What does everybody think about the law crackdown?

[PaarlBok]

Some stats after 3 rounds.

Penalties per Team

Blues: 13 + 9 + 13 = 35
Brumbies: 10 + 12 + 14 = 36
Bulls: 9 + 8 + 4 = 21
Cheetahs: 6 + 15 + 8 = 29
Chiefs: 9 + 21 + 8 = 38
Crusaders: 7 + 12 + 9 = 28
Highlanders: 6 + 7 + 15 = 28
Hurricanes: 12 + 12 + 14 = 38
Lions: 9 + 11 + 12 = 32
Reds: 14 + 10 + 5 = 29
Sharks: 14 + 10 + 9 = 33
Stormers: 11 + 12 + 12 = 35
Waratahs: 9 + 12 + 12 = 33
Western Force: 9 + 7 + 7 = 23

Tries per team

Blues: 2 + 3 + 4 = 9
Brumbies: 3 + 3 + 1 = 7
Bulls: 6 + 5 + 6 = 17
Cheetahs: 3 + 1 + 2 = 6
Chiefs: 1 + 8 + 4 = 13
Crusaders: 4 + 2 + 4 = 10
Highlanders: 2 + 2 + 3 = 7
Hurricanes: 1 + 7 + 4 = 12
Lions: 1 + 8 + 2 = 11
Reds: 3 + 4 + 2 = 9
Sharks: 0 + 1 + 0 = 1
Stormers: 2 + 3 + 1 = 6
Waratahs: 2 + 0 + 4 = 6
Western Force: 0 + 3 + 1 = 4

 

[Spook]

1 try for the sharks!

 

[Blue]

Bulls have lowest penalty count and most tries. How things have changed.

 

[JJJ]

Bulls have lowest penalty count and most tries. How things have changed.

That will happen when you play all your matches at home. Seems to have been a lot of saffa refs for those games as well, though hopefully that isn't a factor.

 

[PhucNgo]

What's annoying me is last week Mark Lawrence was having a big pause between his words, while other referees are doing it faster. Frustrating for the players surely.

Was it jsut me or most refs seems to increase the time between "touch" and "pause". It's not working.

Yeah, me too. Seems like we're getting two pauses for the price of one.

 

[Scotty]

It is getting ridiculous. Surely they can just say 'crouch', then count to themselves a bit and then say 'engage'. Anyone that goes early gets penalised, and it will be difficult to anticipate when the 'engage' signal comes as the don't have the leading up tempo of the touch, pause bizo so it will put an onus on the teams to react quickly to the call rather than being able to anticipate it.

 

[DPK]

Ref's need to develop a sense of rythym and beat- if they say "crouch, touch, pause, engage" in good 4/4 musical timing, it'll be easy for the front rows to engage at the right time and easy to catch the off beat front rowers. The question now is what tempo? :lmao:

 

[JJJ]

Anyone know a site which will give me scrum stats for this year?

 

[PaarlBok]

Anyone know a site which will give me scrum stats for this year?

Think your best bet is SA Rugby's official refs site. try this link
http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2267820.htm

 

[JJJ]

Anyone know a site which will give me scrum stats for this year?

Think your best bet is SA Rugby's official refs site. try this link
http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2267820.htm

Thanks mate. :thumb

Not quite what I was after but it'll do for a start.

 

[Pfitzy]

It is getting ridiculous. Surely they can just say 'crouch', then count to themselves a bit and then say 'engage'.

I think the "touch" is still important for the refs to judge distance. But pausing before the pre-engage pause is farking pointless.

From a couple of games this week we're seeing a creeping dose of attacking side sealing off by going off their feet (Bulls, Jonkers, I'm looking at you). Counter-rucking isn't effective here because the attacking players are lying on the ball.

 

[PaarlBok]

Thanks mate. :thumb

Not quite what I was after but it'll do for a start.

No problemos, thought this would be insightfull to you

Possession

Scrums

Crusaders: 6 (1 reset, 2 collapses, 1 penalty)
Sharks: 15 (2 reset, 6 collapses, 1 lost, 2 penalties, 2 free kicks)
Scrums

Stormers: 8 (1 collapse, 1 penalty)
Brumbies: 11 (4 resets, 3 collapses, 1 free kick)

Scrums

Hurricanes: 14 (2 reset, 5 collapses, 4 free kicks, 1 lost)
Lions: 7 (1 reset, 1 penalty)
Scrums

Western Force: 9 (3 resets, 4 collapses), 1 free kick, 1 penalty
Chiefs: 10 (6 resets, 9 collapses, 1 free kick, 1 penalty)


Scrums

Reds: 9 (4 resets, 4 collapses)
Blues: 8 (1 collapse)

Scrums

Cheetahs: (4 resets, 6 collapses)
Highlanders: ( resets, collapses, 1 free kick)


