Pitfalls of Rugby

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 38, 7 May 1927, Page 12

Pitfalls of Rugby

RULES AND RULERS

Puzzlers of the Game Written for THE SUN by Rev. W. B. Scott, Dunedin. This year I complete my twentyfirst year as an active referee of the Rugby code. Fifteen of those years have been spent in firstclass football in Taranaki, Wanganui, Canterbury and Otago. My experience has led me to the conclusion that the revisions and qualifications that have grown up in the rule book have been due very largely to the “pointing” indulged in by teams in various parts of the Dominion. Some coaches are past masters in theart to the detriment, I think, of the teams and the game. Anything that is not “cricket” in the sense in which that word is understood, should be condemned root and branch. The other day two first-grade teams had a great battle. The school team was ten points to the bad when it suddenly came to light, changed the character of the game and five minutes before the close of the game was in the lead by one point. From that moment to the end of the game it endeavoured to keep the ball in play and when it went into touch it was returned with great celerity to the plaudits of the large crowd that - had assembled. In contrast to this sporting action, their opponents when in the lead were exceedingly dilatory when returning the ball, but when the school team had a point advantage their dilatoriness vanished. Many teams are instructed to do this and it is difficult to detect, but if persisted in one can easily see that it will have to be legislated for more than it is at present. There is also a bad habit in some teams of indulging in a kind of tripping that looks accidental, but is really intentional. That, too, will have to be ruled on so that the “accidental” will suffer the penalty of the “intentional,” and then one can readily imagine it will quickly disappear. A case in point is that of recovering a ball after a knock-on. This becomes a fine art with some players, so that they were able to knock-on over the head of an opponent and with a speedy side-step recover the ball and carry on. Legislation then limited this to a stride, but it was difficult to interpret so that this year we have come back to the English rule which reads: “If the ball is knocked on, no matter how slightly it must be considered a knock-on, even though the ball is recovered before it touches the ground.” That is clear and we are on side once again. MEMORIES OF 1919. The variation between the English and the Dominion ruling on this point created a very awkward five minutes for me in 1919, when refereeing a match in Bristol between the local team and a New Zealand team from Codford. The points were six all and five minutes to go, when a “Digger” got possession of the ball and dropped a beautiful goal. The crowd rent the air with yells of disapproval and I had to be escorted from the grounds.

I afterwards discovered that the “Digger” in question had knocked on about a foot before recovering the ball. Naturally I took no notice but the crowd, whose money was evidently at stake, as well as the honour of the team, resented my Dominion point of view. From the reading of the English law given above they were right and I was wrong. If this law is to be rigidly interpreted there will be some tense moments when the fullback does not take the ball cleanly. Only last SaturdaV the whistle should have been blown in one match quite half-a-dozen times through the fullback fumbling. The rule says, “no matter how slightly,” and it seems to me that this is going to create much controversy unless interpreted literally by all or liberally by all. If acted on literally there is going to be much slowing up of the game I am afraid.

The referee must be careful not to blow his whistle too suddenly for a knock-on, because the advantage rule must be considered in this connection. No whistle need be blown if a player knocks-on and the advantage goes to the opposing side. THE OFF-SIDE RULE

This rule is undoubtedly the one that gives the most trouble to all concerned and rulings are various in all parts of the Dominion. In country districts ,1 find that many, clubs of the first grade fail to understand the A.B.C* of the rule with regard to offside. There are continual appeals for offside when no breach has taken place, and, on the other hand, things are done, that are obviously against the regulations, without any notice being taken. This year’s handbook does make .a laudable endeavour to classify the rulings upon the question of “offside” and they are brought into line with English law. The following diagram should help us to understand what “offside” really means.

A 1 has kicked the ball to 81. A2 A 3 and A 4 are in offside positions. The circle represents the ten yards limit. At a glance it can be seen that A2 and A 4 are outside the ten yards circle. They are all right so long as they allow Bl to run five yards before taking part in the game. If Bl should mull the ball they are at once on side, always providing, of course, that A 3 has not been the cause of him mulling the ball. These are points to be settled by the referee. A 3 is the real culprit in this case. He is inside the ten yards and while he remains in that position he is out of the game. It is his duty to get outside that imaginary ten yards circle as soon as possible, otherwise his side will suffer the penalty. If a player offside is within the ten yards circle, in the referee’s opinion, he is quite justified in ruling him out of the game and penalising him accordingly. My own action would be, if Bl mulled the ball as it came from Al, that A 3 had contributed to the disaster and he would be penalised. Now' take the position of A 4. What a roar there would be if in such a position he snapped up the ball, crossed the line, and was awarded a try. Yet if Bl intentionally—mark that word because unintentional does not

