Respect My Authoritaaaaaah! Part 3

In the final installment of our chat with three of Finland's top refs, we explore the more personal sides of the game in Finland, both the good and the bad. As always, the names have been changed to protect the 'innocent'!

Ruck Tales (RT): What is the best incident of good-sportsmanship you have seen during a game?

Ref 3: It’s quite common for a team meeting an opposition low in numbers to lend players, which sometimes results in losing the game. But all players still have good fun!

Ref 2: At Snow Rugby this year, during Porvoo v Kotka. A Porvoo player broke his leg in 3 places with the only ambulance booked for the day having driven off for relatively minor injuries. One or two of the Kotka players were paramedics and so they stayed with him for about 25 minutes and made sure he was ok.

Ref 1: I’ve seen it many times from many teams: one side turns up with too few players and the other team lend their players, agree to change the numbers in the scrum, accept uncontested scrums, etc etc, and yet choose not to claim a forfeit but play the game and if they lose are still happy to let the other side walk away with the competition points. Always terrific to see that happen.

(Photo by Rod McCracken - Who done it?!: the officials had their hands full when Cyprus visited Finland in June)

 RT: And the worst?

Ref 1: I can’t recall a single incident that would qualify as the worst beyond the red cards I’ve had to dish out over the years.

Ref 3: Violence in general. Rugby is a sport where players can show physicality within the boundaries of the law, so why throw a punch or worse?

Ref 2: No teams mentioned, but many years ago there was a serious leg injury to a player (a compound break) and the opposition were moaning for him to leave the field so they could get on with the match as their bus was leaving at a certain time and they wanted to be home on time. There was no respect or concern for the injured player whatsoever.

 (Photo by Rod McCracken - 'One for the ref': rugby players always have the decency to thank the ref.)

RT: People on the sidelines often enjoy vocalising their opinions on the reffing – what’s it like having all those people shouting at you when you’re trying to do your job?

Ref 3: Frankly, I don’t hear them. Or to be more precise I only hear those from people whose opinion I value (and usually they shout if I make a mistake, bad call or bad positioning and they’re spot on). In those cases, I make a conscious effort to refocus - pretty much like coaching.

Ref 1: I don’t hear people on the side very much at all during a match, but of course you know they’re there. The supporters in Finland generally don’t vocalise their complaints at the ref though; if there is a bad call my experience is that they tend to grumble to the person next to them and only one or two shout across the field. They’re also quite respectful and as long as they understand why you’ve given something they’ll generally accept it and move on, as do the players. Learning to communicate to the crowd (distinctive whistle tones, short/loud verbal cues, and good secondary signalling) really helps with this.

Ref 2: At the start I was very conscious of it, but now I just switch off and concentrate on the game. If only all these ‘sideline refs’ actually wanted to, or took the time to, become ‘proper’ refs, we wouldn’t have a shortage of refs in Finnish rugby!

Personally if I heard something very nasty said to any official, I would now stop the game and ask both captains to request that person leave the sidelines or the game wouldn’t restart (I nearly did this in Snow Rugby this year but the individual left when I asked him to - yes, he was drunk).

What the ruck is going on?!

The ruck is often one of the harder concepts to explain to newcomers to the sport. To the untrained eye it looks like nothing more than mud wrestling, but as our house refs noted last week, the long list of laws and pitfalls at the breakdown account for a staggering percentage of penalties in the Finnish game. Ruck Tales therefore decided to have a stab at delving into the murky world of the ruck for your edification.

 

It's off to ruck we go -

A ruck can take place anywhere on the field and most commonly occurs after a player is tackled and the ball is taken to ground. If the ball is off the ground for any reason, a ruck is not formed. The ruck is actually formed with players on their feet, with at least one player being in physical contact with an opponent.

Budge up! -

You must join the ruck from the hindmost (back) foot of your own side. All players forming, joining and taking part in a ruck should have the heads and shoulders no lower than their hips (something often missed but crucial for safety). Another increasingly common issue is the ‘clear-out’ which the IRB deals with by saying that a player joining a ruck must bind onto a team-mate or an opponent, using the whole arm. Moreover, simply placing a hand on another player in a ruck does NOT constitute binding. For a look at examples of the illegal ‘charging in’ offence, check out this link:

http://www.irblaws.com/EN/guidelines/2/charging-into-the-ruck-february-2010/

Inside the belly of the Beast –

While rucking, it is a player’s duty to try to stay on their feet and he/she must not intentionally fall or kneel in the ruck, nor must he/she collapse a ruck, all of which is considered highly dangerous. A persistent problem in the Finnish game is support players following the ball carrier into contact and letting momentum carry them off their feet – an instant penalty.

