PDA

View Full Version : Ladies match



breako
13-02-16, 01:02
Do you tap the scrum half or just use a yes nine? Thanks

SimonSmith
13-02-16, 01:02
Ask if she's comfortable with the touch would be my suggestion

Phil E
13-02-16, 11:02
As for kids, tell them you will tap them on the shoulder, ask if they are ok with that.
Just don't slap her on the arse? :biggrin:

Dickie E
13-02-16, 11:02
Just don't slap her on the arse? :biggrin:

Not during the game, anyway

didds
13-02-16, 14:02
Has anyone ever had a lady player refuse a tap-on-the-shoulder suggestion in this regard?

didds

Pegleg
13-02-16, 15:02
Tell them in the PMB and let then ask you if they prefer no touch. Never had an issue. (after all..... "This is not football!")

SimonSmith
13-02-16, 17:02
Has anyone ever had a lady player refuse a tap-on-the-shoulder suggestion in this regard?

didds

No. But I don't think that means that we shouldn't ask.

didds
14-02-16, 13:02
indeed - i was just wondering :)

Pegleg
15-02-16, 00:02
Spoke to some ladies after my game yesterday, they had been playing on the pitch alongside my game. They were universally of the opinion that the directive is a tap on the shoulder or a "thumbs up" if the referee is on the other side of the scrum. They could not see the fuss. "Ref tells us what he's going to do".

I think this is one of those daft "PC" issues that people dream up without consulting those really involved.

crossref
15-02-16, 09:02
I reckon that most rugby players, male or female, other things being equal would have a preference to NOT be tapped on the back by the referee at all.

No it's not a big deal, but IMO this touching of the scrum half is simply a bad idea : more sensible to maintain a personal space between refs and players. In general terms you wouldn't like players to be tapping you.

the old verbal command was better.

didds
15-02-16, 10:02
I can see that the tap aty least means the oppo aren't forewarned as to ball entry, maintaining the old status quo etc.

Its not a biggy IMO, but I do see CR's point which has some validity.

It seems endemic at the highest levels that the scrum is nhow just a penalty machine. despite WRs variuous efforts to depower the hit (which has generally worked() it now a case of digging in and trying to disrupt the oppo into giving away a PK. I'm delighted that England's scrummage so far in the 6N has actually looked like one, but now they seem to have sorted it it is again just a way to win penalties.

didds

crossref
15-02-16, 10:02
I can see that the tap aty least means the oppo aren't forewarned as to ball entry, maintaining the old status quo etc.


a lot of the time the oppo scrum half provides the timing anyway...
'ball coming' when the ref makes the tap
'ball in' when the ball comes in

Pegleg
15-02-16, 12:02
I reckon that most rugby players, male or female, other things being equal would have a preference to NOT be tapped on the back by the referee at all.

No it's not a big deal, but IMO this touching of the scrum half is simply a bad idea : more sensible to maintain a personal space between refs and players. In general terms you wouldn't like players to be tapping you.

the old verbal command was better.

Have you asked players what they prefer? I've not experienced any player with a problem. For cying ot loud they have players touching them as part of the game all the time. A simple tap on the shoulder? Let's all "man up".

crossref
15-02-16, 12:02
as I say: I don't think anyone would consider this a big deal, but generally speaking better for refs and players to treat each other courteously and NOT to tap each other.

Generally speaking tapping someone is (mildly) confrontational, and is a power play: the powerful tap the powerless and not vica versa.

You wouldn't want players routinely tapping you, would you?


Or, in a situation where a player has become very steamed up already, and struggling to keep control of himself, and you were having a 'word' with him to wanr him to calm down ..... you'd NEVER tap him on the chest to reinforce your point, would you?

Phil E
15-02-16, 14:02
Are you just trolling now?

SimonSmith
15-02-16, 14:02
Have you asked players what they prefer? I've not experienced any player with a problem. For cying ot loud they have players touching them as part of the game all the time. A simple tap on the shoulder? Let's all "man up".

Yes. That's exactly the phrase I'll use in the Women's games I do. Surefire winner.

I think it's a simple courtesy and helps establish a good dynamic with the teams - ie I'm not an overbearing patriarchal ******.

Pegleg
15-02-16, 21:02
Alternatively the women are unlikely to make an issue of it as they will, in my experience, not expect to be trerated differently to the men.

