Spirit of the Game- Time wasting

[Marc Wakeham]

But a key factor here is this is professional sports, and as Orwell observed “Serious sport has nothing to do with fair play.”

To mix literary metaphors, professional rugby is a foreign country; they do things differently there.

And if WR were to rule officially against this, teams would find another way - maybe stroll the last 25 yds and angle toward a corner, maybe gently passing back and forth with a team mate, then slowly walk towards the posts until they’ve run the clock down which seems to be an integral tactic in 7s.

Back to the laws. I think that unless one team’s behavior adversely impacts the other’s ability to compete - and the ball is still in open play - it’s a tough sell on time wasting for 9.7d. (As a ref, we observe and enforce - the teams choose the way the game is played so my time doesn’t count when it comes to time being wasted per se, I can only enforce where the laws state they must play quickly, or have specific time limits.)

9.27 refers to the “spirit of good sportsmanship* - and if both teams are content with the farce, then what is the bad sportsmanship that I’m penalizing? The crowd may not be happy, I may not be happy, but I’m not there to enforce entertainment.

Do I like what happened? No. Am I ever likely to see it in a match at my level? No. Does this happen on a frequent enough basis that it’s a problem requiring an update? I’d say no.

In a legue structure sportsmanship extends to other combatants in the league as well.

Yes I believe WR will take action to outlaw it and yes I do believe coaches will find an new way to play outside the spirit of the law. Does that mean we should not try?

 

[didds]

ultimately if the paying spectator doesn't like it enough they wont go again.

clubs' revenue will reduce.

clubs will fold.


I wont hold my breath.

 

[crossref]

For me it wasnt such an issue ..
It was a very niche and rare event.
while some supporters probably were baffled, I but some others, who knew what was happening were quite tickled by it.
And being 7s it didn't last long at all, and the next game arrived very quickly ... it wasn't at all comparable to that 80 minute football fiasco

So if I was WR I would do nothing
If I was a tournament organiser I would endeavour to design my tournament cleverly.. you are looking for a format where points difference (and or bonus points ) is almost always important, even if the result of a game isn't .
But it still might happen. Shrug

 

[Dickie E]

Its happened before. No law changes made then.

 

[jdeagro]

I'm of the stance this doesn't fall under the penalty of time wasting in the traditional (and my understanding) sense of how that penalty is intended to be applied. I also agree this is a tournament organization issue. Additionally I think adding a shot clock to scoring a try is a harder law to carve out than initially perceived, as already mentioned for various ways it can still be gamed, and for the multitude of ways it can result in unplanned consequences in legitimate scenarios.

All of that being said, if a law change were to be introduced to help manage this situation, I think it should be more along the lines of giving the ref discretion to stop the clock when a situation like this arises. It would shutdown the goal of both teams here without having to choose a team to penalize. It also doesn't force a rigid time framework to be adhered to under all scenarios, rather is left to the best judgement of the ref for each unqiue situation where applicable.

 

[crossref]

I think the only real solution (if you want a solution) is to give the two captains discretion to mutually agree to end the game, with the score as it stands.

(stopping the clock is pointless, the same will happen when you restart it, penalising either team is pointless as the same will continue to happen after the restart. The point here is that NEITHER team wants to play)

 

[Balones]

Let’s not forget spectators. These players are professional because people pay good money to actually see them ‘play’.
Perhaps people banging on the box office and demanding their money back because the organisation or players were not delivering what we paid for might bring about the desired changes.

 

[Rich_NL]

Let’s not forget spectators. These players are professional because people pay good money to actually see them ‘play’.
Perhaps people banging on the box office and demanding their money back because the organisation or players were not delivering what we paid for might bring about the desired changes.

Agreed, but I'd add: adding new laws just for the spectacle value is an argument to split the professional and amateur games. There's a whole discussion to be had about that, of course

It's something that in the short term can, should, and in any case will be addressed by the tournament organisers, who are the most invested in discouraging it. There are plenty of 'optional rules' that are determined by competition organisers, such as substitutes, water breaks, tiebreakers, etc. - maybe WR can formalise the possibility to do this rather than slapping another plaster on a rare problem - a measure that will no doubt require three revisions in the future, confuse fans and players alike and add to the mental load of referees at all levels all over the world.

 

[jdeagro]

I think the only real solution (if you want a solution) is to give the two captains discretion to mutually agree to end the game, with the score as it stands.

