about arguments on forums...

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
#2
Like it.
I do also like the idea of an "UnOfficial Rugby Referee's Forum Schedule of Arguments (updated - 2016 version)". However I shall resist the temptation to start a separate discussion. Some folks have the sarc gauge turned way down low on RRF.

Following the excellent suggestion in the linked blog here is the updated UnOfficial Rugby Referee's Forum Schedule of Arguments. In order to avoid the current unpleasant habit of year round bickering please to stick to the schedule unless you’ve applied to Robbie for a special one off dispensation.

January: The so-called "momentum rule" on forward passes.
February: Wearing of "leggings" in underage rugby
March: You have got to let him up.
April: when is the ball out of the ruck. (Bird's poo ruling.)
May: allowing theNot straight throw, if the non-throwing team don't compete.
June: crooked feed at the scrum
July: "Hurdling" in the tackle
August: enforcing turnover ball at fluffed quick tap penalty
September: they can't take a second quick one
October: rucking a player is perfectly fine if he is lying over the ball
November: enforcing correct air pressure of ball prior to kickoff.
December: Hooker stepping into FoP at Line Out throw. AR to keep flag up, or not?
 

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
#4
Some others points from that article worth pondering :

This is the real reason that forums are losing members, interminable arguments.
A community made mostly of nice people can probably hold more productive debates and have fewer interminable arguments than one that’s not as good at civility.
The choice is ours (collectively,) to remain a bunch of cranky old gits, or sort things out on these forums.

:knuppel2:Don't feel the need to correct others, don't reply to jerks, don't dismiss others ideas.
Yes criticism can be good, but it isn't always.
 

OB..

, Advises in England
#9
Thanks I'm sure.
Timely reminder that the dreaded "Grammar Police" is missing from that brief summing up.:tongue:
Thanks I'm sure.
Timely reminder that the dreaded "Grammar Police" are missing from that brief summing up.:tongue:
fixed that for you :biggrin:
Fowler says that the verb following a collective noun tends to follow the sense rather than the grammatical form, so "Grammar Police" could take either. A singular verb would imply an abstract entity whereas the plural would be referring to a group of individuals who make up that entity.

In this case "Grammar Police" could also be referring to the phrase itself, which is, of course, singular.

(I think that is enough for a one minute argument.)
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#10
the police are oppressing motorists
the metropolitan police are oppressing motorists

the metropolitan police service is oppressing motorists
 

OB..

, Advises in England
#13
Many references to Fowler over the years. A propos of nothing, do you have a publication date for the copy you are using?
2015 is the latest, but I sometimes check earlier editions as well to see if there have been significant changes.
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#15
Fowler says that the verb following a collective noun tends to follow the sense rather than the grammatical form, so "Grammar Police" could take either. A singular verb would imply an abstract entity whereas the plural would be referring to a group of individuals who make up that entity.

In this case "Grammar Police" could also be referring to the phrase itself, which is, of course, singular.

(I think that is enough for a one minute argument.)
No it isn't! :pepper:


You just have to remember a few simple rules to keep the grammar police off your back....

1. Do not use no double negatives.

2. Repetition is something you should never, never use at any time at all.

3. You should avoid magniloquence unless you are walking through the valley of the shadow of death.

4. Never use a preposition to end a sentence with.

and finally

5. Avoid clichés like the plague!
 

L'irlandais

, Promises to Referee in France
#16
I feel these forums have moved away from Robbie's original idea, to become a soapbox for a very tiny few.
".... this is a result of “online disinhibition”. “When you cannot see or hear the other person, the lack of visual and auditory cues tends to make people more bold in what they say,” he says. “You can’t see a frown on someone’s face or hear anger in that person’s voice, which would otherwise cause you to tone down your argument. The arguer even forgets that another real, alive person exists at the other end of his or her words.”this is a result of “online disinhibition”. “When you cannot see or hear the other person, the lack of visual and auditory cues tends to make people more bold in what they say,” he says. “You can’t see a frown on someone’s face or hear anger in that person’s voice, which would otherwise cause you to tone down your argument. The arguer even forgets that another real, alive person exists at the other end of his or her words.”

Source : Irish press:sad:
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#18
I feel these forums have moved away from Robbie's original idea, to become a soapbox for a very tiny few.
...especially by those with by smart-Alec interpretations of the Laws which causes them to arrive at outlier ideas about the way some aspects of the game ought to be refereed.

The end result of this is that referees coming here looking for guidance sometimes get some very bad advice, the type of advice that leads them away from the way the game is normally refereed.
 
Last edited:

Rushforth

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/holland.p
#19
...especially by those with by smart-Alec interpretations of the Laws which causes them to arrive at outlier ideas about the way some aspects of the game ought to be refereed.

The end result of this is that referees coming here looking for guidance sometimes get some very bad advice, the type of advice that leads them away from the way the game is normally refereed.
You make a good point about how the forward pass will continue to be refereed in practice, Ian_Cook. Wayne Barnes would agree with you about outlier ideas! ;)
 

OB..

, Advises in England
#20
So emotive language causes emotional reactions?! Who'd have thunk it? :biggrin:

Those who agree will applaud, those who don't will get cross, and along the way the actual point being discussed gets lost. For me it undermines an argument rather than reinforcing it since it implies the argument itself is not strong enough to carry the day. YMMV.