Sky Sports.com

DON'T BLAME THE REF
Send your rugby questions to Steve Lander
Click here to send an Email

RUGBY UNION ON SKY
Guinness Premiership
Heineken Cup
Super 14
Click here for details

Also see

• Sky Sports experts
• Rugby on Sky
• Live scores

Don't Blame the Ref
Scrums - who's in control?

Recent law changes were made in order to simplify the scrum engagement process.

One of the driving factors in making changes was to make the process safer at all levels of the game.

Some purists complained that the skill and power required was being removed from the game and that the scrummage was in fact being sanitised.

Others applauded the move citing the scrum as merely a method of restarting the game.

In reality, the process of 'crouch-touch- pause and engage' has become not much different to that which was in place before.

Collapsed scrums are still a feature of the game, front rows driving hard into one another are common and all manner of 'dark arts' are still alive and well amongst the front row fraternity.

So who is to blame when the scrum goes wrong?

Try as they might referees still find it difficult to determine who is actually breaking the law. I believe that good scrums are often down to chemistry between the two front rows.

As a ref, and probably a player, you know after the first scrum what kind of an afternoon is stretching before you. Sure you must do and say the right things in terms of law application, but if the two front rows want to go their own way, life can be extremely difficult for even the most experienced of officials.

The engagement process allows for the referee to take control, all too often we witness the crouch, touch, pause, engage process gabbled out in one sentence. Little wonder the scrum collapses in a heap.

Evidence from the ELVs in the Super 14, is that poorly engaged scrums inevitably result in the referee awarding a free-kick. At least for the rest of us there are still the tedious resets!

Surely there is danger from the Super 14 model that scrums will not only be sanitised but may in fact disappear as a contest altogether!

Naturally front row players are all too eager to take control and pre-empt the referee's call. It takes strong refereeing to ensure that they remain in control and players wait for the engage call. That is what the pause is for!

Taking time enables the referee to ensure players are in the correct position, being proactive and communicating with the players helps them understand what is required and above all consistency demonstrates to the players the boundaries within which the can operate.

Referees have to work hard and maintain control, once you hand decision-making power to the players and allow a race for the hit you are in trouble.

It is worth remembering that without timely referee intervention, good scrums can easily go bad, but bad scrums never become good.

ASK THE REF!
STEVE LANDER ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS

Email Steve Lander

Steve, One of the most difficult areas to referee, it seems to me, are the scrums. I always watch through my binoculars and what doesn't go on isn't worth mentioning! One of the problems is that the referee can only be on one side of the scrum and when he moves round to the opposite side the nonsense breaks out on his blind side. Quite often the wrong team gets penalised. Wouldn't an answer to this be for the touch judge nearest to the scrum to monitor the referee's blind side? This may help towards preventing the dragging down, wheeling before the ball has been put in, and general professional fouling that goes on in most scrum downs. Jane Liddiard

STEVE SAYS: Hi Jane You' re not kidding, scrums along with the tackle make or break the game depending on how they are refereed! True the ref can only be on one side of the scrum at a time and in matches without TJs communicating with him it is very difficult to judge what is happening. As a rule of thumb I would not advise referees to adjudicate on what they cannot clearly see. In the high profile matches the TJs do assist the ref with advice but it is up to the ref to make the call. However, the Super 14 ELVs specifically allow 'referee's assistants' to advise him. I agree it can be extremely frustrating for all seeing spectators, especially those with binoculars, when the match officials make seemingly poor calls. However, I am not sure that another official on the sideline would necessarily make a better call? Cheers stv

Hi Steve, According to Jim Fleming, TMO's can now be used for 'foul play' incidents, not just for events affecting the scoring of a try. Who is correct? You or him? It's just so I can tell him this weekend! Regards, Mike Sanders

STEVE SAYS: Hi Mike It is always difficult to comment on statements made by others, particularly third hand and not knowing the context, but this may help your discussion. As far as the powers of the TMO are concerned, they are restricted to try scoring situations. I.e. the grounding of the ball, knock ons and forward passes, touch and touch in goal and foul play in a try scoring situations. I am assuming you are north of the border and so have my hearty congrats .for the win last week! How the mighty have fallen eh! Cheers stv.

Hi Steve, Over the course of the 6 nations we have seen some questionable tries awarded, even having been referred to the video referee, e.g. Shane Williams v Scotland and Jonny Wilkinson in similar fashion against Scotland a year ago. On both occasions it was clear to everyone watching on TV that one decision should be made but subsequently another has been the case. Would it not be a suitable suggestion to have a panel of two as the video referee committee, and decisions could be discussed? This would seem to eliminate the possibility of one official missing a key piece of evidence. Thanks, Nick Roblin

STEVE SAYS: Hi Nick Sadly some TMO decisions are on the face of it difficult to understand! It is an extremely pressurised situation, one I did not relish. Clearly there is nowhere to hide if the majority of viewers disagree with you. The TMO is empowered to make the call, it takes long enough as it is without two of them having a debate. Therefore I don't think having an extra official would help. What I do think would help is only appointing extremely experienced officials to the role who fully understand the context of the role they are in. It is a highly specialised job requiring special skills. Had Stu Dickinson not been as experienced as he was, the decision in the Rugby World Cup Final could easily have been got wrong! Cheers stv