Scrums

Bulls: 12 (4 resets, 6 collapses, 1 free kick)
Waratahs: 3


Some Match Totals

Stoppages per match

Western Force vs Brumbies: 73
Sharks vs Chiefs: 88
Crusaders vs Highlanders: 65
Cheetahs vs Bulls: 60
Blues vs Hurricanes: 69
Lions vs Stormers: 77
Reds vs Waratahs: 74
Bulls vs Brumbies: 55
Highlanders vs Blues: 77
Lions vs Chiefs: 74
Sharks vs Cheetahs: 76
Hurricanes vs Western Force: 68
Reds vs Crusaders: 62
Stormers vs Waratahs: 91
Stormers vs Brumbies: 81
Bulls vs Waratahs: 58
Reds vs Blues: 68
Western Force vs Chiefs: 73
Crusaders vs Sharks: 80
Cheetahs vs Highlanders: 69
Hurricanes vs Lions: 81

Fewest stoppages: Bulls vs Brumbies - 55
Most stoppages: Stormers vs Waratahs - 91



Penalties per Team

Blues: 13 + 9 + 13 = 35
Brumbies: 10 + 12 + 14 = 36
Bulls: 9 + 8 + 4 = 21
Cheetahs: 6 + 15 + 8 = 29
Chiefs: 9 + 21 + 8 = 38
Crusaders: 7 + 12 + 9 = 28
Highlanders: 6 + 7 + 15 = 28
Hurricanes: 12 + 12 + 14 = 38
Lions: 9 + 11 + 12 = 32
Reds: 14 + 10 + 5 = 29
Sharks: 14 + 10 + 9 = 33
Stormers: 11 + 12 + 12 = 35
Waratahs: 9 + 12 + 12 = 33
Western Force: 9 + 7 + 7 = 23


Yellow cards

Adam Byrnes (Reds) - tackle infringement (repeated)
Andy Goode (Sharks) - high tackle
Alando Soakai (Highlanders) - dangerous tackle
Aled de Malmanche (Chiefs) - deliberate infringement
Bismarck du Plessis (Sharks) - dangerous, late tackle
Dean Mumm (Waratahs) - dangerous charge
Isaia Toeava (Blues) - tackle infringement (repeated)
John Smit (Sharks) - tackle infringement (repeated)
Josh Bekhuis (Highlanders) - tackle infringement (repeated)
Ma'a Nonu (Hurricanes) - offside, a repeated team infringement
Owen Franks (Crusaders) - tackle infringement (repeated)
Rene Ranger (Blues) - tackle infringement (repeated)
Richard Kahui (Chiefs) - dangerous tackle.
Sione Lauaki (Chiefs) - dangerous tackle

Sanctionary Cards per team

Blues: Y, Y
Brumbies
Bulls
Cheetahs
Chiefs: Y,Y,Y, C
Crusaders: Y
Highlanders: Y, Y
Hurricanes: Y
Lions: C
Reds: Y
Sharks: Y,Y, Y
Stormers
Waratahs: C
Western Force: 0

Y = Yellow card
R = Red card
C = citing with suspension

If you gave points for such serious offences (1 for a yellow card, 3 for a red card and for a citing with suspension), it would look like this:

Brumbies: 0
Blues: 2
Bulls: 0
Chiefs: 6
Crusaders: 1
Cheetahs: 0
Hurricanes: 1
Highlanders: 2
Lions: 3
Reds: 1
Stormers: 0
Sharks: 3
Western Force: 0
Waratahs: 4

 

[PaarlBok]

also worth a read , Andre Watsons view on the law crack down

Watson reviews the Big Four
Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:08

Before the Super 14 got going and at the request of the Super 14 coaches, certain existing laws were highlighted as in need of more careful attention and application with a view to making a faster and more creative game. André Watson, South Africa's refereeing boss, has taken stock.

He has been in touch with the match officials in South Africa about the application of the Big Four - tackle, scrum, offside and obstruction.

Watson said: "We started the season with the Big 4 and it had a huge influence on the game and the early indications are that it is mostly positive.

"I want to thank the referees that have been in action so far for the effort and commitment to apply the Big 4.

"However, like any law or application we implement for the first time, there are some spin-offs as a result and if one is not aware of it, they may negatively affect the product."

He then goes through each of the Big Four.

A. Tackle:

a. The tackler is to release immediately – no material effect to be measured, as it is a fact.

b. Tackler to roll away once he has released ball carrier – material affect can be determined depending on what his influence is.

c. ALL OTHER PLAYERS WHO ENTER LEGALLY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PLAY THE BALL.

d. A PLAYER TACKLING AND ENDING UP ON THE WRONG SIDE SHOULD NOT BE PENALISED – UNLESS HE DOES NOT RELEASE!

e. A PLAYER GETTING BACK ON HIS FEET SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PLAY THE BALL.

f. TACKLED PLAYERS SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO GET UP AND CRAWL, OR RUN WITH BALL ONCE THEY HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO GROUND.

g. Nothing wrong with awarding an unplayable at times – not as an excuse, but sometimes there is genuinely nothing wrong.

