At a time when you would have thoughts that there would be lots of Christmas planning going on, there are still questions from readers for Stu Berry to answer.

1. Name: Lindsay Gibson

Question: I have three interesting ones for you this week.

Firstly the Wales, Australia game 70th -72nd minute Australia penalised for not allowing the welsh player back to his feet when he had gathered a kick, Mr Barnes clearly heard saying you must let him back to his feet. Is this a Northern Hemisphere law?

Secondly, kicks being caught on the full with leg outstretched over the touch line but not grounded and kick are being ruled out on the full. Is this to do with the line of touch law or just a question of timing and the touch judge getting it wrong. (Carters second kick-off in first half.)

Lastly why were both New Zealand and Ireland playing in white? Is it the home or away team responsible for playing in the changed strip?

Enjoy the summer off.        

Stu Berry: Hi Lindsay, thanks for your mail.

I know many supporters and players believe at times that there is a different set of laws between certain areas of the globe, but it is one global set as dictated by the IRB.

The decision you are referring to had nothing to do with the kick at all.  Mr Barnes had penalised the tackler for not releasing the tackled player.  His communication was “You must release the tackled player before you get to your feet”, and so he was referring to the tackler having to release the tackled player before he got to his feet and competed for the ball.

In terms of your second query, as you explain it that player has taken the ball out, and it is not fully into touch as such.  So, a player who kicks the ball, an opposition player with one foot in the field of play and the other in the air but ‘past’ the touchline, is still deemed to be in field. All that provided the other leg is on the ground and in field.  In this case, it would not be directly into touch, and the line-out would be for the same team who kicked the ball originally.

In terms of changing kit, as far as I understand, the away team generally changes their kit to the alternative strip to accommodate the clash.  This is generally something that the hosting union will determine in the week before a game. When Ireland and South Africa meet, the home team plays in white. But they have been doing that for a long time.

2. Name: Carlos Romero

Question: There is a lot of discussion about new laws are against to play good rugby.

I think that the need to promote consistency and a fair contest for possession It is the most important factor that influences the continuity.

Not so long time ago the attacking team infringements should be very obvious to be punished and thus it could keep continuity.

Is there any Law or Ruling that you think is a key to ensure the right balance between continuity and contesting?

There were good results and good players/coaches' feedback about the SUPER 14 ELV: "Players are only put onside after a tackle when they retreat past the tackle or the ball has moved five metres away from the tackle"? I think that this is a good one to promote more handling instead kicking.

Thanks

Stu Berry: Hi Carlos, and thanks for your very valid and well thought through comments.  

Consistency is something that SA Referees, and the IRB for that fact, strive to achieve in their workings and dealings with the laws and elite referees, and as referees, something that we always try to maximize in a game.

I personally enjoyed the ELV’s a lot, and felt that there was a lot more continuity to the game, but it also suited my style of refereeing at the same time.  I think that the history of the game has been an important dealing when considering all these ELV’s as well….understanding exactly what the game has aimed to achieve over the years and staying true to those principles and the Law’s. The agreement thereof is up to the IRB to investigate and decide accordingly, but I don't personally believe that we have seen the last of the ELV’s that the Southern Hemisphere used last year.

3. Name: Gary Gordon

Question: Last Saturday there was a match at Saracens when they played Sale in ghastly conditions. It made me think about the weather and refereeing.

What adjustments, if any, do you make according to the weather - heavy rain, hot sun, angled sun, strong wind? How does weather affect your preparations? Do you drink water during a hot match? Do you take energy drinks?  That sort of thing.

Stu Berry: Hi Gary, Thanks for your queries - great to get a few now and then that are a bit aside from the laws.

As a referee, I certainly do concentrate a lot on preparation, and weather, field conditions and nature of the fixture/teams playing certainly affects my preparation.  Not from a perspective of identifying trends or individual players, but from understanding the best way to manage certain teams on the field.  That is key for us.  Weather is also key.  A really wet field and conditions don't really allow for much advantage play, for example, and so as a referee, you would (from a management perspective), rather blow it a touch earlier than allow advantage.  In conditions where there is potential for the breakdown to get really messy and tense, there is also an opportunity, or ‘tool’ as we call it, to blow a touch earlier as offences happen, thereby minimizing the opportunity for dirty play (in a game with that kind of tension in it) or a messy breakdown occurrence.

In terms of hydration, it is a vital part of the game.  In a top Super 14 or Currie Cup game, the referee does, in some instances, run up to 12km in a game, which is always done at a high intensity (usually a three-quarter sprint pace), which is a seriously high intensity active session.  Hydration not only keeps your muscles in shape, but more importantly in my eyes, keeps your concentration levels at a maximum.  The ability to learn to concentrate for 80 minutes without allowing yourself to drift at any stage is something that we train extremely hard for mentally, and probably one of the best abilities that define a really top class referee.

Hope this helps a bit in understanding our preparation for a game.

4. Name: Guy Woodruff

Question: How steady must the scrum be before the scrumhalf has to put the ball in? There has been a lot of hooha about scrums and their collapses that it seems to me that referees don't give a damn how unstable the scrum is as long as the players get the ball in. Surely this is wrong. Don't the Laws say the scrum must be still and stable before the ball is put in.

Stu Berry: Hi Guy.

Certainly the hot topic at the moment is the scrums.

In terms of steadiness, I think that the law really guides us on this in that we allow the original ‘hit’ on engagement, but after that it needs to be a fair contest for both teams, and I would interpret this to be not moving forward, backwards or sideways.  It also depends on how quickly the scrumhalf wants to feed the ball. Nowadays it is relatively fast and happens on the engage call.

Law 20.1 (k) clearly states that a scrum must be stationary and the middle line of the scrum must be parallel to the goal lines.  I think that a bit of leeway is applied here though, as if the letter of the law were to be blown, then the ‘hit’ would be nullified more often than not, discrediting the good scrummaging teams.

Law 20.1 (k) Stationary and parallel. Until the ball leaves the scrum half’s hands, the scrum must be stationary and the middle line must be parallel to the goal lines. A team must not shove the scrum away from the mark before the ball is thrown in.
Penalty: Free Kick