(Photo by Sini Nordberg - Zero tolerance: Finnish refs have cracked down on ruck infringements)

Hands off! –

A referee will inform the players when the ruck has formed – a signal to abide by the laws of the ruck. Once a ruck is formed, the ball must be released and can only be played by a player who is not involved in the ruck. The exception to the rule is for a player on his feet who, following a tackle gets his hands on the ball before the ruck is formed. Professional rugby has produced many gifted ‘poachers’, as they are known, the most famous in the modern era being stars like Richie McCaw, David Pocock, Chris Robshaw and George Smith. Rugby World magazine recently analysed what made these men so skilled at stealing the ball and the conclusion was that their positioning and timing was simply better than that of their peers. Pocock in particular has made the timing of his swoop onto a tackled player into an art form.

Less commonly seen are two further possible infringements: firstly the ball cannot be put back into a ruck (a free kick offence). Secondly (and we would rather like to see this) a player cannot pick up the ball with his feet in the ruck. Although you would concede a penalty for such a stunt, the acrobatics needed might make the spectacle worthwhile!

Sorry, was that your head? –

The actual term ‘rucking’ comes from the player’s ability to use his boot to free the ball inside the ruck. However, before you go off to sharpen your studs for the next game, note that strict penalties will be given against any player who steps on another player’s head or intentionally or treads intentionally on bodies.

Wait for it...... –

Offside at the ruck is one that we have all come across and referees have a pretty easy job of spotting it. In short the offside line for BOTH teams is the hindmost foot of the hindmost player (i.e. furthest back point of your side of the ruck). The only time this changes is when the back foot is over the try line, in which case the try line automatically becomes the offside line instead.

As noted already, a player must enter a ruck from behind that point, or risk conceding a penalty for side entry. Interestingly a penalty can also be given for a player loitering (standing around doing nothing) at the side of the ruck (a good way to keep lazy players in check)!

Is it over yet, Sir?....... –

The ruck ends successfully when the ball is played out the back of one end or the other of the ruck, of if the ball is on or over the try line for a try. Confusion can occur about when the ball is actually out of the ruck. Ruck Tales advises you to ask the referee how he interprets this one: some refs deem hands on the ball as ‘out’, others wait until the ball is off the ground and moving – there is no universal law, so beware!

On occasion the ball gets stuck in the black hole of humanity. The referee must allow ‘reasonable time’ for the ball to emerge but the length of time is totally discretionary. The length of time he waits may depend on the amount of movement happening in the ruck (if one team is making progress in moving forward etc.) but if meaningful movement ceases, then a scrum is likely to be called. Generally the put-in at the scrum will be given to the team moving forward before the ball was made unplayable, but if no team was clearly moving forward then the default law is that the attacking side will have possession.

The Right To Ruck

During the offseason a debate arose over a Championship (SM-sarja) team’s right to make use of players from the Finnish Cup (now Division 1). Plenty of strong views were expressed on both sides of the argument, but the recent Championship match between Helsinki RC and Eagles RFC from Turku highlighted the fact that the issue is far from settled.

The men at the heart of the incident were players from Division 1 West leaders, and last season’s Finnish Cup champions, Rauma Ice Pack (RIP). RIP have enjoyed an increasingly close tie with Turku over recent years - in large part due to the proximity of the two cities, which has allowed for pre- and post-season friendly matches. Yet Turku were unable to include RIP players in their squad when they travelled to Helsinki recently due to their opponents refusing their consent, despite other Championship teams having given their consent to Turku’s use of RIP players. With the clear rise of lower division rugby in Finland, Ruck Tales asks whether it is time to make a change to the eligibility rules.

Firstly some background: there is a strict 2-part law governing whether a Division 1-registered player can play for a side in the Championship:
The Division 1 player in question must not have already represented another Championship side in the current season, AND
The other team must give their consent to the player’s involvement.

Bear in mind that these rules do not apply when a club (such as Eagles in Turku, Helsinki RC and Warriors RC) has a team in both the Championship and Division 1. Rather it applies if a player from an external club (for example RIP) wishes to represent another club’s Championship team.

We have now come to a crossroads in Finnish rugby: whereas previously there has been a sizeable difference in standards between the Championship and Division 1, recent matches have shown that the gap has diminished, in some cases to the brink of invisibility. We would argue that RIP, given a little more practice at playing 15s, would challenge any Championship side. At the same time their Division 1 West rivals, Pori, have produced some sparkling performances which earned several of their young players places in Tampere’s squad in their recent match against Eagles. In the East, Porvoo recently earned their first tournament win and in the North Kuopio ground out their first ever win over Vaasa. In short, everyone is improving – so what’s the big problem?

The problem comes when we turn to the issue of building on this fantastic development. Though Division 1 North consists of standard matches, Div 1 East and West still employ mini-tournament formats, made up of shorter matches and almost always played as 10-a-side (with the occasional possibility of 12s). It is safe to say that the structure of Division 1 will not change any time soon: despite talk of a promotion/relegation system between Div 1 and the Championship, such an arrangement would only benefit the winner of Division 1, leaving the rest of the developing clubs facing another frustrating season of 10s. Much as many would like to simply promote more teams to the Championship, it is simply not a realistic option: the summer schedule is already full, with rugby taking up the majority of summer Saturdays – there is simply no more room!

