Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wayne Barnes

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post
    Garces appointed to referee the final.... Saracens will be delighted. The breakdown will be lethal, hopefully not literally.... Barnes gets the Challenge cup.
    I posted on the semi final thread that I’m sick of the likes of garces not getting held to account for terrible performances, in this case rewarded. Last week was an absolute disgrace the amount of things he missed & I’d include some of the occasional decisions he threw our way as well.

    What are the assessors looking at I want to know? Some of the things he is missing are blatant out. An example from last week Saracens 6 plays the ball off his feet in a ruck with his feet, with garces watching on, that’s 3 penalties in 1 play.

    Comment


      #47
      Originally posted by Munster Mojo View Post

      I posted on the semi final thread that I’m sick of the likes of garces not getting held to account for terrible performances, in this case rewarded. Last week was an absolute disgrace the amount of things he missed & I’d include some of the occasional decisions he threw our way as well.

      What are the assessors looking at I want to know? Some of the things he is missing are blatant out. An example from last week Saracens 6 plays the ball off his feet in a ruck with his feet, with garces watching on, that’s 3 penalties in 1 play.
      I was gobsmacked with how much he let slide in that game. Don't understand why refs don't ping up infringements early in the game...especially offside...once he has let it go, players will keep pushing up. curious decision for him to be ref for the final. hope the outcome isn't decided by a dodgy call by garces.

      Comment


        #48
        Originally posted by MylesNaGapoleen View Post

        I was gobsmacked with how much he let slide in that game. Don't understand why refs don't ping up infringements early in the game...especially offside...once he has let it go, players will keep pushing up. curious decision for him to be ref for the final. hope the outcome isn't decided by a dodgy call by garces.
        There’s been a group set up now to look at ways to encourage more attacking play to neutralise the blitz defences & reduce the amount of collisions in the game. Some of the ideas so far are 13 a side, getting the throw into the line out for kicks to touch in the opposition half etc. I think it was Wardy that said the biggest issue in this regard for the game is the offside line & if this was correctly monitored by referees it would remove a lot of these issues straight away. I’d agree with that statement.

        I’m no big soccer fan but by & large they have the offside rule down (yes there is the odd howler, but you won’t get away with living offside all game). I can’t understand why the touch judges in rugby aren’t made strictly inforce the offside line, they are both looking in from the line & have to spot most of the infringements. Teams wouldn’t be long copping on if it was penalty after penalty & it would improve the game no end.

        Poor refereeing & officiating like we see from the likes of garces are damaging the game in the long run.

        Comment


          #49
          Originally posted by Munster Mojo View Post

          There’s been a group set up now to look at ways to encourage more attacking play to neutralise the blitz defences & reduce the amount of collisions in the game. Some of the ideas so far are 13 a side, getting the throw into the line out for kicks to touch in the opposition half etc. I think it was Wardy that said the biggest issue in this regard for the game is the offside line & if this was correctly monitored by referees it would remove a lot of these issues straight away. I’d agree with that statement.

          I’m no big soccer fan but by & large they have the offside rule down (yes there is the odd howler, but you won’t get away with living offside all game). I can’t understand why the touch judges in rugby aren’t made strictly inforce the offside line, they are both looking in from the line & have to spot most of the infringements. Teams wouldn’t be long copping on if it was penalty after penalty & it would improve the game no end.

          Poor refereeing & officiating like we see from the likes of garces are damaging the game in the long run.
          Offside needs to be material for it to be picked up and actually penalised. When you say strictly enforced? What do you want ARs to be doing? Thryre on the mic all the time to ref with trends in games...

          Comment


            #50
            You've said this before, OL, and I've never agreed with you. Offside being material is about more than the nearest one or two defenders being a bit too close to the scrumhalf at the ruck. The reason for the offside line being behind the hindmost foot is to restrict the capacity of an entire defensive line to rush up and kill off the space for the attacking side. Failing to enforce that law means that a defensive line behind (or should I say, "behind") a ruck is able to immediately get into the faces of the attacking side not merely at the moment an attacking player receives the ball, but even as the scrumhalf lifts it. It is, therefore, absolutely material when the fourth, fifth or even eighth player out on the defending side is poised and ready to sprint towards an opposition receiver from an offside position. This makes it far more difficult for the team in possession to actually attack, leading to the prevalence of box-kicking, grubber kicks and multiple breakdowns.