I don't think that's a terrible idea either.

(stopping the clock is pointless, the same will happen when you restart it

I disagree. One of the remaining 13 players will get tired of the repeated waiting around (especially in a tournament format with a long day ahead of them) and will resume playing or nag on their teammate to stop being a nob. We're still human and also still ruggers who understand we're not going to get what we want with time off, we came to play rugby at the end of the day.

It also provides a means for the ref to take some control back in the situation by being painfully annoying with stopping the clock any time dicking off like this starts happening. A la "I can stand here all day, but if you're not going to play rugby, we can put the game on pause."

 

[crossref]

Sevens normally has a really strict timetable, you can't mess with the clock as there is a queue of games behind you

 

[Dickie E]

Sevens normally has a really strict timetable, you can't mess with the clock as there is a queue of games behind you

And at the highest level, they've got satellite slots booked, advertisements to show, etc

 

[thepercy]

I think if this happens in a game I'm refereeing ill just walk back to halfway, and if it's still happening maybe go and sit down.

 

[crossref]

I have been repeatedly told by several of our professional referees that they have been told to referee for the spectators.
I can see that a particular team’s supporters won’t mind the time-wasting as long as it benefits them but there are others to consider which are usually more numerous than those of specific teams.

In this instance BOTH sets of supporters would have been happy

(But neutrals presumably would have been bored - or baffled)

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I'm of the stance this doesn't fall under the penalty of time wasting in the traditional (and my understanding) sense of how that penalty is intended to be applied. I also agree this is a tournament organization issue. Additionally I think adding a shot clock to scoring a try is a harder law to carve out than initially perceived, as already mentioned for various ways it can still be gamed, and for the multitude of ways it can result in unplanned consequences in legitimate scenarios.

All of that being said, if a law change were to be introduced to help manage this situation, I think it should be more along the lines of giving the ref discretion to stop the clock when a situation like this arises. It would shutdown the goal of both teams here without having to choose a team to penalize. It also do"shot clock" after all that is just a gimmick. esn't force a rigid time framework to be adhered to under all scenarios, rather is left to the best judgement of the ref for each unqiue situation where applicable.

I'd not propose a "shot clock" that is, after all, just a gimmick for the crowds entertainment. We have always applied the time allowed for conversions / penaty without the crowd seeing the time on the screen. Just allow the referee to apply common sense to say" come on let's get on with the game".

 

[Harry]

Down at grass roots level we have players pretending to look for a lost contact lens as they are too tired to get up.
If you start down the route of laws against time wasting where would you end it ?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Down at grass roots level we have players pretending to look for a lost contact lens as they are too tired to get up.
If you start down the route of laws against time wasting where would you end it ?

You use common sense. We already have laws against time wasting!

 

[didds]

I think the only real solution (if you want a solution) is to give the two captains discretion to mutually agree to end the game, with the score as it stands.

(stopping the clock is pointless, the same will happen when you restart it, penalising either team is pointless as the same will continue to happen after the restart. The point here is that NEITHER team wants to play)

this.

and what happens when the clock is topped the player then dot down and scores? isnt the ball dead when the clock is off ? so now you are back to the position of the ref calling time wasting.

 

[didds]

Let’s not forget spectators. These players are professional because people pay good money to actually see them ‘play’.
Perhaps people banging on the box office and demanding their money back because the organisation or players were not delivering what we paid for might bring about the desired changes.

except in this case both sides were happy and i suspect their supporters were. the people that wouldn't have been happy would have been presumably / potentially other teams in the same group and their supporters (maybe they should have won more games/scored more points?), or neutral supporters just enjoying whats on offer.

And then i come back to my post #62.

I wont hold my breath.

 

[didds]

One of the remaining 13 players will get tired of the repeated waiting around (especially in a tournament format with a long day ahead of them) and will resume playing or nag on their teammate to stop being a nob. We're still human and also still ruggers who understand we're not going to get what we want with time off, we came to play rugby at the end of the day.

which clearly wasnt going to happen in this game. the one player that started top do something was told by his coach not to. watch the full video.

 

[didds]

You use common sense. We already have laws against time wasting!

which as others have demonstrated in this thread don't really fit this scenario in the video, given you have two teams content with running down the clock with the scoreline as it is - witness the coach telling his player to NOT pressurise the attacker standing in goal with the ball.