Or in other words they just get on with the game without fuss thay you are creating.

Do you afford the men the same respect to "help establish a good dynamic with the teams"? I treat both men and women the same, as equals, thus avoiding being sexist.

Pegleg
15-02-16, 21:02
as I say: I don't think anyone would consider this a big deal, but generally speaking better for refs and players to treat each other courteously and NOT to tap each other.

Generally speaking tapping someone is (mildly) confrontational, and is a power play: the powerful tap the powerless and not vica versa.

You wouldn't want players routinely tapping you, would you?


Or, in a situation where a player has become very steamed up already, and struggling to keep control of himself, and you were having a 'word' with him to warn him to calm down ..... you'd NEVER tap him on the chest to reinforce your point, would you?

The tap is proscribed in the guidlines. The players know that. Have you ever had a situation where a player has had a problem with it?

Can you give one situation where it would be remotely possible to justify a player tapping you "routinely"? I can't.

Why would you touch a player in a "discipline" situation?

The situations are totally different.

As Phil asks. Are you sure you're not trolling now?

crossref
16-02-16, 14:02
sigh, I'm not sure why my point is so difficult to understand.

I'll try just one more time

background -

1 in life it's not polite to tap people when issuing an instruction, if you do, it pisses people off
2 in life especially if someone is steamed up / angry / upset / in a confrontation / emotional it's DEFINITELY a bad idea to tap them when issuing an instruction

surely everyone would agree with that ?


So... I think it was a mistake for IRB to introduce a protocol where referees deliver an instruction to players by tapping them.

Especially as a rugby pitch is a place we were do - from time to time - encounter players who are steamed up / emotional / confrontational

that's all.

It's not a biggie, no, but all the same it's a mistake
- there's no upside to it (for team that wants an audible warning the SH just gives a shout anyway)
- but there's a small downside.

** No, it's never been a problem to me, and
** no it's not a big deal ---

But seeing as the thread opened up the subject of the tap - indeed worrying if some players mind being tapped - my 2p worth is that it's a poor protocol, and not commensurate with the way refs normally want to deal with players, which is to be calm and courteous.

IMO a verbal or visual signal would have been a better choice of protocol, than tapping -- that's all.

Wert Twacky
16-02-16, 15:02
1 in life it's not polite to tap people when issuing an instruction, if you do, it pisses people off. A polite tap??
2 in life especially if someone is steamed up / angry / upset / in a confrontation / emotional it's DEFINITELY a bad idea to tap them when issuing an instruction

surely everyone would agree with that ? No, they wouldn't.

Never had any issue with tapping (politely) a SH in any game or have I ever seen this be a problem.

Lee Lifeson-Peart
16-02-16, 15:02
I find SHs object to being tapped on the buttocks if you're blowing your whistle and signalling a free kick all at the same time. :D

Pegleg
16-02-16, 20:02
sigh, I'm not sure why my point is so difficult to understand.

I'll try just one more time

background -

1 in life it's not polite to tap people when issuing an instruction, if you do, it pisses people off
2 in life especially if someone is steamed up / angry / upset / in a confrontation / emotional it's DEFINITELY a bad idea to tap them when issuing an instruction

surely everyone would agree with that ?


So... I think it was a mistake for IRB to introduce a protocol where referees deliver an instruction to players by tapping them.

Especially as a rugby pitch is a place we were do - from time to time - encounter players who are steamed up / emotional / confrontational

that's all.

It's not a biggie, no, but all the same it's a mistake
- there's no upside to it (for team that wants an audible warning the SH just gives a shout anyway)
- but there's a small downside.

** No, it's never been a problem to me, and
** no it's not a big deal ---

But seeing as the thread opened up the subject of the tap - indeed worrying if some players mind being tapped - my 2p worth is that it's a poor protocol, and not commensurate with the way refs normally want to deal with players, which is to be calm and courteous.

IMO a verbal or visual signal would have been a better choice of protocol, than tapping -- that's all.


Sorry You are making a mountain out of a non existant molehill. Try ASKING the players if it bothers them. How on earth is the tap not calm and courteous?


Do you suggest hookers stop tapping the had on the prop to tell the SH he's ready for the ball? Or the SH tapping the scrum with the ball before feeding ? both common practice for years.