            If the offside law were properly enforced, there would be more space for the attacking side to run into, meaning we would see more rugby with ball in hand, fewer phases of ruck-to-ruck play and god help us, a few more line breaks. I want the ARs to police the offside line far more strictly from the outset of every game, and again from the start of the second half as a reminder. Like Piquet and MM say, players getting pinged for something early on means that the offence is less likely to continue being committed. That will in turn lead to less, rather than more, stop-start play.
            Tis but a scratch.

            Comment


              #51
              One of the many complaints you'll hear about modern rugby is the lack of space.

              This is very clear when you've a defending player smashing a receiver just as he gets the ball. There is absolutely no way that the defending player started from an offside position.

              It's very obvious to anyone with even a passing interest in the game that these offside, rush defences are creating the lack of space that people talk about.

              There is absolutely no doubt that the more cynical teams (I'm looking at you Leinster and Sarries) are offside numerous times during a game. The correlation between being successful and being offside must be pretty high.

              Please support Milford Hospice. Click here to donate.

              Comment


                #52
                Originally posted by mr chips View Post
                You've said this before, OL, and I've never agreed with you. Offside being material is about more than the nearest one or two defenders being a bit too close to the scrumhalf at the ruck. The reason for the offside line being behind the hindmost foot is to restrict the capacity of an entire defensive line to rush up and kill off the space for the attacking side. Failing to enforce that law means that a defensive line behind (or should I say, "behind") a ruck is able to immediately get into the faces of the attacking side not merely at the moment an attacking player receives the ball, but even as the scrumhalf lifts it. It is, therefore, absolutely material when the fourth, fifth or even eighth player out on the defending side is poised and ready to sprint towards an opposition receiver from an offside position. This makes it far more difficult for the team in possession to actually attack, leading to the prevalence of box-kicking, grubber kicks and multiple breakdowns.

                If the offside law were properly enforced, there would be more space for the attacking side to run into, meaning we would see more rugby with ball in hand, fewer phases of ruck-to-ruck play and god help us, a few more line breaks. I want the ARs to police the offside line far more strictly from the outset of every game, and again from the start of the second half as a reminder. Like Piquet and MM say, players getting pinged for something early on means that the offence is less likely to continue being committed. That will in turn lead to less, rather than more, stop-start play.
                But you would be changing whole parts of what refereeing is about then and materiality isnt simoly about the nearest one or two defenders.
                For the sport to not be a complete whistlefest there must be some leniancy in these areas especially with the speed of defensive lines in the pro game.
                People keep saying proper enforcement of the offside law but in practicality what do ye want done? The AR to go on the ref mic every single time a player strays offside then?

                Comment


                  #53
                  Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                  But you would be changing whole parts of what refereeing is about then and materiality isnt simoly about the nearest one or two defenders.
                  For the sport to not be a complete whistlefest there must be some leniancy in these areas especially with the speed of defensive lines in the pro game.
                  People keep saying proper enforcement of the offside law but in practicality what do ye want done? The AR to go on the ref mic every single time a player strays offside then?
                  In the Leinster V Toulouse semi final Barnes (unusually) penalised both sides in the first five minutes for the tackler not rolling. Thereafter the teams knew they weren’t going to be left to lie all over the breakdown so they didn’t do it. All it takes is the ARs to ping side’s for being offside, the players will adapt accordingly and we will have a bit of space.

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Originally posted by the plastic paddy View Post

                    In the Leinster V Toulouse semi final Barnes (unusually) penalised both sides in the first five minutes for the tackler not rolling. Thereafter the teams knew they weren’t going to be left to lie all over the breakdown so they didn’t do it. All it takes is the ARs to ping side’s for being offside, the players will adapt accordingly and we will have a bit of space.
                    But they do when it is necessary to.
                    And ARs are on mic to refs all the time all depends on whether ref see's need to penalise one side or other.

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                      But you would be changing whole parts of what refereeing is about then and materiality isnt simoly about the nearest one or two defenders.
                      For the sport to not be a complete whistlefest there must be some leniancy in these areas especially with the speed of defensive lines in the pro game.
                      The game constantly evolves, as does the nature of officiating. The introduction of the TMO is one example of something that changed whole parts of what refereeing is about - same goes for the capacity for the ref to review incidents on the big screen in a stadium. This is a non-issue.
                      Materiality not being simply about the nearest one or two defenders is exactly the point I was making - ALL players in the defending team should be behind the hindmost foot of a ruck or else retreating with their hands in the air to show they are not interfering in an offside position.
                      Yes, a whistle-fest is undesirable - but this is something that usually happens as a direct result of a ref failing to impose his authority from the outset and with consistency, e.g constant resetting of scrums when a ref won't penalise deliberate collapsing, failing to drive straight etc.

