Firm refereeing at the international level: thank-you Jonathon Kaplan!
Mon, Feb 16, 2009, Posted by Vic Drover 
I have been around the rugby pitch for a long time. For nearly 20 years, I’ve either been playing (mostly) or refereeing (occasionally) at the club (amateur) level in Canada and the United States. As a player, perhaps the most frustrating (and dangerous) experience on the pitch occurs when the referee does not control the match and allows infractions of the laws to go unpunished.
As a referee, one of the most difficult things is to balance the control of the match with the safety, flow and enjoyment of the players.
None of this compares however to the feeling i get while watching test rugby. Since the skill level is so high, the referees generally allow many things that would be free-kicks or penalties at the amateur level. The best example is the use of hands in the ruck. It is generally now accepted that the ball carrier will twist his body (when possible) and stick the ball out of the back of the ruck. It is very rare these days to actually see other participants in the ruck actually using their feet to free-up the ball.
For a long time I found this absolutely infuriating. In the end however, I forgave these sins as a tradeoff for an exciting match. But what about those boring matches? While watching France v Scotland in the opening round of the 2009 Six Nations I realized that conceding these laws of the game was not giving the same return. There was no (and I mean “NO”) excitement factor to offset these clear violations of the laws which left me with a feeling of ‘buyers remorse’. In any case, we certainly cannot expect referees to use different interpretations of the laws for different matches.
Thus, it was refreshing on Saturday to see Jonathon Kaplan, one of the highest-rated referees on the oval planet, apply firm rules to an English side that seemed hell-bent on slowing the ball down at every tackle. After a few penalties, Kaplan warned the English captain that the next infraction would result in a yellow card. He followed up on that warning a few minutes later, sending Mike Tindall off for 10 minutes for using his hands in the ruck.
In the second half, Andy Goode was sin-binned (and eventually replaced) for lying on the ruck and killing the Welsh attack.
While a few Welsh infractions went unnoticed by Kaplan (including a dangeous tackle on a player in the air), overall I was thrilled to see a referee at the test level apply the laws with verve. I say “bring on more of the same”. Not only does firm application of the laws provide more consistency and serve as an example for referees, it will hopefully get rid of buyers remorse and, in the case of rucks, lead to a resurgence of the art of rucking with your feet.
Tags: laws, Referee, Six Nations, Test Rugby
Talking of balance you seem to think its ok for a referee to
penalise England off the park yet miss a few Welsh infractions
including the most blatant yellow card of the game when Byrne took
out Armitage. He penalised England on a team count up basis and
sent two English players to the sin bin yet Wales accrued 8
penalties without even a warning…..disgracefull bias!. Kaplan has
proved himself to be England’s nemesis on more than one occasion
including keeping a hopeless Australian pack in the world cup final
until the dying seconds of the game. Yesterday Gough seemed able to
enter rucks from anywhere on the pitch and Kaplan was so busy
berating england he didn’t even notice wales straying offside on
numerous occasions. How can you describe that as an excellent
display of refereeing, surely good means even handed. I have
no problem with England being penalised so long as the same rules
apply to both teams.
I didn’t say he did a balanced or even a good job. My point is only that the referee set a standard, and when the players infracted, he followed through on his word. This is often not the case at the amateur level on this side of the pond.
As I noted above, there is no doubt that the ref missed some Welsh calls. But let’s face it, England lost the game on discipline and coaching.
And what about the English calls that he missed? Surely you aren’t saying that the English were as disciplined or more disciplined than Wales.
Also keep in mind that English scored short-handed during the first yellow card. If they had not taken Goode off the field, they could very well have won the match in spite of the penalties and cards.
England has spent a decade (or a few decades) winning matches by denying possession. I think they should take a lesson from this match and just play some rugby.
France and Italy haven’t played each other yet oh wise one (4th
paragraph, line 3). You must have meant France v. Scotland.
Vic only wrote an article about Jonathan Kaplan because he’s his
long, lost, inbred twin.
