RUGBY REFEREES

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19042, 16 June 1936, Page 7

RUGBY REFEREES

POVERTY BAY ASSOCIATION

WEEKLY MEETING

REFEREES FOR SATURDAY

The weekly meeting of the Poverty Ray Rugby Referees Association was we'll attonuod, last evening and was presided over by Mr. K. R. Waite. Referees lor Saturday were appointed as follows : Curtain-raiser.—Gishorne third grade representatives v. Fast Coast juniors, on the Oval Xo. 1 ground at 1.15 p.m., Mr. 11. Hunter.

Juniors.—Celtic v. H.5.0.R.. Oval No. 2 ground. 1.15 p.m., Mr. 11. Hoiford; Marist, v. High .School. High School Xo. 1 ground, 1.16 p.m.. Mr. W. MeKeague ; Old Roys (Rj v. V.M.P., Oval Xo. 3 ground." I.lb p.m.. Mr. 0. Mills. Fifth grade.—'High School (A) v. Marist. High School Xo. 2 ground. 1.15 p.m.. Mr. F. Rennet! : High School (B) v. Old Rovs. High School Xo. 3 ground, 1.15 p.m..'Mr. I! W. Cook. Reserve referees.—Messrs. W. Btlborough and V. Xorman. Line umpires.—Oval Xo. 1 ground, 1.15 p.m., Messrs. A. J. Worthington and A. Ingram. Messrs. X. Tasker. K. R. Waite. and L. Slichbury were nominated for submission to the Rugby Union for the senior representative match.

INJURED PLAYERS The practice of coaches or spectators rushing on to tin ground when a player is injured was discussed. It was decided that as the referee was in sole charge of ihe gam.' he could use his discretion regarding a non-competitor going on to the ground on such occasions. The Ambulance men were in all lance for such emergencies ami if they needed assist-, r.nce'tlie referee would permit a supporter giving help. The question of dangerous sprigs on boots was discussed. It was stated that, the referee had power to order a player to remove dangerous sprigs, and to refuse to allow him to play until they were made safe.

QUESTIONING OF A DECISION Arising out of an incident during a match last Saturday, a referee reported in writing that a member of the Rugby Union management committee had called from the touch line questioning his decision, and had suggested to the captain of a team that he should appeal against the ruling. ''This," continued the referee's report, "was a gross breach and an insult to on? association, and furthermore created a very wrong impression in the mind of the public." The referee outlined the breach of play and his ruling. The meeting agreed that Law 19. para. I'., bad been broken. This law leads: "A player, not himself running for Ihe ball, must not wilfully charge or obstruct an opponent who has just kicked the ball." The penalty for this is as follows: "The opposing team shall be awarded, at their option, a penalty kick at the place of infringement, or at the place where the ball alights. In the event of Ihe ball alighting in touch the mark shall be at a place fCvds. from the touch line on a parallel to' the goal lines through the place where it crossed the touch line, or in Ihe. event of the hall alighting in in-goal Ihe mark shall be at a place 10yds. from the goal line on a line parallel to the touch lines through the place where it crossed the goal line." Tn the discussion that ensued it was pointed out that many spectators were not conversant with the finer points of the game, and when a management committee member volubly questioned a referee's ruling it had 'a bad effect on the prestige of a referee and was not in the best interest of the game. It was decided to protest most strongly to the Poverty Bay Rugby Union against the member's action.