After his experience with the lights that failed in Port Elizabeth, Mark Lawrence is back in Standerton answering readers' questions.

1. Name: Lious Prins

Question: I am a referee.

The law clearly states that a ball carrier brought to ground a tackle has occurred and the tackled player has to exercise his options. Not at all tackles will you have a tackler for those does not necessarily go to ground and cannot be the tackler. 

At an ankle tap though we allow the players to get up with the ball without releasing it first. Clearly the player has been brought to ground. What is making this more debatable is the that the player that brought the ball carrier to ground has to create a visible gap before he can play the ball. At this instance the tackled player gets up with the ball and play on.

I realise the manner in which we approach this as refs, but looking at the facts above to me is questionable. The ankle tap the player know that he was not held and would play on although brought to ground.

Thank you

Mark Lawrence: Hello Lious,

I am very glad you read this website because of one thing in refereeing - we learn all the time.

For a tackle to occur a player must be HELD and brought to GROUND, simultaneously. A very different picture to the one you currently have. In an ankle tap, the ball-carrier is not held and therefore there is NO tackle.

Law 15 DEFINITIONS
A tackle occurs when the ball carrier is held by one or more opponents and is brought to ground.

Trust that clears up the tackle law for you.

Regards, Mark

2. Name: Donald Burns 

Question: Ek sien al hoe meer hoe spelers rondom 'n losskrum staan en opponente weghou om iemand te tackle,. Dit gebeur ook in 'n meer verskuilde mate in die agterlyn (dummy runner) die ding is mos 'n onding. Dis dan soos American football. Waarom blaas die skeidsregters dit nie? Kyk na die wedstryd tussen Australie en Suid-Afrika die naweek. Dis erg blatant wat die Wallabies daar doen. en waarom is daar soveel verskillende strawwe vr dieselfde oortredings?

Groete.

Mark Lawrence: Hi Donald,

Thanks for your question. It is a pretty difficult one to answer as I am not quite sure of the incident that bothers you. I guess this all falls under obstruction so I will explain this with special mention of dummy runners.

Law 10 1 b deals with dummy runners. Running in front of the ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of a team mate carrying the ball THEREBY preventing the opponents from tackling the ball carrier..

 So, Donald, there are two aspects to this law…running in front of a team mate must also block the tackler. Now this is what we as referees look at when we decide if there has been obstruction or not. Remember that the purpose of a dummy runner is to confuse the defender to try and create a break in their defensive line. If the defender is so confused that he tackles the dummy runner, we do NOT rule obstruction. If however, the dummy runner runs into the tackler thereby blocking him, that is obstruction. Now just before you think this is ridiculous, just consider this …..  2 defenders will always successfully defend against 3 attackers … or so the best defensive coaches tell us. The reason is that the touch line serves as an extra defender that no attacker can beat! It is therefore more difficult to attack than defend and the art of dummy runners is to try and “crack” defensive walls. 

Hope that clears things up a bit.

Regards, Mark 

3. Name: Pieter Rautenbach

Question: Na aanleiding van Saterdag se wedstryd tussen Bulle en Cheetahs waar die skeidsregter die Bulle seker drie keer waarsku om nie strafskoppe afte staan in die kwartgebied nie, maar die Bulle hou aan daarmee en geen geelkaart word gegee nie, moet daar nie strenger stappe gedoen word teen sulke spel nie?  

Die gevolg van sulke negatiewe spel is dat daar pale toe geskop word en die kans om 'n drie te druk word ontneem. In van die bewegings is die voordeel tot drie keer herhaal .

Soms maak sulke spanne dit onmoontlik vir die skeidsregter asook die ander span om die spel te speel deur so aanhoudend onkant te gaan en oor die bal te val. Ek glo die skeidregter wil ook nie gebrandmerk word as iemand wat net kaarte uitdeel nie maar soms is dit nodig.

Ek het baie agting vir die werk van die skeidsregters.

Mark Lawrence: Hello Pieter,

Thanks for your question and thank you for appreciating the difficult task of the referee. You are quite correct, sometimes a team can make it very difficult for a referee, and to be quite frank that is when the referee has to put his foot down and be “die vark in die verhaal” !! The referee will be blamed or accussed of spoiling the game but teams will eventually learn which refs not to push! The good news is that under Andre Watson, coaches meet with the referees and agree or buy into the concept that their players must be coached to play positive rugby. The obligation is now also withy the coaches .. not just the referee.

Let's hope it is going to be a great Currie Cup

Keep well and regards

Mark

4. Name: Hannes Cilliers

Question: Hi Guys,

Thanks for providing your thoughts on my suggestion last week (http://www.sareferees.co.za/news/ref_news/2548760.htm). You provided me with a much better understanding of the process and what lengths everybody goes through to enhance the product. We as fans might not own the game/product but without us the product/game will not exist.

I also understand that referee's are human and therefore have human- and constitutional rights like everybody else. I was in no way suggesting that any of these rights should be violated.

All I, and I'm sure all fans  want is to know that it is a fair system and that there is a responsibility accepted. What happens if a referee made mistakes by having a bad day at the office or for whatever reason? For instance, If I make a serious mistake at work I get fired. Don't get me wrong I know my job is completely different from yours and we can therefore not be treated the same and that is why I get a performance review 4 times a year and not 40.

Lastly, I just want to say that what happened to Willie Roos was totally unacceptable. I know it is old news by now, but I feel we as fans have a responsibility to accept the game as it is and should never ever behave like that if we disagree with what is happening on the field and maybe having more clarity and transparency on the process and system will go a long way in achieving that.

Thanks for doing the tough job, which I know I would never be able to do.

Best regards, Hannes Cilliers

Mark Lawrence: Hello again Hannes,

On behalf of all the referees, I want to thank you for your very positive and mature response. You had the guts to put your thoughts in writing last week but you also had the decency and good manners to read and hear our side of the story.

We need more fans like you. What is scary is that referee numbers are down to 1300 in SA. We need 2500 every weekend just to get by. Because of lack of referees, some chaps are reffing 3 to 4 games per weekend. Unless we look after our refs, they are simply going to stop because to give up your weekend and then be abused every time,  just isn’t worth it. The good news, though,  is that Willie Roos is not lost to rugby. He is being trained to become a referee selector/assessor so his experienced is not lost.

As referees, we look forward to your support and I look forward meeting and shaking your hand one day

Have a great weekend.

Kind regards, Mark