B. Scrum:

a. The cadence is important and one can talk about a fast vs slow cadence till the cows come home but what is important is to have:

i. Four distinct calls, namely: crouch, touch, pause and engage.

ii. Please check constantly with Balie Swart. [Swart is on the referees' committee as a scrum specialist.].

iii. But, it is important to have all to crouch when asked to, front rows to touch when asked to, and then to follow the ‘engage’ call after the ‘pause’ without too long a delay.

b. Do not follow the front rows but get them to engage on your call.

c. Do not guess.

d. Allow no individual angles by players but,

e. PLEASE ALLOW THE BIG BOYS TO SCRUM ONCE THE ENGAGEMENT was FINE – LET THEM ‘DO IT’ PLEASE!

C. Off side in general play:

a. Please keep at it; it already causes a lot more running as we have space all of a sudden.

D. Obstruction:

a. Is well refereed in general play but

b. Needs attention at kick off and

c. At the formation of mauls at line out.

 

[Scotty]

I think the "touch" is still important for the refs to judge distance. But pausing before the pre-engage pause is farking pointless.

I thought about that as well, but the touch call comes after the ref has set the scrum distance. It isn't like they stop the scrum after the touch and go 'hang on guys, move closer together'. If they can't judge distance between the two front rows without having them hang there arms out, then there is something wrong.

 

[Refabit]

I think the props use it (the touch) more than the refs to set the distance. They know they have to be close enough to touch. It sounds silly but they do use it. I always try to let the front rowers set their own distance and step in only as a last resort.

 

[Lee Grant]

Not a bad report from Watson but if I can have a whinge: this should have come from the SANZAR ref boss Lyndon Bray after consultation with the 3N ref bosses. No effect at the moment though; so play on.

The crackdown has lasted 3 weeks now which is about as long as the crackdown on not staying on feet in the Super12 lasted yonks ago; but I have higher hopes this time as I can see a response from the players. In the S12 the staying on feet application was observed with reluctant churlishness by the players and eventual weakness by the referees. It died, unlamented.

Now I see such things as tacklers rolling away. It's as though they were obeying a commandment of George Ayoub, who one hot day at TG Milner I heard say, in response to a player complaining that he couldn't get out of the way - "Mate, if the ball was a snake you'd be long gone."

I still have some gripes. The TV commentators miss some of the main points - even the excellent Bob Skinstad. Once a player was second man into a tackle and was penalised and IIRR he said something like "Rough call - he was plainly on his feet and was entitled to fetch the ball."

He wasn't - his first act was to bend over and put his hands on the ground, or ball, or player to get balance - the Dallaglio rent boy position. He used his hands to form a bridge. Had he not he would have landed on his face. Anything after that was contaminated.

Then, with admirable athleticism, the fetcher grabbed the ball and rocked back with it. He wasn't on feet when he entered the zone, and nor are some players with weight on their bellies reaching over other players. But these things happen so fast they look righteous.

I probably shouldn't say: "They wouldn't be allowed to do it in my day", because the game is much better now - but they wouldn't - they weren't on feet 100%.

The refs get it right many times and the commentators don't. But just as many times the referees act like the commentators would like them to.

That is one of my gripes.

Another gripe is too much leeway being given to attackers going off their feet. Some of the referees are cracking down now, especially if a ball carrier is isolated, but some refs seem to get carried away when the attacking team is on a roll late in the game, and want to be part of the action. Or so it seems.

Give me a ref who is calm and accurate for 80 minutes no matter what the game situation is - every time.

Another gripe - why don't we hear from the Watsons and the Brays etc - that more cards should be issued, sooner?

Do they not see what is missing from the formula?

 

[chief]

Gotta agree about the cards Lee, been campaigning for it a while. If players are going to deliberately slow down play and prevent attacking play then that player should spend 10 minutes in the sin bin while the team who has been trying to attack is given a attacking advantage. The earlier usage of cards, could probably mean the lesser use of cards in the long term. Let's hope we see Cole, Bray and Watson taking direct action against referees who are not complying.

Steve Walsh I'm looking at you

 

[PaarlBok]

Another gripe - why don't we hear from the Watsons and the Brays etc - that more cards should be issued, sooner?

Do they not see what is missing from the formula?

They probably hate seeing cards like myself. :nta:

Interesting to see Chiefs getting the highest score.

 

[chief]

Another gripe - why don't we hear from the Watsons and the Brays etc - that more cards should be issued, sooner?

Do they not see what is missing from the formula?

They probably hate seeing cards like myself. :nta:

Interesting to see Chiefs getting the highest score.

Bray hates them no doubt. I always remembered him avoiding at all costs to bringing out a card. I remember a blatant head butt on Sam Cordingley during a Tri Nations match by CJ Van Der Linde where it was 10 minutes through the match, and he gave him a warning. Talk about pulling a Bryce Lawrence.

 

[the gambler]

I quite liked point g in the tackle. About it being ok to call an unplayable ball.

Lee referred to how sometimes players pretend to be trapped, but often they generally are (mainly because attacking players have gone off their feet) and shouldn't be penalised. However because the Ref sees them there he thinks he better award a penalty because they get marked down for calling unplayable balls.