                      Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                      People keep saying proper enforcement of the offside law but in practicality what do ye want done? The AR to go on the ref mic every single time a player strays offside then?
                      Yes, I absolutely, definitely, 100% want the defensive line to be behind the hindmost foot of the ruck and to be strictly enforced by a flag from the assistant referee to result in some form of sanction against the offending side, most likely a penalty kick. A less drastic alternative could be a scrum/free kick to the side in possession 10m ahead of where the offside offence took place. This would eradicate the problem within a matter of weeks. The current farcical non-implementation of the laws is a blight on the game - this will not change until mindsets like yours, as someone who is in a position to implement the laws, do.
                      Tis but a scratch.

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Originally posted by mr chips View Post

                        The game constantly evolves, as does the nature of officiating. The introduction of the TMO is one example of something that changed whole parts of what refereeing is about - same goes for the capacity for the ref to review incidents on the big screen in a stadium. This is a non-issue.
                        Materiality not being simply about the nearest one or two defenders is exactly the point I was making - ALL players in the defending team should be behind the hindmost foot of a ruck or else retreating with their hands in the air to show they are not interfering in an offside position.
                        Yes, a whistle-fest is undesirable - but this is something that usually happens as a direct result of a ref failing to impose his authority from the outset and with consistency, e.g constant resetting of scrums when a ref won't penalise deliberate collapsing, failing to drive straight etc.
                        Ideally every player would but if a player(players) quite wide out/far out from breakdown in defensive line are a step or two offside then we shouldnt penalise them all the time. Or else you have to go down line of penalising far more at breakdown and everywhere else in game simply because theyre infringing.
                        A whistlefest isnt simply because a ref fails to impost authority. You have to give benefit of doubt to teams and cant simply look to penalise especially when the game is long enough as it is. And Yes ARs are in communication with refs via their mics but how much do we want them to be calling up offsides?


                        Yes, I absolutely, definitely, 100% want the defensive line to be behind the hindmost foot of the ruck and to be strictly enforced by a flag from the assistant referee to result in some form of sanction against the offending side, most likely a penalty kick. A less drastic alternative could be a scrum/free kick to the side in possession 10m ahead of where the offside offence took place. This would eradicate the problem within a matter of weeks. The current farcical non-implementation of the laws is a blight on the game - this will not change until mindsets like yours, as someone who is in a position to implement the laws, do.
                        A Touch Judge/Assistant Ref puts their flag up for foul play only. Not penalties.
                        And im sorry chippy if you think officials being this bit more harsher on teams would eradicate this then you are extremely naive.
                        You have to have a feel for the game and simply penalising everything because the law isnt being followed to the letter makes the sport far worse off.
                        Same with breakdown work and differences in how it is refereed.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                          if a player(players) quite wide out/far out from breakdown in defensive line are a step or two offside then we shouldnt penalise them all the time. Or else you have to go down line of penalising far more at breakdown and everywhere else in game simply because theyre infringing.
                          Yes, you should. This is why the law was introduced, to prevent the closing down of attacking space. Failing to implement this is a significant failure on the part of the officials which has a substantial, material effect on the way the game is played.

                          Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                          A whistlefest isnt simply because a ref fails to impost authority. You have to give benefit of doubt to teams and cant simply look to penalise especially when the game is long enough as it is.
                          The majority of the time, it is exactly because of a ref failing to be clear, authoritative and consistent from the outset, i.e. from the start of the game. Players aren't stupid, they quickly adapt to what a ref will whistle and adapt accordingly - or concede penalties, meaning they will be more likely to lose the game. Coaches aren't stupid either, and they will train their players to "play to the whistle".

                          Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                          And Yes ARs are in communication with refs via their mics but how much do we want them to be calling up offsides?
                          As I said above - for the hindmost foot of the ruck, 100% unless players are retreating with hands in the air to show they are not interfering with play (and not obstructing, obviously).

                          Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                          A Touch Judge/Assistant Ref puts their flag up for foul play only. Not penalties.
                          No reason why this can't be changed, but in any case as you say the AR is in communication with the ref via microphone - there's nothing to stop them telling him/her that the defending team has crept offside so that the ref can initially warn and then where necessary penalise. Especially if it's something that team is doing for the second, fourth, 20th time. It's the responsibility of the ref to follow up on this and if he/she doesn't, he should be hauled over the coals at review.

