the TMO more effectively and not limit their input by asking too specific a question, e.g. 'is there any reason to not award a try?' rather than 'was there a knock-on in the approach play?'.

 

[Saint4805]

So which would I rather see, a game that is clinically refereed to the letter of the Laws of the Game, or one that is 'managed' fairly and sensibly in order to maximise entertainment?

Referees need to learn to work with the TMO more effectively and not limit their input by asking too specific a question, e.g. 'is there any reason to not award a try?' rather than 'was there a knock-on in the approach play?'.

What constitutes 'fairly' and 'sensibly' is not always obvious but there is something fundamentally wrong with the sport when refereeing appointments are influencing team selection and tactics. Yes certain teams bend the laws to suit their own strengths or opposition weaknesses but giving individual referees too much license to interpret the laws and too much discretion just leads to inconsistent officiating. There has not been enough effort made by the governing body to address this.

 

[johnmac99]

What constitutes 'fairly' and 'sensibly' is not always obvious but there is something fundamentally wrong with the sport when refereeing appointments are influencing team selection and tactics. Yes certain teams bend the laws to suit their own strengths or opposition weaknesses but giving individual referees too much license to interpret the laws and too much discretion just leads to inconsistent officiating. There has not been enough effort made by the governing body to address this.

I'm not sure this happens, but it can easily be remedied if true by not notifying teams in advance who will ref the game.

Teams bending the Law is down to the ref to stop or at least lessen and if individual referees do not interpret the Laws correctly, or as required, they will be sanctioned by their governing body.

I think most fans would like to see a balance between the two scenarios, as clinically applying the Laws would lead to the whistle being blown every minute which would ruin the game.

 

[dai_seven]

The major problem with rugby is the rule book - has anyone ever read it? Ex All Black Ali Williams said he hadn't on Scrum V after the Scotland game. When the rule regarding offside in a kick/chase situation was read out it was incomprehensible.
Yes, Gareth Davies was offside and yes the try should not have been awarded and the decision. Did it affect the result, difficult to say as it was relatively early in the game and don't forget, Scotland went in at half time with a lead.
As said above, if referees were to run the game as per the rule book, rugby would be killed off as a sport and have more breaks in play than American Football. The question is: how much can the referee let go so there will be a natural flow to the game?
As is the case, if your team benefits, all well and good, if it affects your team, the referee is a plonker!

 

[Saint4805]

I'm not sure this happens, but it can easily be remedied if true by not notifying teams in advance who will ref the game.

Teams bending the Law is down to the ref to stop or at least lessen and if individual referees do not interpret the Laws correctly, or as required, they will be sanctioned by their governing body.

I think most fans would like to see a balance between the two scenarios, as clinically applying the Laws would lead to the whistle being blown every minute which would ruin the game.

I could be wrong but I seem to recall Gatland claiming recently that a referee appointment had an impact on his team selection or tactics but he may have been attempting to play some kind of mind games.

Agree that a balance between the two would be better or perhaps revamping some of the rules which would achieve better clarity, consistency and maintain the flow of the game.

 

[Tony Manx]

I'm not sure this happens, but it can easily be remedied if true by not notifying teams in advance who will ref the game..

Haha like that could happen on this day of the Internet!!!!

 

[YoungScud]

The major problem with rugby is the rule book - has anyone ever read it? Ex All Black Ali Williams said he hadn't on Scrum V after the Scotland game. When the rule regarding offside in a kick/chase situation was read out it was incomprehensible.
Yes, Gareth Davies was offside and yes the try should not have been awarded and the decision. Did it affect the result, difficult to say as it was relatively early in the game and don't forget, Scotland went in at half time with a lead.
As said above, if referees were to run the game as per the rule book, rugby would be killed off as a sport and have more breaks in play than American Football. The question is: how much can the referee let go so there will be a natural flow to the game?
As is the case, if your team benefits, all well and good, if it affects your team, the referee is a plonker!

Easy answer. Yes. Any ref who hasn't ought not to be reffing.