Thanks man. Match was so boring i messed up
A firm application of the laws would be nice, but unlikely. Going back to the old mantra, “Laws are interpreted, rules are enforced”, referees as individuals will continue to call the game as they interpret it. The lack of consistency is what’s keeping the US team from advancing on the world stage in my opinion. Over the past month I’ve sat through demonstrations by the USA Rugby National Panel Manager and more locally, by a regional referees society. The inconsistencies between what the Super League referees are going to enforce and what is enforced at the international level are glaringly different. The inconsistencies further expand as you go down the ranks of club rugby from the Super League. One particular point I’ll reference is this year at the Super League level and ideally, at the lower club levels, “sealing” will be penalised. By sealing, I don’t mean bridging, which has been illegal for quite some time now. I mean when a rucking players arrives, he grabs onto the jersey/shorts of the player on the ground. This will no longer be allowed in the US at all levels. My question when this was presented was, “Is this an IRB initiative or a USA Rugby initiative?” The answer I received was too covoluted to repeat, but basically the answer was, it’s a USA Rugby initiative. I’ve watched every 6 Nations match so far and numerous club matches and not once have I seen this penalised. I’m not saying club rugby should be emulating international club rugby, but if the US national team is ever going to seriously compete, there needs to be some sort of consistency in the laws applied. No where in the law book does it say anything about not being allowed to bind on to a player on the ground. One could say binding on to a player on the ground falls under rucking a player on the ground, a penalty, but that’s quite a stretch. One could say the player on the ground is presumably the tackled player and hence not rolling away. Fine. Penalise for not rolling away then. But then what if I’m binding on to the tackler? The tackler must roll away, I certainly don’t have to help him. My point is, USA Rugby is moving towards a tendency of setting forth initiatives that are inconsistent with the IRB Laws of the Game. Younger players who are avid watchers of test matches and international club play are going to become confused and already are confused judging from club players telling me what I called in the match isn’t called in the Heinekin Cup. As a referee this drives me nuts to hear as I have to remind players occasionally that they’re playing Division II rugby in the US. As a player though, I’ve experienced the frustration. I understand that US referees need to use their own discretion as to what offenses to call since some games if not most would entail penalty kicks back and forth. For example, does offsides need to be called when the wing on the long side of the field is half a meter offsides when the ball was taken by a forward for 2 meters? I certainly don’t think so, simply telling the wing to watch his offside line is much more efective than proving to the players and spectators that you’re keen and knowledgable of the laws enough to make the call. In terms of how the laws are called in a match though, there can be no discretion.
Josh! You’re not leaking that super-secret info prior to the
official roll-out, are you.I, too, was watching closely for this to
be called and am amazed how how prevalent it is. I was under the
impression that this was an IRB directive, but after watching the
first round I stand corrected. I’m watching my TIVO’d second rounds
tonight.
SNAP!
Haha! I’m just sick and tired of USA Rugby setting forth their own
agenda, further widening the gap between the US and the rest of the
world. There’s no way IRB referees are going to blow the whistle
for sealing. They have been much more strict on going straight to
ground as Vic was stating. USA Rugby seems to be making an effort
to “create” more competition at the ruck by making it easier for
the defending team to win posession. What happened to good ol’
fashion hard rucking. If a man’s going to bind onto a player on the
ground, roll his arse off of there!
I’m a neutral, but Kaplan (who’s never like England) was
totally useless. I’m not talking about the decisions he made. I’m
talking about the fact that he penalised England for everything and
yet let Wales get away with exactly the same offences. Both teams
were right on the offside line. England got done 6 or 7 times
before Wales got done for it. Tindall gets a yellow card. Goode
gets carded despite the fact that he was on his feet and got
knocked over by one of his own players. Ryan Jones then kills the
ball by his own line and nothing happens. Armitage gets taken out
in the air whilst jumping for a high ball (automatic yellow card)
and nothing happens. I mean where’s the consistency? Even in the
scrums he was constantly talking to England’s fron row and not
Wales’. Was very strange
O SNAP! The IRB just dropped the hammer.