Not saying they because of..... I said they mostered them on the scoreboard. When I say guessing I mean scrums because that is where most of the guess works come into play. Can you honestly tell me that referees have not been targeting certain individual props in the scrums?
lol I think you misunderstood me. Referees have identified props and are penalizing them. Just like professional coaches referees analyze teams as well to prepare. Take a look at the props most penalized last couple of years and you will see that names stand out of props. If it was mostly names of just props fine then at least they have been subjective and know what is going on but the same names popping up time after time clearly shows that they have been identified and one is doing what the other referee did in the past and looking at a single player to nail him rather than keeping a eye on everyone.
Thank God I am not the only person to have noticed and commented on this. Although I wasn't an 'A' student at physics, even I have worked out that having 2 packs of forwards weighing 800-900 kgs lining up and crashing into each other is likely to produce collapse, unsteadiness and no doubt many other things.
The thing is there is nothing in the rules saying anything about the hit. Why trail it? Just tell referees to let them come together without force.
Rugby is a funny old game. You create rules to see more open play and you end up with less space, 150 rucks and the same amount of kicks. They are even start phasing out the rolling mall. Soon we will get to a scenario where one have to ask what s the difference between league and union besides for the 15 men on the field? In 2001 we enjoyed some great matches. One gotta ask why they implemented all these breakdown laws?
Correct but in those times you would not dare to slow a ball down at a ruck as you would get tiger striped. Neither would back line players dare to go into a ruck.
Technically yes. Laws changed or not controlled rucking is still being outlawed and its considered as foul play.
) many old games and the same variables we see in today's game are there, games with slow ball and games with unbelievably fast ball.
You're right, raking, stomping, kicking players on the ground was and still is illegal. My earlier point was that the laws have never changed on this, just the refereeing interpretation.The funny thing about "The Ruck" is that nowhere in the rules does it say you can slipper a player laying on the ground. The fact is that a player laying on the ground got trodden on as the ruck moved backwards and forwards over them, or tried to. They morphed into intentionally using the studs dragged across the back or arm or whatever to ensure they moved, and in more than a few cases stomping the shit out of the poor bastard trapped in there. Nowhere did it say in the rules that this was permissible and it does in fact (and I'll leave it to others to quote Sections and Subsections) that you cannot intentional play players without the ball, players on the ground, kicking, punching stomping etc.
The romanticised view of "rucking" is just that a rose coloured glasses backward view of something that didn't work that well and wasn't in the spirit of the game in any event. I have in my library of VHS tapes (yes I still have a working machine that I repair every few months, somewhere I even have a Beta unit
Rugby's vagaries are part of its charm to me and part of its character, League games are pretty much all the same at the highest level, the same quality every day of the week with little deviation. It is a very marketable product in that way. Rugby however is different, more than a few games are just terrible slug fests where there is little to recommend them to any but the purists (among which I include myself), then there are those games which are just sublime, where the skills displayed both individually and as a team just leave you elated and stunned and crowing about the game to all who will listen and those that won't. It makes Rugby much more difficult to market, it makes watching problematic at times, but we all have to realise that the great myriad of factors that go into making that sublime game include the vagaries in the Laws AND the application of those Laws by individual referees and their personalities.
Anyway that is my last word on this thread - Referee's have shockers like the rest of use, they may well get a focus on some individuals who they observe over numerous game offending in a particular manner to exclusion of others, they may have other flaws (heaven forbid we get somebody with a personality like say Mr Steve Walsh). I do not believe we have bad referees, we have certainly had bad management of referees, with some placed in bad situations that could have been avoided. We will see bad decisions, maybe some game changers, but there is always another viewpoint that the educated person should try and find and consider before condemning as "incompetent". My final last word is I appreciate the efforts of the refs, all of them as they add to immense value to the game, often under extreme duress and more often with a total lack of appreciation, and without them I would never again see that sublime game that lives within us all in our memories and we watch again and again for the next time it happens.
I do however reserve the right to yell out the tried and true - "Are ya blind, get some glasses" and my personal favourite at oranges hand him a copy of the Laws with the advice he might actually want to read this for the first time during the break.
But how do you get the ball over a man lying there spoiling it? Touch him and you are suspended. Anyways we agree on some aspects lets not go too far from the original thread but talking about the standard of refereeing. Do you know the Pretoria black boots attack? One of the easiest ways to score a 7 pointer and getting through the defense. This is the 2nd thing they show half backs when signing up for the Bulls.
I've always said half backs are the smartest players on the fieldBut how do you get the ball over a man lying there spoiling it? Touch him and you are suspended. Anyways we agree on some aspects lets not go too far from the original thread but talking about the standard of refereeing. Do you know the Pretoria black boots attack? One of the easiest ways to score a 7 pointer and getting through the defense. This is the 2nd thing they show half backs when signing up for the Bulls.
Look where the referee stands and which hole they aim for. Defender only note black boots next to him not realizing it belongs to a referee actually and the hole is bigger what they think it is. All those instances lead to 7 pointers and I got hours of material of that hole. Some referees still go standing the defense. George Gregan was brilliant picking up a referee standing in the defense. That classic 2000 game every time Watson stood in the defense he aimed at him. When Watson wasn't standing there he exploited Lomu who had no idea what drift means or when to commit. Two of Mortlocks try and Paul try came exploiting Lomu
Its funny that the referees never notice this as you will find them still standing in that hole lolI've always said half backs are the smartest players on the field