British and Irish Lions Tour: Referee Chat

[TRF_Olyy]

Agree completely, SC, It's refreshing to see referees starting to clamp down on it in prem rugby.

Another one that went against the AB's was the penalty on 29:20. Franks was penalised for taking man without the ball. Infact, Franks timing was spot on and murray clearly had his hands on the ball.

I didn't think hands on was ball out, these days? Have to pick it up/out

 

[die_mole]

Agree completely, SC, It's refreshing to see referees starting to clamp down on it in prem rugby.

I didn't think hands on was ball out, these days? Have to pick it up/out

Pick it up and out yeah

 

[Shaggy]

Why is it always the Welsh and NZ posters.

It must be something in the sheep.

... All of Kiwis love Sheep

... slow roasted, with Mint sauce

 

[The Jones Boy]

I'm not a fan of Jaco Peyper.
He is often too childish and pedantic.
Yesterday he grew up and gave his most mature performance ever.
The game flowed and the teams showed great skill at times.
He did a fine job.
He's got me thinking he's not that bad after all.
Off outside to check for porcine aviators cruising passed a blue moon...

 

[Mrs. Peter Quinn]

Have to say that there was a lot of diving off feet by the All Blacks today. Had zero bearing on the result, but I'd like to see it pinged for the quality of the game all the same. Otherwise, I didn't pick up on much. He got a right earful from Sexton and O'Brien at the end apparently, but not quite sure why. Really not a Peyper fan, but I always beieve teams should educate themselves better on the ref's main gripes and wise up accordingly.

I think it was partly that knock on which seemed a little deliberate. In fact thats something had been managed to zero extent this tour - players need to have a plausible attempt at catching the ball rather than just waving a hand and claiming they wanted to catch it. (Of course you did, but we're never in a position to).

Overall didn't think Peyper was atrocious but not that consistent either.

 

[smartcooky]

Agree completely, SC, It's refreshing to see referees starting to clamp down on it in prem rugby.

I didn't think hands on was ball out, these days? Have to pick it up/out

It isn't. Its a common fan/commentator mistake. When the acting SH is reaching in/digging for the ball, its not out of the ruck until it is clear of bodies. That was a WR directive in to unions in 2015, and is reflected in Game Management Guidelines that are issued by unions to the ri referees

Here is the wording from the NZRU GMGs, but its much the same for all unions.

Ball out/Collapsed ruck
• The ball is only out of a ruck (or scrum) when it is behind the hindmost foot or it is clear of bodies.
• If the ball is being dug out (after being clearly won) or is under the feet of players at the back of the ruck, the
scrum-half cannot be touched until the ball is clearly out of the ruck. The benefit of any doubt must
go to the scrum-half.
• Players cannot step through or over the middle of a collapsed ruck before the ball is cleared or the ball
is completely clear of bodies. These players are unbound and in front of the last feet and are therefore
offside.
• Zero tolerance on defending players at the ruck who target the scrum-half before he has the ball, even if
the ball is out of the ruck. Any onside player must play the ball and not the man.
.

 

[Five Meters Out]

Jaco did well on Saturday night. He kept the whistle to a minimum and his reffing contributed to a great game.

 

[Caitlyn Jenner]

Jaco did well on Saturday night. He kept the whistle to a minimum and his reffing contributed to a great game.

Agreed. I thought it was one of his better efforts actually.

 

[TRF_heineken]

I thought Jaco Peyper did a really good job, and was part of the great spectacle of this much anticipated series. The way I interpreted his stance on have the whistle close to the mouth but not blowing, was that at some stages it took a while for the ball to come out of the ruck, and it was more of a split second decision to call it, or to let the team with the ball have the advantage of playing on. I don't see why some of the B&I Lions fans complain about this, as there were a couple of instances it looked like he was going to blow the whistle, when the Lions were in possession of the ball and advancing.

The referee didn't have any effect on the outcome of this match, and it was a really great spectacle to watch as a neutral. Was a great way to start my Saturday.

 

[valley commando]

The Lions were asked to maintain a gap that the NZ'ers weren't. I can't see how an impartial observer can refute that.

On the screaming? Its no different to the NZ'ers screaming "release, release" (while off their feet and not supporting their body weight) in general play. Contrary to good sportsmanship is an unbelievable stretch btw.

The point is Peyper only tackles the NH teams on rules while allowing players he's more familiar with transgress. It happens with too much frequency to be coincidence and he's the only referee in world rugby i'd accuse of bias.

Excellent post

 

[valley commando]

I don't like the shouting at the lineout, hate it at the breakdown more though.
In the NH they've started penalising for it under the new respect the referee rulings (not sure what they're actually called, but the ref basically has more scope to penalise players being footballers).
Not sure if that's just a NH thing, though, and I'm also not sure whether any ref would have the minerals to start penalising players internationally for it, especially All Blacks players in NZ! I'm sure Lions players were doing at as well, anyway.

Yes your right, there is to much chopsing from players.
There seems a reluctance from ref's to penalise ABs anyway, especially SH refs.

