Tangled Points in Rugby

Manawatu Times, Volume 60, Issue 92, 20 April 1935, Page 5

Tangled Points in Rugby

Dominion Referees in Annual Conference

TAMPERING- WITH RULES DEPLORED

Association. INVERCARGILL, Last Night. The annual conference of the New Zealand Rugby Referees’ Association opened here this afternoon and will be continued this evening and to-morrow. The chairman of the executive, Mr McKenzie (Wellington), presided over an attendance of 20 delegates. In welcoming the delegates to Invercargill, Mr H. Strang, president of the Southland Rugby Union, said there had been too much tampering with tjie rules of the game during the last few years. A t.vpical instance was the scrummage half. Referees and players did not know when the ball was in the scrum and when it was not. This last had been made too complicated and it ought to be simplified. He expressed the opinion that the suggestion that the referees should put the ball into the scrum would be very acceptable to the players. In the course of Iris address the chairman remarked that it was agreed that scrummaging of recent years lmi been a weakness in play' in New Zealand he was going to suggest to referees that, if the ball got fairly into the scrummage, that is, on the ground past the first foot of a player on each side, the whole intent of the rule had been carried out, and when this happened, referees should be prepared to allow play- to go on, provided that the second aud third feet did not play the ball before the fourth. A lengthy discussion took place on a question from the King Country Association: “The referee failed to see a touch judge hold up his flag owing to the ball going into touch. Play continued and a fair catch was given and a free kick awarded. On noticing that the touch judge’s flag was still up, should the referee alter his decision and order a line out?” The meeting agreed that tho referee may alter his decision if he thinks it justified. Tho Southland Association queried: “An attacking player kicks-the ball and a defender charges down the kick, but fails to gather. Another attacking player on bis way back to get on side plays the ball. All players aro within ten yards of one, another.J-T-s there an infringement?' ’ % . The answer" given by the executive last year was-: “Tho.ajlayor is offside and should be penalised for playing the ball while within 10 yards or nis opponent.”

The chairman said that this ruling was sent to England and the EngHsh Union had said that there was no infringement, as the player charging down the kick was not waiting for the ball.

It was decided to reverse the live’s decision. ■ • -