Two refs is working well

[Ref2009]

correct 'game breaker' and they may have a different opinion to me, you or another person so we are never going to have everyone happy with a decison, remembering we make ours after countless replays the ref after a split second. Again they are human and make mistakes, i think its time we gave them a break, went back to video referee for grounding only, bugger of News Limited and not care about players sex life......

 

[Parra]

Well, since the days of Hollywood Hartley and Selflover Harrigan we should be used to the idea that refs are as important as the game.

Sorry - more important. After all, it's not the refs at fault - it is the rules of the game that are to blame.

 

[Ref2009]

not sure what issue where blaming people here for atm but if its the state of the game there are several factors: the rules/managment/media/commentators/ and if you want the players and referees...although i think managment is to blame more than anything

 

[abpanther]

Terrible decision and I agree that this is the issue with the 2 refs, having said that, no guarantee that they make that field goal under those conditions.

 

[Ref2009]

and again refs as important as the game......well does the game go on without a referee????? i think not.......refs and players are equally important.

 

[super_coach]

The two ref system working??? tonights two games, the best teams in both games could only manage one point Parra and the Tigers. Its a joke week in and week out we are seeing the best team getting the wrong end of the deal from the pink ladys.

 

[Ike E Bear]

Still haven't seen a definition of "set" or "unpack" in relation to scrums.

Can someone provide one from the rules?!?!?!?!

I'm ignorant of these new rules (didn't even know they existed until tonight), so I want the above issue clarified before I form a proper opinion ... and not just an emotional one. For the record I'm an Eels fans, who follows the Rabbitohs as a second team ... the only way I'd have been happier with the result is if the Eels had kicked one of their last two field goals. A draw isn't that bad.

Again, out of ignorance ... it seems to me that the spirit of the rule is that the players that rush to form the scrum should have to CONTEST (ha!) that scrum. If you have a winger and two centres as your scrum's front row, tough luck. Personally, I don't see how McPherson supposedly lifting his head slightly when the two packs haven't even engaged would come into it.

I'm a bit baffled.

I'd LOVE to hear from the Ref Champions on those definitions. Show those to me from the rules and you'll have at least one more ally.

 

[ozjet1]

by any chance.. are you the same person asRef2009

two users both supporting refs join in the same month..


the_mighty_refs

Juniors


Join Date: 22-05-2009
Total Posts4


-----
Ref2009

Juniors


Join Date:
22-05-2009
Total Posts6

same join date... TODAY.... similiar amount of posts

no coincidence.. surely

Robert Finch & Brett Finch.

 

[Iafeta]

IMO Souths have as much to blame Brett Suttor for as they do Roy Asotasi. After Souths rush to get the scrum packed, Roy pops his head up to look around and disengages from the scrum. It was one of the dumbest plays of the year. The rules have been interpreted this year that you can get time off if you get to the scrum and pack it, but time will be put back on as soon as the other team has formed the scrum or the rushing team either leaves formation or stands up from a scrumming position. Roy was in, then pulls his head out and doesn't stick it back in immediately. It was a schoolboy error and something the captain should take responsibility for.

As far as Suttor goes though, I have no problem with him blowing time back on, but at 9 seconds when it becomes apparent that the ball is 10m downfield on the goal-line, he needs to blow time back off. That's not a South Sydney error. I'm not sure how it got there, did Parramatta throw it away or did the ball balls place the ball incorrectly??? If it's an act of either of Parramatta or the ball boy, then common sense entails that time is off until Wing is able to get the ball to feed the scrum legitimately.

I'd also blame Gavin Badger, it looked to me after the game that he looked a bit sheepish and was going after Suttor to talk to him. As the experienced refereee, when he realised what happened he should have taken control.

 

[Shifty]

The rule needs to be reviewed immediately.

It's ridiculous, one team rushes to pack and then has to stay like that as the other team deliberately stroll down and catch their breath.

Dane Laurie stood their while the rest of his pack were set and when the Broncos finally showed up he never bothered to pack in properly anyway.

Scrums haven't been contest for years now, so why waste all this time and effort on them?

 

[rossy]

Still haven't seen a definition of "set" or "unpack" in relation to scrums.

Can someone provide one from the rules?!?!?!?!

I'm ignorant of these new rules (didn't even know they existed until tonight), so I want the above issue clarified before I form a proper opinion ... and not just an emotional one. For the record I'm an Eels fans, who follows the Rabbitohs as a second team ... the only way I'd have been happier with the result is if the Eels had kicked one of their last two field goals. A draw isn't that bad.

Again, out of ignorance ... it seems to me that the spirit of the rule is that the players that rush to form the scrum should have to CONTEST (ha!) that scrum. If you have a winger and two centres as your scrum's front row, tough luck. Personally, I don't see how McPherson supposedly lifting his head slightly when the two packs haven't even engaged would come into it.

I'm a bit baffled.

I'd LOVE to hear from the Ref Champions on those definitions. Show those to me from the rules and you'll have at least one more ally.

I'd be inclined to think that when your head is between the hips of the hooker and prop in front of you and your arm is bound to the other second rower then you've packed into the scrum. As a second rower if your head isn't in the scrum the you've got an unfair adavantage, especially if defending. Same with the lock.

 

[no name]

I'd be inclined to think that when your head is between the hips of the hooker and prop in front of you and your arm is bound to the other second rower then you've packed into the scrum. As a second rower if your head isn't in the scrum the you've got an unfair adavantage, especially if defending. Same with the lock.

It would have been interesting to see, had time been called off, what they would have said about Nathan Hindmarsh. He came screaming out of the scrum as the siren sounded.

 

[Ref2009]

For those that requested it:

A scrum has been SET once all players have bound correctly and are locked together. It has been unpacked the moment a player moves from the 'set' position i.e is no longer locked in and has his neck and back parallel to the ground as such. Hope this clears up some confusion. again a scrum is no packed if a player has a arm, head or anything loose.

 

[Ike E Bear]

For those that requested it:

A scrum has been SET once all players have bound correctly and are locked together.

"All players"? All players of one team or both?

At this stage, I still think the spirit of the rule is just to ensure that the players who form the scrum "contest" (funny idea, I know) the scrum.

Additionally, it prevents excessive time wasting from the team that rushes to pack the scrum once they get time calling off. Of course, it doesn't stop the other team wasting as much or more time. :crazy:

At very least there is a problem with the rule ... but I still haven't seen a quoted rules section that completely absolves Suttor of a stuff up.

... again a scrum is no packed if a player has a arm, head or anything loose.

By this definition, I see scrums EVERY game that are NEVER packed.

 

[johnkelley]

brett sutton was correct.
in the rule book, page 16 at the bottom it states Scrum: If a scrum has been set and fed before time expires play shall continue until a player in possession is tackled or the ball goes out of play.
Why don't you's all learn the rules before you make judgement.
Its not the referees fault that souths didn't know how to keep their scrum pack and if they wanted a quick start why didn't wing go and get the before and then waste time going to get it when Sutton blew time back on.
Its Souths own fault they lost the game, NOT THE REFEREE

A couple more ref mistakes in your post.

a/ Brett Suttor not Sutton

b/ The game was a draw, Souths did not lose they drew.

Keep trying Champ.

 

[Parra]

By this definition, I see scrums EVERY game that are NEVER packed.

Exactly. Yet again we see a rule that is only enforced at a crucial stage - yet is ignored most of the time.


Who in the NRL decided it was time to reintroduce technical scrum infringements?

When a scrum infringement is ruled in such a high profile way it is reminiscent of rugby. And there are plenty of people who wont like that comparison.