Christmas may be upon us with lots of heat in the Southern Hemisphere and wet in the North, but readers' questions continue and St Berry answers them.

1. Name: Keith Evans 

Question: Why do elite ref take up position in the defending line facing the attacking side when the defending side should be watched for offside and they should be face them?

Stu Berry: Hi Keith.  Positioning is a key element to a referee’s performance….being in the right position ensures that he has all the correct tools to be able to make an informed decision.  One of the key elements about positioning is where a referee is comfortable, and where he is best suited to effectively moving around and staying out of the way.  Players and coaches attack a referees channel often, and so we need to be sharp to not disrupt attacking or defensive patterns in anyway.

Most referees will vary their positions to ensure that players don't get used to one position.  The defensive backline is a good position in that play comes towards you, and so you are generally always up with play.  It is also a good position to judge and manage offside.  By standing on the offside line, players then know to stand on your line, and as the ball emerges, a quick turn of the head will reveal whether any of these players are offside or not. 

2. Name: John Davies 

Question: Xmas greetings from a soggy UK!

Following the tribunal hearing the case of the late cancellation of the game between Sale and Wasps on Nov 27th. The finding was that Wasps had no case to answer but the blame was squarely put on referee David Roses shoulders for not understanding IRB or premiership regulations! My belief was that you could not force players onto the park! If one captain was unwilling to play because of pitch conditions the game did not go ahead and it was to others to rule on the veracity of the action. If there was some concern the ref's opinion could be sought. If in the unlikely circumstances both sides wanted to play but the ref deemed the conditions dangerous, the ref would start the game and then immediately blow and abandon the match. I don't suppose that such events occur in sunny SA! 

Please enlighten  

Stu Berry: Hi John….this is quite an interesting case.  The law (Law 1.6 a and b) states that if either team has an objection about the ground, they must tell the referee before the match starts.  The referee will then attempt to resolve the issue but is instructed not to start the match if any part of the ground is considered to be dangerous.  My understanding of this is that if there is any issue with the ground, the referee is empowered to make the decision as to whether it is safe to use or not, and if he decides not, he has the capacity not to start the game.  If David Rose believed, with valid reasons, that the ground was dangerous to play on, then according to the law, he was allowed not to start the game.  The referee is responsible for the safety of the players, and that needs to be the consideration at all times.

3. Name: Bunny Bolton

Question: When a player leans over what had been a ruck and knocks the ball out of the scrumhalf's hands, is he penalisable for doing it regardless in which direction the ball goes or is he penalisable just for knocking the ball out of the scrumhalf's hands?

Stu Berry: Hi Bunny, thanks for your submission.

Generally speaking, you find that a player who leans and knocks the ball out of the scrumhalves hands is offside, and so he is penalized for being offside.  In the case where the player is onside and simply slaps the ball out of the scrumhalves hand, whether forward or not, the interpretation of the law is that it is spoiling play, as he has made no attempt to catch the ball in anyway, and so a penalty would occur.

4. Name: Tim Clifford

Question: When is a referee allowed to change his mind?

On Saturday at Thomond Park, Munster scored a try. They ran half the field to score it. It was clearly a try. After it had been scored, the referee decided that there had been a knock-on at the tackle that freed the ball and disallowed the try. Instead it became a scrum to the French.

Was the referee right to do so?

It seemed to me that the referee had got a call from the touch judge and so changed his mind. Is he allowed to do that?

How long does it take the message to get from the touch judge to the referee? I resume that they are in radio contact. Should the referee not act immediately if he is unsighted, as he probably was in this case?

This sort of hesitation creates a bad impression.

Stu Berry: Hi Tim, thanks for your mail.  The impression that a referee and touch judges give off is a vital one….they need to act and look professional through their conduct and decision making.  It inevitably happens that there are mess up’s here and there, but the key at the end is the right decision.

As a referee, I am in contact (at top games) with my assistants through an immediate communication system.  The AR presses a button and is able to talk to me immediately.

In this regard, I would brief an AR to perform certain duties for me during a game, some of which may vary from what other referees prefer.  A knock on, be it clear and obvious, is certainly something that an AR is empowered, most of the time, to comment on and point out.

By the sounds of it, the referee certainly got the call from the AR, however it does seem to be very delayed and late.  I think that the key aspect here is whether the knock on occurred or not.  If it did, then I would suggest that the right decision was made, which is what most people would want.