PDA

View Full Version : this was one of mine



dave_clark
14-05-07, 20:05
I was refereeing an U9s festival final between teams known as green and blue recently. Early in the second half, with the score at 0-0, a green player is breaking down the wing. About 5 metres out, a blue player is charging across the pitch. Assuming the green player doesn't sidestep, which he doesn't, the blue player is a certainty for the tackle (or even just a small nudge into touch).

However, rather than wrapping his arms around the ball carrier, the covering defender goes in for what was effectively a flying shoulder barge. Ultimate Warrier stylee.

Clearly, this was a very dangerous tackle and needed penalising. But how far? Had the tackle not gone in, the attacking player was a certainty for the try. Had the tackle gone in low, the player would have been knocked into touch.

I awarded a penalty for the dangerous tackle and sent the player concerned to the sin bin (very harsh for an 8 year old, but it was a proper flying shoulder). Should a penalty try have been awarded too? I still think not as, had the player gone in low, the tackle would have been made, but I'm interested in your opinions...

SimonSmith
14-05-07, 20:05
Yes.
You're over complicating this by throwing in assumptions that you don't need.

In this situation you only need to ask yourself: if the act of foul play had NOT happened, would a try have been scored? If the answer is yes, then it's a PT.

You're throwing in hypotheticals that don't have any place in your decision making process. You say, for example that had he gone low, then a try would not have been scored. But what if his tackling technique sucks? What if he's scared of going in at the knees? Why did he go for the barge instead of a proper tackle?

As I said above: KISS. Would a try have been scored? Yes? Pen Try then.

ExHookah
14-05-07, 21:05
I agree with Simon. You can't add in hypotheticals to this. The defender came in and made an illegal tackle, so you remove that from the equation and what does this leave you with? Here it leaves you with the ball carrier running in and scoring. You can't theorize about different tackling attempts, you can only use what actually happened.

Secondly, if a player needs to go to the bin then he goes. If he's 8 then he's learned an important lesson very early and will hopefully be a better 9 year old player as a result.

Greg Collins
14-05-07, 21:05
PT every time surely?

What might have happened had he put in a legal tackle no one will ever know now - he denied eveyone the chance to find out. He had the chance to find out but chose not to take the risk and opted for foul play instead.

PaulDG
14-05-07, 22:05
I awarded a penalty for the dangerous tackle and sent the player concerned to the sin bin (very harsh for an 8 year old, but it was a proper flying shoulder).

Everything else is a matter of opinion, but sin binning is not at option in the English Continuum Age grades.

You can have a player permanently substituted, but there is no "temporary suspension" option.

Gareth-Lee Smith
14-05-07, 22:05
Paul is correct on the Sin Bin issue, and everybody is correct on the overcomplication.

The Temporary Suspension (or Sin-binning) is prevented within Continuum rugby by the RFU. I guess the idea is twofold: you upset the kid and you seriously damage the team by dropping a player.

If you intend to carry on refereeing at this level, you MUST make use of the Continuum (found on www.rfu.com), which deals with matches U12 and below. Otherwise you could be doing stuff that is dangerous and put yourself in s**t if (God forbid) something went majorly wrong. And please, keep refereeing at this level - it's you guys who keep grassroots going.

And welcome to the forum!

dave_clark
15-05-07, 12:05
OK, cheers chaps. So, just to clarify:

If a player commits foul play (regardless of what it is and regardless of what they could have done differently) the referee has to imagine (s)he wasn't there and, if a try would be probable, award the penalty try?

How does this stand if, say, a winger makes a break and is high tackled by a full back on their own 10 metre line? If the full back is the last line of defence and there's no covering winger (as there frequently isn't in the standard I referee at), should this be a PT too? By the above I would say yes, but I can imagine uproar if a PT was given 40 odd metres out... has anyone had one of these before?

(I'm not trying to argue my decision was correct BTW - I'm comfortable with the fact that I make incorrect calls from time to time! Just trying to make sure I understand for future reference).

Ta

Dave

p.s. point taken on the cards, will remember that for next season's tournament.

didds
15-05-07, 12:05
dave - PT deffo.


and if a wionger has already scored twice running the length of the pitch WAY faster than anybody else (say) you would have good reason to award one in such circumstances if the high tackle happened on his own goal line.

didds

Dixie
15-05-07, 12:05
All correct as to the PT. Dave, on the Continuum question, you do sometimes get deeds for which an adult or junior would be carded. The preferred approach for those is to call the coach over, explain to both the lad and the coach what the issue was and why it was wrong, and then ask the coach to substitute the lad for the rest of the game in lieu of the card.

SimonSmith
15-05-07, 13:05
To answer your second question about the winger - yes, if a try would have been scored, then PT.
The corwd may not be happy, but then again, what's new about that?

PaulDG
15-05-07, 13:05
All correct as to the PT. Dave, on the Continuum question, you do sometimes get deeds for which an adult or junior would be carded. The preferred approach for those is to call the coach over, explain to both the lad and the coach what the issue was and why it was wrong, and then ask the coach to substitute the lad for the rest of the game in lieu of the card.

The Continuum also mandates the substituted player must not play in any further matches that day.

So it's a very serious step to take. (Not that that should prevent you doing the right thing, of course.)

OB..
15-05-07, 14:05
Agree on the PT, and have actually seen it happen (local 2nd XV game).

FlipFlop
15-05-07, 15:05
Have had a discussion with an assessor about the possibility of awarding a PT from inside a teams own half. We both agreed that in the actual circumstances, it would have been wrong to award it, but that it was a close run thing, and something I should have kept in mind (I hadn't even considered it on the field.....).