• Please bear with us. We have moved to a new provider, and some images and icons are not working correctly. We are working hard to fix this

Spirit of the Game- Time wasting

V

vimpe22


Referees in Sri Lanka
Has there been any discussion on what happened as in this video? Can this be treated as not in the spirit of the game or time wasting?
 
In terms of the BC, nothing he is doing is illegal. Defenders don’t like it? Don’t let it happen.

In the context of the scored-upon team, that’s on WR for creating a system where this can happen. FIFA learned this lesson in 1982…
 
I recall lots of noise about “rugby values” etc. and some semi-official grumbling at the time but no official comment was issued to say that the ref should have applied the laws around time wasting.

Sir Nige opined that it was "against the spirit of the game" but nothing official - so of course players are going to take advantage for their team’s benefit.

Ultimately, does the BC have to dot the ball down if under no pressure from the defenders? If they are not applying pressure, are they having their time wasted or being denied the opportunity to play? As @smeagol noted - if they don’t like it, the defenders can easily force the BC to play.

And it’s 7s - ref is probably happy to take a break.
 
one of the things I love about rugby is the way that quick thinking teams can use the laws to their advantage to counter a larger oppo who are relying on brute force.
So in other words being clever with the laws is 100% WITHIN the spirit of rugby
 
I seem to remember also that at that stage of the tournament the prevailing scoreline suited both sides so no pressure on either team to advance the game. It happens all the time in tournaments.
 
In this instance I dont blame either of the teams, its an anomaly thrown up by the tournament schedule. Both teams goal is to advance so that tactic suits both, tough on the non playing team but thats life. What law can be brought in to counter it without having drastic unintended consequences ?

As regards time wasting in games, I hate to see refs stop the clock when teams are time wasting.

One of the other goals of time wasting is to antagonize the opposition so that they lose their cool, they achieve this by time wasting and then the ref stops the clock instead of just giving a FK. If the refs went to FKs sooner then the timewasting would soon stop. Lineouts are the same , team go into a huddle , ref tells them to hurry up no huddle and then they amble over to the LOT. Once you see the huddle peep FK , no more huddles problem solved.

Elite refs atm are like parents who want to be the child's friend instead of being a parent. They pander way too much esp at scrum time, constant resets and after 65mins explaining to professional players what they are supposed to be doing. Penalise them and they will learn pretty quick what needs to be done.
 
meanwhile in a same same but different football world cup scenario there was the infamous Peruvian 6-0 loss to Argentina in the 1978 WC which then allowed Argentina to qualify (and they went on to win it of course)...
 
didds said:
but the defenders didn't NOT like it - they were happy with it. The situation suited both teams.
Click to expand...
True - I was referring to a more "normal" context, just clarifying that within the laws, the BC was acting legally. The way I read it, the "spirit of the game" does not take into account tournament structures that incentivize such actions.
Shelflife said:
In this instance I dont blame either of the teams, its an anomaly thrown up by the tournament schedule. Both teams goal is to advance so that tactic suits both, tough on the non playing team but thats life. What law can be brought in to counter it without having drastic unintended consequences ?
Click to expand...
As I alluded to, the onus is on the organizers to not create a tournament format where such chicanery is permissible. For an event where concurrent games are not feasible, the only feasible option I can think of off the top of my head is to move games around such that, in this case, ENG-ARG played first, then the other pool game takes place.
Shelflife said:
In this instance I dont blame either of the teams, its an anomaly thrown up by the tournament schedule. Both teams goal is to advance so that tactic suits both, tough on the non playing team but thats life. What law can be brought in to counter it without having drastic unintended consequences ?

As regards time wasting in games, I hate to see refs stop the clock when teams are time wasting.

One of the other goals of time wasting is to antagonize the opposition so that they lose their cool, they achieve this by time wasting and then the ref stops the clock instead of just giving a FK. If the refs went to FKs sooner then the timewasting would soon stop. Lineouts are the same , team go into a huddle , ref tells them to hurry up no huddle and then they amble over to the LOT. Once you see the huddle peep FK , no more huddles problem solved.
Click to expand...
What you're missing in this context is that most time wasting in 15s is during transitons from open play to a lineout/scrum/kick at goal. The event being described happened in open play.
 
