Select Edition

Northern Northern
Southern Southern
Global Global
NZ NZ

You're the Ref - What would you give?

By Paul Smith
Rugby referee Nigel Owens and Peter O'Mahony (Photo by Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)

We all like to shout at the TV during the Six Nations or offer the officials some ‘helpful’ advice from the touchline or terraces of our local ground.

ADVERTISEMENT

“You’re so far out of your depth you’d drown in a puddle,” is one of the more memorable lines I heard during my time as a referee.

RugbyPass is now giving fans everywhere the chance to put themselves to the test.

Ref Watch columnist Paul Smith’s answer is below.

The Scenario:

You are the referee of a match played in pouring rain on a pitch with huge in-goal areas.

Video Spacer

A sneak peek at Stadio Sergio Lanfranchi in Parma

Video Spacer

A sneak peek at Stadio Sergio Lanfranchi in Parma

With his team feeding a defensive five-metre scrum the home side’s full back positions himself directly behind the set-piece just inside his dead ball line.

The rest of the home backs line up 15 metres in front of the full back on their goal-line.

After winning scrum possession the ball is passed to the full back who seeks to find touch.

Fast-advancing opponents pressure the kicker who slices badly causing the ball to strike his own posts and balloon in the air.

Although the away side’s no.7 is now only a metre away, the home centres are closest to the ball which eventually comes down directly behind their posts never having crossed the goal-line.

These three players contest the awkwardly spinning ball in the air. It is caught then immediately touched down by the home side’s no.12.

ADVERTISEMENT

What is your decision?

a) Five-metre scrum opposite the point where the ball was touched down with the away side to feed

b) Goal-line drop out

c) Penalty to the away side on the five-metre line opposite the point where the ball first went into in goal

d) Penalty to the away side on the five-metre line opposite the point where the ball was touched down and a yellow card for home no.12

e) Penalty try

f) Penalty try and yellow card for home no.12

Ref Watch columnist Paul Smith’s answer:

ADVERTISEMENT

I’d opt for option F – a penalty try and yellow card for home no.12, although I also see the argument for D.

Explanation:

Despite what is sometimes suggested a player can be offside in goal.

Home no.12 is in front of the kicker and is therefore offside once he interferes with play.

The close proximity of away no.7 brings a penalty try into the referee’s thoughts.

Based on the skill level of the players and weather conditions the referee must assess the probability of a try being scored had the no.12’s offence not taken place.

Given that home no.12 caught the ball under pressure, we have to assume away no.7 would have managed it too – especially without the presence of the offside player.

It is therefore a penalty try.

Home no.12 is guilty of a ‘professional foul’ type offence in his own ‘red zone’ and since he is identifiable he is shown a yellow card.

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | Episode 6

Sam Warburton | The Big Jim Show | Full Episode

Japan Rugby League One | Sungoliath v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Japan Rugby League One | Spears v Wild Knights | Full Match Replay

Boks Office | Episode 10 | Six Nations Final Round Review

Aotearoa Rugby Podcast | How can New Zealand rugby beat this Ireland team

Beyond 80 | Episode 5

Rugby Europe Men's Championship Final | Georgia v Portugal | Full Match Replay

Trending on RugbyPass

Comments

Join free and tell us what you really think!

Sign up for free
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest Features

Comments on RugbyPass

T
Trevor 2 hours ago
Will forgotten Wallabies fit the Joe Schmidt model?

Thanks Brett.. At last a positive article on the potential of Wallaby candidates, great to read. Schmidt’s record as an international rugby coach speaks for itself, I’m somewhat confident he will turn the Wallaby’s fortunes around …. on the field. It will be up to others to steady the ship off the paddock. But is there a flaw in my optimism? We have known all along that Australia has the players to be very competitive with their international rivals. We know that because everyone keeps telling us. So why the poor results? A question that requires a definitive answer before the turn around can occur. Joe Schmidt signed on for 2 years, time to encompass the Lions tour of 2025. By all accounts he puts family first and that’s fair enough, but I would wager that his 2 year contract will be extended if the next 18 months or so shows the statement “Australia has the players” proves to be correct. The new coach does not have a lot of time to meld together an outfit that will be competitive in the Rugby Championship - it will be interesting to see what happens. It will be interesting to see what happens with Giteau law, the new Wallaby coach has already verbalised that he would to prefer to select from those who play their rugby in Australia. His first test in charge is in July just over 3 months away .. not a long time. I for one wish him well .. heaven knows Australia needs some positive vibes.

21 Go to comments
B
Bull Shark 6 hours ago
Jake White: Are modern rugby players actually better?

Of the rugby I’ve born witness to in my lifetime - 1990 to date - I recognize great players throughout those years. But I have no doubt the game and the players are on average better today. So I doubt going back further is going to prove me wrong. The technical components of the game, set pieces, scrums, kicks, kicks at goal. And in general tactics employed are far more efficient, accurate and polished. Professional athletes that have invested countless hours on being accurate. There is one nation though that may be fairly competitive in any era - and that for me is the all blacks. And New Zealand players in general. NZ produces startling athletes who have fantastic ball skills. And then the odd phenomenon like Brooke. Lomu. Mcaw. Carter. Better than comparing players and teams across eras - I’ve often had this thought - that it would be very interesting to have a version of the game that is closer to its original form. What would the game look like today if the rules were rolled back. Not rules that promote safety obviously - but rules like: - a try being worth 1 point and conversion 2 points. Hence the term “try”. Earning a try at goals. Would we see more attacking play? - no lifting in the lineouts. - rucks and break down laws in general. They looked like wrestling matches in bygone eras. I wonder what a game applying 1995 rules would look like with modern players. It may be a daft exercise, but it would make for an interesting spectacle celebrating “purer” forms of the game that roll back the rules dramatically by a few versions. Would we come to learn that some of the rules/combinations of the rules we see today have actually made the game less attractive? I’d love to see an exhibition match like that.

29 Go to comments
FEATURE
FEATURE Luke Cowan-Dickie: 'I didn’t feel right. I felt like I was going to pass out. Everything was going black in front of me' Luke Cowan-Dickie: 'I didn’t feel right. I felt like I was going to pass out. Everything was going black in front of me'
Search