                          Originally posted by ormond lad View Post
                          And im sorry chippy if you think officials being this bit more harsher on teams would eradicate this then you are extremely naive.
                          You have to have a feel for the game and simply penalising everything because the law isnt being followed to the letter makes the sport far worse off.
                          Same with breakdown work and differences in how it is refereed.
                          Ah here. "When six people tell you you're sick, lie down!" Your constant refusal to accept any sort of alternative view, even when it comes from multiple sources, is indicative of a firmly closed mind. I've never seen you criticise a ref's decision, and when people post any sort of criticism of referees on here your default response is to jump in to defend them. It's a classic example of "closed ranks". How can you expect anyone to engage with you or take your contributions about refereeing seriously when you have zero acceptance of anyone else's input?
                          Tis but a scratch.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            The tip tackle was all but eradicated from the game in a matter of weeks after the referees were instructed to have zero tolerance. Really nasty high tackles are increasingly rare and the mid air challenge has become a lot safer. If the referees showed zero tolerance for the blitz being offside it wouldn’t happen anymore. I understand there are priorities in the game but offside is a priority right now.

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Originally posted by mr chips View Post
                              Yes, you should. This is why the law was introduced, to prevent the closing down of attacking space. Failing to implement this is a significant failure on the part of the officials which has a substantial, material effect on the way the game is played.
                              Im sorry chippy but if thats the case then you wouldnt have an advantage law. You dont penalise every infringement you see especially if it isnt directly related to the ball carrier/ball. If you penalise every incident you are slowing the game down far more you remove continuity and reduce ball in play time. It isnt a significant failure from officials. If it was as big a concern in the game as its been this way for years then why hasnt anything been done about it in all the world rugby changes to laws, Advice to referees etc?

                              The majority of the time, it is exactly because of a ref failing to be clear, authoritative and consistent from the outset, i.e. from the start of the game. Players aren't stupid, they quickly adapt to what a ref will whistle and adapt accordingly - or concede penalties, meaning they will be more likely to lose the game. Coaches aren't stupid either, and they will train their players to "play to the whistle".
                              A referee and his team not being extremely strict on this isnt a cop out. Its game management/having a feel for the game.
                              It isnt a ref lacking in authority. You are showing a lack of empathy for the sport in my opinion by wanting to be as harsh on teams.

                              As I said above - for the hindmost foot of the ruck, 100% unless players are retreating with hands in the air to show they are not interfering with play (and not obstructing, obviously).
                              Doing that for every single ruck/breakdown when there can be 200+ tackle/rucks in games would see far too many penalties in games and would make the game even more stop start than it is and we should be going the other way not having far more involvement from officials.

                              No reason why this can't be changed, but in any case as you say the AR is in communication with the ref via microphone - there's nothing to stop them telling him/her that the defending team has crept offside so that the ref can initially warn and then where necessary penalise. Especially if it's something that team is doing for the second, fourth, 20th time. It's the responsibility of the ref to follow up on this and if he/she doesn't, he should be hauled over the coals at review.
                              No reason. Its perfect policy. A flag should be for the most serious of incidents not a few players a few steps offside. Would you want touch judges/assistants to be flagging for players going in from the side of rucks as well or what about scrum penalties?

                              Ah here. "When six people tell you you're sick, lie down!" Your constant refusal to accept any sort of alternative view, even when it comes from multiple sources, is indicative of a firmly closed mind. I've never seen you criticise a ref's decision, and when people post any sort of criticism of referees on here your default response is to jump in to defend them. It's a classic example of "closed ranks". How can you expect anyone to engage with you or take your contributions about refereeing seriously when you have zero acceptance of anyone else's input?
                              Accept plenty in criticism of how games are refereed when the proposals/criticisms are realistic.

                              Comment


                                #60
                                OL, you fail to understand (or pretend not to understand ) that if the Ref pings a team for a particular offence, then, eventually, that team will cease to offend.

                                It may take a few matches, but if, as suggested, Refs start to go to town on offside players, consistently and continuously, the penny will eventually drop, as long as the Officials hold their nerve and are backed up by the Administrators.

                                As PP has pointed out, action was taken on the tip tackle. Once this action was taken and it was accepted that it wasn't the Ref who issued the card that "ruined the game as a spectacle" rather it was the player who was carded, it has been eradicated for the most part.

                                Similarly, it won't be the Refs pulling for Offside that will be ruining the game, it will be the players who continue to be offside.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X