Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
The Rugby Championship 2023
Romain Poite's credibility
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mcfadden" data-source="post: 738111" data-attributes="member: 72865"><p>I think the bigger picture here is that after the World Cup is perhaps a few laws need to be reviewed as to their necessity, strictness of application, etc.</p><p></p><p>Small things like what constitutes a ‘reasonable’ amount of time to clear the ball (a tangible number of seconds, because I’ve seen this wildly vary). Or, for example, when can a player not be expected to roll away? Maybe some other things too like clarity around how to sack a rolling maul legally, because it almost seems completely unreasonable the way it gets policed now.</p><p></p><p>Too an extent, there are actually just too many rules. There has always been a difference between hemispheric refereeing, but if we’re going to make interpretations and clarity universal then surely we don’t want the rulebook quite as heavy as it is now. And we certainly don't want the contents of that rulebook trending upwards in my opinion.</p><p></p><p>I think World Rugby should really target communication and consistency between each hemisphere’s referees after the WC. It seems quite clear that the North struggle with some of the Southern refs, and certainly vice versa. </p><p></p><p>I’m not really sure if I feel comfortable with the proposed idea of avoiding the referee you struggle most with. While I accept that interpretations seem to vary between hemispheres, this phenomena could be due to any number of reasons. What I mean is, I’d want to see each of those games lost and understand the full context. Not just numbers on a bit of paper. It only serves to paper over the cracks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mcfadden, post: 738111, member: 72865"] I think the bigger picture here is that after the World Cup is perhaps a few laws need to be reviewed as to their necessity, strictness of application, etc. Small things like what constitutes a ‘reasonable’ amount of time to clear the ball (a tangible number of seconds, because I’ve seen this wildly vary). Or, for example, when can a player not be expected to roll away? Maybe some other things too like clarity around how to sack a rolling maul legally, because it almost seems completely unreasonable the way it gets policed now. Too an extent, there are actually just too many rules. There has always been a difference between hemispheric refereeing, but if we’re going to make interpretations and clarity universal then surely we don’t want the rulebook quite as heavy as it is now. And we certainly don't want the contents of that rulebook trending upwards in my opinion. I think World Rugby should really target communication and consistency between each hemisphere’s referees after the WC. It seems quite clear that the North struggle with some of the Southern refs, and certainly vice versa. I’m not really sure if I feel comfortable with the proposed idea of avoiding the referee you struggle most with. While I accept that interpretations seem to vary between hemispheres, this phenomena could be due to any number of reasons. What I mean is, I’d want to see each of those games lost and understand the full context. Not just numbers on a bit of paper. It only serves to paper over the cracks. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
The Rugby Championship 2023
Romain Poite's credibility
Top