Manage it!

Ask - Can you put the ball down? I am not standing here until the end of the game.
Tell- Put the ball down. I am not standing here until the end of the game. Otherwise I WILL penalise you!
Ping - Blow. They will not waste time twice!

The law allows it And the people who paid good money to watch did not do so to see two sides pratting around.
 
Last edited:
dont disagree Marc , but it rather raises the question why this ref didn't do any of those things.

Meanwhile who should he really address his concerns to - the ball carrier to score, or the defenders who are not pressuring the ball carrier?
 
didds said:
dont disagree Marc , but it rather raises the question why this ref didn't do any of those things.

Meanwhile who should he really address his concerns to - the ball carrier to score, or the defenders who are not pressuring the ball carrier?
Click to expand...
  1. Who knows.
  2. The ball carrier.
 
Marc Wakeham said:
Manage it!

Ask - Can you put the ball down? I am not standing here until the end of the game.
Tell- Put the ball down. I am not standing here until the end of the game. Otherwise I WILL penalise you!
Ping - Blow. They will not waste time twice!

The law allows it And the people who paid good money to watch did not do so to see two sides pratting around.
Click to expand...
I disagree, on this instance all players were entirely within the law and cannot be penalised

The problem lay with the tournament organisers
 
Marc Wakeham said:

  2. The ball carrier.
Click to expand...
again i'm nor disagreeing overall ... except to say the defenders were equally culpable in THIS instance. They were cl;early content to waste time also as preoven by the actions of the coach with his intrructions to at least one player who moved towards the "scorer"

Im happy to agree to disagree :-)
 
Marc Wakeham said:
Manage it!

Ask - Can you put the ball down? I am not standing here until the end of the game.
Tell- Put the ball down. I am not standing here until the end of the game. Otherwise I WILL penalise you!
Ping - Blow. They will not waste time twice!

The law allows it And the people who paid good money to watch did not do so to see two sides pratting around.
Click to expand...
Hi Marc

Its open play, there are no laws being broken here, its not a good look I agree but if you were to penalise him in this instance you would be wrong to do so.
 
smeagol said:
True - I was referring to a more "normal" context, just clarifying that within the laws, the BC was acting legally. The way I read it, the "spirit of the game" does not take into account tournament structures that incentivize such actions.

As I alluded to, the onus is on the organizers to not create a tournament format where such chicanery is permissible. For an event where concurrent games are not feasible, the only feasible option I can think of off the top of my head is to move games around such that, in this case, ENG-ARG played first, then the other pool game takes place.

What you're missing in this context is that most time wasting in 15s is during transitons from open play to a lineout/scrum/kick at goal. The event being described happened in open play.
Click to expand...

Ahhh no I understand its a totally different senario, just in the great tradition of RugbyRefs I said Id take a thread and go off in a different direction :)
 
crossref said:
The problem lay with the tournament organisers
Click to expand...
Yep, fully agree on that. WR could ensure this never happens in a simple edict, but they didn’t - just harrumphed and then went back to whatever it is they actually do.

Unless you have a straight elimination competition there is always going to be an incentive to try and game the system.

In the pool stage you may strategically rest your players and essentially throw a match to give a better performance when it counts, and pretty much any competition with a repechage structure you can find teams flirting with putting themselves into that pot to game an easier run through the elimination rounds.

Ultimately it’s all about getting the best result you can and the 7s structure is always going to have this “let’s just stand around for 6 mins and 50 seconds” possibility unless there is a specific rule in place.

As for Rugby Values - pretty sure that’s pretty far down the pecking order at the pro level where players have a limited window to maximize their earnings and sponsorship deals.

Anyway, it’s 7s. Don’t like what you see, go get a beer/snack. By the time you get back the next match is on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top