When is a Mark Not a Mark?

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1015, 4 July 1930, Page 9

When is a Mark Not a Mark?

NEW RUGBY PROBLEM WELLINGTON IN QUANDARY j Special to TIIE SUN WELLINGTON, Thursday. I New Zealand is supposed to be playing at present under the International Board’s ruling in regard to the mark, but judging by the various readings of the rule given by the referees of Wellington the rule is “rafferty” rather than International, and it certainly is not New Zealand’s idea of a mark. Each of the referees who has been approached in regard to the matter ' declares that his rulings are in con- . formity with the instruction received ; from the Management Committee of ! the New Zealand Rugby Union. Having taken a catch the player is required to make a heel mark immediately, and he is not under any instruction to cry "mark” when claiming a fair catch. Under the existing conditions, the fact that a player did not appeal vocally would practically eliminate any chance of the referee blowing his whistle for a mark, as the appeal by voice has been allowed for so long in Xew Zealand that this is really the only method that counts, but according to tiie N.Z.R.U. ruling a heel mark only is necessary, t Suppose that the referee is not in a ! position to see the actual heel 'mark made, though he may see the fair catch? Should he decided without actually seeing the heel mark made or should he decide that seeing only is believing? If a player appeals "mark" in a loud voice ho both helps the referee and indicates to his opponents what ho is appealing for, whereas some may not have seen his heel mark made and may therefore proceed with a tackle, all the more readily where a referee is a bit tardy in blowing liis I whistle. It certainly seems that the present ruling is not in the best interests of the player, because under the New Zealand ruling he had some protection, but under the International rule he has none. After a lengthy discussion on the matter, the management committee of the Wellington Rugby Union decided to ask referees to interview the teams before they take the field, and to tell them how the rule governing the mark will bo interpreted. It is hoped that by this method a greater degree of uniformity or ruling will be obtained, but it seems doubtful, as each referee will merely interpret -according to his own light, and the only advantage the j player will have will be that he will at least know what are the referee’s intentions in the matter. j