Tests are certainly on in Europe, and Jonathan Kaplan, Mark Lawrence, Craig Joubert and Marius Jonker are in full swing while Jaco Peyper is at home practising law and answering readers' questions.

1. Name: Paul Jennings

Question: I love the site. It's a brilliant tool for the likes of myself in my first year of refereeing.

I was wondering, when speaking to players are there any key words they respond to better, as in hands away as opposed to NO hands? Do you keep to a script so to speak for certain situations, or do you make it up as the play develops? I find that if I'm negative they will come back equally so. It would be great if you could put players under some kind of hypnosis. Then they would do exactly as you say.

Jaco Peyper: Hi Paul

Thanks for the endorsement and compliment.

With regards to your question on “key words”: I know most of the referees do prepare and “condition” their communication for different phases of play and scenarios they suspect could surface in an upcoming match, as especially for TV games and the pressures involved it is kind of hard to react instantly and accurately at all times when you you’re put on the spot (and sometimes you have to communicate in your second language on top of that.)

So, yes, I suppose most referees plan their “key words” but it’s a question of personal choice and what he feels works for him.

It is however good sometimes to have a natural reaction to control specific situations where the “white noise” will not have an effect in player behaviour.

On personal experience when I refereed on the Sevens circuit I found that the Argentinians, French and other countries who do not commonly speak English as a first language that it is better to use words universally understood and are short and powerful such as: NO / DANGEROUS, etc

Cheers

2. Name: Saadjie Zelie

Question: Deliberate slowing down of the game refers.

Why can any player at a ruck take time to pass the ball? They act like traffic officials instead of playing the ball. This action take more time when the ball is still in the maul/ruck. This is a stupid rule. You can clearly see how a player's hand is on the ball but he doesn't want to play the ball. If this is not deliberately slowing down the game, then I don't know. The team who deliberately slows down the game must be punished.  

Jaco Peyper: Hi Saadjie

Personally I too hate it when a game is slowed down and the game becomes less of a spectacle. But the Law rules and we have to referee and play according to it until it is changed.

The law applicable is Law 16 Ruck

16.6 SUCCESSFUL END TO A RUCK
A ruck ends successfully when the ball leaves the ruck, or when the ball is on or over the goal line.

In terms of this if the players hand/s are on the ball the ball is out, and all onside opponents are allowed to break the offside line and a player having his hand/s on the ball is not allowed to slow down the game further. (The law makes an exception when a player has to dig for a ball trapped under bodies)

It is a different story if he has no hands on the ball and it is still in the ruck though, then everybody must stay onside as it is not general play yet.

I feel that if a ruck is moving nowhere we should have a use it or lose it call as it is with the maul – players will then have to clear the ball to avoid a turnover.

Enjoy the tests on the weekend.

Cheers

3. Name: Dirk Meyer

Question: Please clarify a few things from Saturday's Bok game.

1. In the first half, the ball was kicked up field and was rolling in the 22 near the touch line. Red player then put his foot in touch and picked up the ball immediately claiming the line out. When the SA players prevented him from throwing 5 metres, they were penalised. Was it not originally an SA throw in, thus nullifying the short arm?

2. Ruan Pienaar chipped the ball in the opposition 22 and the ball was rolling towards the try line. Red picked up the ball and touched down. Replays showed he took it over the 22 and should have been a scrum to green on the 5m line. As it relates this relates to the in goal area, could the referee not have gone upstairs just to be sure?

I look forward to the reply.

Dirk

Jaco Peyper: Hi Dirk.

You have two very good questions and we discussed and answered both with the applicable Video Clips comprehensively on the video clip feature on the home page of www.sareferees.co.za as you scroll down a bit.

Your first question is dealt with in Clip 3.
Your second question is dealt with in Clip 5.

Well picked up. You seem to know you’re laws quite well!

Cheers

4. Name: Mark Middelhoven

Question: Regarding two of Alain Rolland's decisions in Saturday's match between South Africa and Wales.

1. Regarding the line-out where the Welsh player put his foot into touch and the hands on the ball (which was on the ground) why was it a Welsh put in, and subsequently why after Wales were awarded a penalty did SA get the put in?

2. When the ball was carried over the try-line was it a 22-metre drop-out and why was the TMO not used to judge if the ball was carried over?

Is Rolland's evaluation avalible for public view?

Jaco Peyper: Hallo Mark

Great observation in your two questions as I also stated to Dirk above in the previous question.

Your first question is dealt with in Clip 3.
Your second question is dealt with in Clip 5.

Referees do get evaluated very carefully on a set of descriptors as prescribed by the IRB and these instances will be noted in there with a few others. All referees make a couple of mistakes – even in their best game.

These mistakes will be brought under the referee’s attention, but is not a public document – just as coaches do not make their personal evaluations available to the public on players who made certain errors.

But be assured we do get slapped on the fingers and if we do not improve in the next performance we get demoted in future appointments

Regards