apply in the working out of the rule — touches the ball and the ball goes on towards the gaol line. A 4 is‘ on side and can play it. The fact of Bl trying to play the ball and failing to do so, and because A 4 is outside the ten yards circle, then A 4 is placed on side. A 5 is on side and can follow up Al’s kick, but carefully note that he cannot put A2, A 3 or A 4 on side. Al the kicker, can put them on side by running up so long as he is not in touch at the time. A player offside cannot stand still to wait till he is put on side. That is to passively obstruct and can be penalised. MAY INTERCEPT A PASS A player who is offside may intercept a pass. His opponents’ act in passing the ball puts him on side, but remember when accepting the pass he must be outside the ten yards circle. I venture to submit that very few intercept a pass ten yards away. Just measure it out and see. My policy is to be very chary with* regard to allowing intercepted passes. I have seen many given that would not come up to the standard of a five yards rule. The handbook endeavours to simplify the intricacies of offside by giving the following advice: 1. A player is off side when he is in front of the player on his own side who last played the ball. He is not necessarily off side because he is in front of the ball except when the ball is in the scrummage. 2. A player is not penalised for being off side unless he does certain things. They are: (a) Wilfully remaining or approaching within ten yards of an opponent waiting to receive the ball; (b) plaving the ball; (c) entering the scrummage from the opponents’ side; (d) remaining in front of the ball while it is in the scrummage. The following English regulations have been incorporated in our own handbook. I give them briefly, and without the preciseness of the book. Referees should strictly enforce the penalties and a player must be penalised if he prevents a fair catch being taken through his proximity to an opponent making the catch more difficult. Neither can such player pounce upon the ball and play it. No scrummage can be claimed for unintentional offside by a player who has kicked the ball in such a way that it strikes one of his own men in front of him. Referees must not act as if much of the offside was unintentional. A few penalties would soon rectify that disorder.

Wing-forwards are to be regarded as “suspect” by the referees and they are to be on the watch for offside and obstruction. Wing-forwards, and all other players not in a scrum, must be behind the ball while it is in the scrummage but there is no intention in the rules to penalise a player who unintentionally overruns the ball while it is in a scrummage.

Now what can I say more about this offside rule? Have I exhausted it. Not by a long chalk. The handbook has no less than 60 paragraphs dealing with the question and my advice to every referee, young, old and in the middle distance, is to read, re-read, and read again the regulations on this matter. It is the most intricate law to master and very difficult to apply. No one can claim to be a real master of the game until it is thoroughly understood and can be applied in any situation that may arise on the Rugby field. Having grasped the rule a good deal must be left to the referee in the application.

REP MATCHES

BIG RUGBY EVENTS AUCKLAND’S ATTRACTIVE LIST HAWKE’S BAY ON AUGUST 27 The following representative matches have been arranged for the coming season by the New Zealand Rugby Union. Auckland has an attractive list of home fixtures against leading teams, so that some great football should be seen here as the season advances. A match with Hawke’s Bay, the holders of the Ranfurly Shield, is set down for August 27, the match to be played at Auckland. The full representative programme is as follows: — _ . June 3: Hawke’s Bay v. Wairarapa, at Napier; Wanganui v. Taranaki, at Wanganui. June 11: Hawke's Bay v. Poverty Bay, at Napier. June 22: Wairarapa v. Bush Districts, at Pahiatua. July 6: Wellington v. Taranaki, at Hawera. July 9: Hawke’s Bay v. Wairarapa, in Wairarapa. July 23: Bush Districts v. Wairarapa, in Wairarapa; South Canterbury v. North Otago, at Oamaru; Thames Valley v. Waikato, at Paeroa. July 26: Wellington v. South Canterbury, at Wellington. July 27: Hawke’s Bay v, Taranaki, at Napier. July 30: Hawke's Bay v. Manawhenua, at Napier; South Canterbury v. Wanganui, at Wanganui; Hawke’s Bay v. Bush, at Pahiatua. August 3: South Canterbury v. Taranaki, in Taranaki. August 6: Southland v. Otago, at Dunedin; Waikato v. King Country, at Hamilton; South Canterbury v. Auckland, at Auckland.

August 10: Southland v. South Canterbury, at Timaru. August 13: Southland v. Wanganui, at Wanganui; King Country v. Thames Valley, at Paeroa; Taranaki v. Auckland, in Taranaki; August 17: Wellington v. Southland, at Wellington; Manawhenua v. King Country, in King Country. August 20: Manawhenua v. Auckland, at Auckland; Taranaki v. Otago, at Dunedin; Southland v. Canterbury, at Christchurch; Thames Valley v. Bay of Plenty, at Rotorua. August 24: Hawke’s Bay v. Wanganui, at Wanganui; Manawhenua v. Waikato, at Hamilton; Southland v. Taranaki, at Invercargill. August 27: Taranaki v. Canterbury, at Christchurch; Wanganui v. Wairarapa, at Masterton; Hawke’s Bay v. Auckland, at Auckland; Hawke’s Bay v. Poverty Bay. at Gisborne. August 31: Wairarapa v. King Country, at Taumarunui; Wanganui v. Bush Districts, at Pahiatua. September 3: Wellington v. Otago, at Wellington; Hawke’s Bay v. Canterbury, at Napier; Auckland v. Wairarapa, at Auckland; Wanganui v. Manawhenua, at Palmerston North. September 7: Canterbury v. Manawhenua, at Palmerston North; Wairarapa v. Waikato, at Hamilton; Otago v. Bush Districts, at Pahiatua.

September 10: Canterbury v. Wellington, at Wellington; Auckland v. Otago, at Auckland; Wairarapa v. Taranaki, in Taranaki. September 14: Otago v Manawhenua, at Palmerston North. September 17: Wellington v. Auckland, at Auckland; Hawke’s Bay v. Taranaki, in Taranaki; Otago v. Canterburv, at Christchurch. September 24: Wanganui v Taranaki, in Taranaki.