Your comparrison with: "in life especially if someone is steamed up / angry / upset / in a confrontation / emotional it's DEFINITELY a bad idea to tap them when issuing an instruction" is nonsense. If the SH is that steamed up / angry / upset when he's putting the ball into a scrum I'd suggest you have a far bigger problem on your hands!


No one is suggesting a slap or thump it's a simple tap. We are talking about a contact sport and you're getting prissy over a little tap. Amazing!

crossref
16-02-16, 22:02
not prissy.
It's not a big deal, but since someone raised it, my opinion is that a verbal or visual signal would be a better protocol than a tap.

do you really think a tap is actually better?

Dickie E
16-02-16, 22:02
not prissy.
It's not a big deal, but since someone raised it, my opinion is that a verbal or visual signal would be a better protocol than a tap.

do you really think a tap is actually better?

This whole business about the ref deciding when the ball can be fed is a crock. Let the SH decide - if he does so illegally ping him/her.

And as for keeping it a secret from the opposition - how equitable is that? And why should the ref be complicit in the subtefuge?

Its like asking the non-throwing team to close their eyes at a lineout.

Dickie E
16-02-16, 22:02
Are you just trolling now?

this post is trolling

4eyesbetter
17-02-16, 00:02
Once again I mourn the loss of the original sense of the word "trolling", which required wit, subtlety, originality, and at least 100 responses.

Pegleg
17-02-16, 08:02
do you really think a tap is actually better?

Not relevant! The question is: "Why is a tap a problem?". I feel you are inventing a problem that does not exist. Of course if you have some supporting evidence that players (male or female) have an issue with the "gross invations of personal space". or any evidcence of such "disgusting" behaviour from the Ref (condoned by WR) leading to disciplinary issues on field. Then I might give you comments more respect but, for now, they are simply not an issue.

In the context of the game a tap (NOT A PROD OR HIT) to let the SH know they can feed the scrum is just a simple communication tool. Nothing more.

didds
17-02-16, 09:02
Its like asking the non-throwing team to close their eyes at a lineout.

except of course - its not. :-)

didds

Pegleg
17-02-16, 09:02
Once again I mourn the loss of the original sense of the word "trolling", which required wit, subtlety, originality...

Are you sure?

crossref
17-02-16, 10:02
Not relevant! The question is: "Why is a tap a problem?". I feel you are inventing a problem that does not exist. Of course if you have some supporting evidence that players (male or female) have an issue with the "gross invations of personal space". or any evidcence of such "disgusting" behaviour from the Ref (condoned by WR) leading to disciplinary issues on field. Then I might give you comments more respect but, for now, they are simply not an issue.

In the context of the game a tap (NOT A PROD OR HIT) to let the SH know they can feed the scrum is just a simple communication tool. Nothing more.

shug (again). I specifically said it's NOT a big issue, it's a small one, but a verbal or visual protocol would be more appropriate than tapping, for the reasons I explained.

I feel that I am making a pretty uncontentious, small point, and for some reason you are escalating it into a big deal.

three ways the ref could make this signal - -
visual
verbal
touch

if you were the IRB, which would you have chosen, and why ?

for me verbal is by far the best - it's quick and clear, ref can stand where he likes, works from both sides of scrum, everyone can hear it, follows naturally in the verbal sequence of CBS. Avoids touching the players.

Pegleg
17-02-16, 13:02
shug (again). I specifically said it's NOT a big issue, it's a small one, but a verbal or visual protocol would be more appropriate than tapping, for the reasons I explained.

I feel that I am making a pretty uncontentious, small point, and for some reason you are escalating it into a big deal.

three ways the ref could make this signal - -
visual
verbal
touch

if you were the IRB, which would you have chosen, and why ?

for me verbal is by far the best - it's quick and clear, ref can stand where he likes, works from both sides of scrum, everyone can hear it, follows naturally in the verbal sequence of CBS. Avoids touching the players.

YOU are the one who introduced the point. Don't blame me because I disagree with you. It is totally irrelevant and you are making the mountain not me.

Thamk God that the ladies in this part of the world have a little more perspective than you.

I am happy with the Protocol. And cannot be bothered to worry about what is better. The protocol works so why change what is not broken?

Bye you are boring me now I have some paint to watch dry.