 

[valley commando]

I thought Jaco Peyper did a really good job, and was part of the great spectacle of this much anticipated series. The way I interpreted his stance on have the whistle close to the mouth but not blowing, was that at some stages it took a while for the ball to come out of the ruck, and it was more of a split second decision to call it, or to let the team with the ball have the advantage of playing on. I don't see why some of the B&I Lions fans complain about this, as there were a couple of instances it looked like he was going to blow the whistle, when the Lions were in possession of the ball and advancing.

The referee didn't have any effect on the outcome of this match, and it was a really great spectacle to watch as a neutral. Was a great way to start my Saturday.

Well it would be wouldn't it, most New Zealanders must have had Peyper as Man of the Match.

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I have yet to personally see any sanction for players shouting out. Refs seem to issue a warning but never follow it through. I'd be happy to see it happen. Would it result in a penalty?

I've also never seen a team penalised for being motionless at the ruck several seconds after the ref shouts "use it". Again, it'd be good to see this happen once in a while.

Other than that I'm pretty happy with the way rule changes (and their implementation) are going. My above grumbles are fairly minor.

 

[TRF_heineken]

Well it would be wouldn't it, most New Zealanders must have had Peyper as Man of the Match.

Erm... I'm not a New Zealander...

But keep on trucking

 

[valley commando]

Erm... I'm not a New Zealander...

But keep on trucking

When did I say you were ?

 

[Every Time Ref]

Erm... I'm not a New Zealander...

But keep on trucking

Then maybe you shouldn't have legendary All Black Joost van de Westhuizen as your avatar...

 

[smartcooky]

My trouble is that it's not Peypers job to make sure it flows .... a couple of plays before the first try a AB went off his feet at the ruck Peyper went to blow his whistle then changed his mind . That's because he has flowing rugby on his mind not playing the game by the laws ..... I'm sure there were other things done from both teams but too many in my eyes to list . Such a shame Nigel can't ref these games

Having just re watched that play, it is clear that you have got this wrong. At 17:23. (one play before the Lions gave up the penalty for tacklers not rolling away from which Aaron Smith tap kicks leading to Taylor's try) Peyper brings his left hand up to his face... but he has is whistle on a wrist strap on this right hand, so he wasn't about to blow the whistle at all.

Incidentally, I agree that Read went off his feet at the tackle, but I think it was immaterial, since there was no Lions player there who was making any attempt to even enter the Gate, let alone play the ball. Players from both teams were going off their feet at the tackle all afternoon... Peyper, like all elite referees, doesn't penalise the immaterial ones. If they penalised every breakdown offence, we'd never get a game..

There was another occasion (46:45) when he was about to blow, then changed his mind. He was about to penalise Liam Williams for playing the ball from the wrong side of the tackle before he realised that Williams was actually the tackler, and therefore quite entitled to be where he was....so Peyper correctly didn't blow and played on.

Now which is better, a referee who catches himself when he is about to make a mistake and doesn't blow the whistle, or one who blows too quickly and gets it wrong, then tries to bluff his way through it by compounding his mistake (think Romain Poite and Bismarck du Plessis' perfectly legitimate tackle on Dan Carter for which du Plessis got penalised and yellow carded).

One of the first things we teach new referees, once they have gained a thorough knowledge of the Laws, is to try to understand how and when to apply them. Its called Game Management. Any mug can pick up a whistle and blow it when they see an infringement. If that is all there was to it, then refereeing would be easy, and the world would be full of top level referees. The reality is that assessing materiality is not an easy task. The referee will often see multiple acts by players every second (especially at the breakdown), there may be multiple infringements by both teams, and he has a fraction of a second to decide if any are having a material effect or not, and whether they should be blown for. He is doing this several times a minute for 80 minutes. It takes many years of experience to get really good at Game Management.

 

[Five Meters Out]

My trouble is that it's not Peypers job to make sure it flows .... a couple of plays before the first try a AB went off his feet at the ruck Peyper went to blow his whistle then changed his mind . That's because he has flowing rugby on his mind not playing the game by the laws ..... I'm sure there were other things done from both teams but too many in my eyes to list . Such a shame Nigel can't ref these games

I think this post encapsulates the NH - SH divide, in regard to how a game should be reffed. If there were a spectrum with 1 being "Ref to the letter of the law" and 10 being "Let the game flow", NH rugby followers want it around "2-3" and SH types would vote for "8-9". And never the twain shall meet.

 

[smartcooky]

I think this post encapsulates the NH - SH divide, in regard to how a game should be reffed. If there were a spectrum with 1 being "Ref to the letter of the law" and 10 being "Let the game flow", NH rugby followers want it around "2-3" and SH types would vote for "8-9". And never the twain shall meet.

As regards wanting the game refereed to the letter of the Law, I think fans in your "2- 3" bracket need to be careful what they wish for... they might not like what they end up with.

 

[die_mole]

I think this post encapsulates the NH - SH divide, in regard to how a game should be reffed. If there were a spectrum with 1 being "Ref to the letter of the law" and 10 being "Let the game flow", NH rugby followers want it around "2-3" and SH types would vote for "8-9". And never the twain shall meet.

So your saying NH followers want refereees to have to get subbed out after 50 minutes due to finger and lip cramping?