Lee Lifeson-Peart
17-02-16, 13:02
3398

msf..

crossref
17-02-16, 13:02
YOU are the one who introduced the point. [.

No, I didn't introduce it - the thread was started by breako - he asks whether some players would prefer not to be touched.
Simon Smith and didds both thought that they possibly might, and we should ask them if the tap is OK.
I chimed in with my opinion on the topic, which is, after all, the whole point of a discussion forum.

Paule23
17-02-16, 13:02
Tell them in the PMB and let then ask you if they prefer no touch. Never had an issue. (after all..... "This is not football!")

It is football, it's not soccer!

SimonSmith
17-02-16, 14:02
YOU are the one who introduced the point. Don't blame me because I disagree with you. It is totally irrelevant and you are making the mountain not me.

Thamk God that the ladies in this part of the world have a little more perspective than you.

I am happy with the Protocol. And cannot be bothered to worry about what is better. The protocol works so why change what is not broken?

Bye you are boring me now I have some paint to watch dry.

Please stop being a dick to people who are trying to rationally argue a point. You seem to have taken huge affront to anyone who sides with the position of talking to the scrum half. You disagree, and that's fine. But there's no need to be a passive aggressive patronizing soap box mounting fool to everyone who doesn't share your enlightened position.

Pegleg
17-02-16, 14:02
Try actually reading Simon. I said I disagree and now Crossref feels I'm making an issue. Well hang on who created the discussion point? Well sorry he you and he made the point and it is u]you both who are not willing to support anything you post. That's fine I'm out to discuss things with grown ups.

Bye Bye!

SimonSmith
17-02-16, 18:02
Try actually reading Simon. I said I disagree and now Crossref feels I'm making an issue. Well hang on who created the discussion point? Well sorry he you and he made the point and it is u]you both who are not willing to support anything you post. That's fine I'm out to discuss things with grown ups.

Bye Bye!

I'll try this in words with low syllable counts so that you might understand.

I said it might not be bad idea to ask if it something that concerns you. I have found - and I referee a lot of college women - that many of them appreciate it.

You then mounted a soapbox, and in a classic case of fingerpointing in a schoolboy way, you took the debate to a place it didn't need to go. Everybody else was being quite civil and not quite so curtly dismissive as you managed to be. I even acknowledged that there can be differences in opinion, and that's OK; I do something that works for me. I don't take umbrage at the fact that others don't do it, and nor do I consider doing it making a mountain out of a molehill.

You do, and you don't like it when people point out your bad behavior. ​tant pis

Pegleg
18-02-16, 00:02
Simon the first insult was from you in post 16. But don't let the truth get in your way.

Pegleg
18-02-16, 00:02
No, I didn't introduce it - the thread was started by breako - he asks whether some players would prefer not to be touched.
Simon Smith and didds both thought that they possibly might, and we should ask them if the tap is OK.
I chimed in with my opinion on the topic, which is, after all, the whole point of a discussion forum.

He actually asked "Do you tap the scrum half or just use a yes nine? Thanks"

SimonSmith
18-02-16, 01:02
Yes. That's exactly the phrase I'll use in the Women's games I do. Surefire winner.

I think it's a simple courtesy and helps establish a good dynamic with the teams - ie I'm not an overbearing patriarchal ******.

This? Wasn't directed at you. If you chose to interpret it that way, that says more about you than it does me. Sad to say, you weren't - and still are not - the center of my universe.

2/10. Must try harder.

Pegleg
18-02-16, 09:02
It was in direct reply to my comments. Oh dear. Attack the argument and not the man. That paint still needs watching!

FlipFlop
18-02-16, 09:02
I'm not a Mod - but can all of you please stop all this bitching. It reflects badly on you, and on the site.

If you have a complaint over a post - report it to the mods. And then move on with life.

I for one am getting fed up with how many times threads seem to descend into people bitching at each other.

OB..
18-02-16, 12:02
I'm not a Mod - but can all of you please stop all this bitching. It reflects badly on you, and on the site.

If you have a complaint over a post - report it to the mods. And then move on with life.

I for one am getting fed up with how many times threads seem to descend into people bitching at each other.I heartily agree. If this spat continues, I will close the thread.

Wert Twacky
21-02-16, 22:02
One of the reasons I stopped visiting this site for a while. Shame.