(Photo by Rod McCracken - Rising stars: Division 1 sides are highly competitive and not just side-acts)

When we confine emerging talent to situations where they can only play 10s, certain problems are going to arise, regardless of how talented the individual is: front rows will not experience the pressures of 8-man scrums, forwards experience fewer lineout options, backs are far less focused on positioning and players are moulded to a defensive structure more akin to 7s than the 15-man game. Giving these players the chance to play in the Championship provides them with the experience to take their game to the next level, jerking them out of their comfort zone and providing additional match time. Linked to this is the need to exploit the talent we have while we have it. Several Division 1 players have already represented the National Team, with a further handful under consideration for the coming international season, and there is still plenty of time for more players to make an impression. Keeping talented players boxed in Div 1 kills the chance for them to stake a claim to greater things.

The counter-argument to all this has been consistent from those clubs who cling to the current laws, especially dealing with cases such as Turku: because Turku have teams registered in both competitions, logic should dictate that Turku have a large pool of players and any players registered to Turku should therefore be used ahead of players from external clubs. Using external players, they argue, puts those clubs without links to another Division 1 team at a disadvantage. 
While these are valid points, consider also how much of an advantage a team is really getting. In almost all cases, external players will not have trained with the team they are helping, meaning that they are often out of sync with the game plan, set pieces and styles of their teammates; in a tight game such a lack of cohesion could be the fatal difference between victory and defeat. More often than not, what you get when using an external player is their raw skill and nothing more. 

We should point out that this article is not intended as an attack on Helsinki RC for their decision to refuse consent to Turku. They played by the laws and made a tactical decision – Eagles have no right to complain. Instead this is a plea for change: abolish the law requiring the consent of the opposition and make top level rugby more accessible to all players in Finland. It seems to us that the benefits of the free use of players far outweigh the drawbacks and with competitive development still the focal point of Finnish rugby, why continue with a law which can only hinder it?

A Brutal Match in HD!

Check out these fantastic pictures from Rod McCracken taken during Saturday's SM-sarja match between Eagles RFC and Tampere RC.

http://riafin.galleria.fi/kuvat/Rugby/Eagles+24+-+14+Tampere/

Ruck Tales kindly asks that if you make use of any of these photos on social media sites, articles etc, please attach credit for Rod.  He has been a terrific friend to Finnish rugby and makes these excellent photo freely available to us.

If you would like to share your rugby photos with the rest of the rugby community through Ruck Tales, please let us know through facebook (search for Ruck Tales Suomi or for Ronald Ruck) or email them directly to us at ronald.ruck@hotmail.com!  All photos will be fully credited.

Respect My Authoritaaaaaah! Part 2

In our second chat with the men in charge, Ruck Tales looks at the technical side of the game: where the issues occur and how the evolution of the laws of the game are impacting on how we play.

Ruck Tales (RT): What are the most common rugby law infractions committed in Finnish games?

Ref 1: The most common laws infractions occur at the breakdown. Coaches are getting better at ensuring that their players release both the ball and the ball carrier, but both remain a problem. Added to that, players frequently leave their feet in an effort to secure the ball and those already on the ground often fail to make the effort to roll away.

Ref 3: Definitely post-tackle situations - tacklers not rolling away and the tackled player not releasing the ball. It used to be high tackles three or four years ago, and this has improved.

Ref 2: Offsides at the breakdown (rucks/mauls), and of course knock-ons. Tip-tackling is creeping in more and more these last few seasons as well.

 (The eye of the storm: refs are very aware of potential infringements at rucks and mauls)

RT: The scrum is the iconic image of rugby, but between the diminished importance of the feeding rule and the new IRB law variations for quick lineouts for certain knock-ons, we feel it is slowly being sidelined. What are your thoughts on this?

Ref 3: At top level way too much time is spent and lost on resetting scrums. It is certainly an iconic image of the game, with the pack in such a close encounter, but IRB heads do realise it’s an injury hotspot (and therefore costly for insurance) and tends to eat spectacular game time away. At our level, it’s not abused yet.

Ref 2: I agree it has to be officiated heavily due to the safety issues involved, but I’m hoping it doesn’t go down the rugby league route and become meaningless due to continual tampering.

Ref 1: I don’t agree with your take on the trial law amendments. The feed is nearly always highlighted as an area to be policed more tightly ahead of every major tournament, and while I would agree that there are many examples of when crooked feeds have gone unpenalised, there has been no downplay of the importance of ensuring a fair contest. One recent example of this is the new engagement sequence to be trialled at the start of each nation’s next domestic season; by replacing a referee’s command to 'engage' with an invitation to do so reintroduces some of the contest that was originally lost once the four-stage call was introduced a few years ago. Furthermore, in my opinion allowing a team to take a quick lineout is a good way to keep play alive and to give other options to teams. The scrum option hasn’t been removed from the incident for those that want to capitalise on a stronger pack, but allows those with a weaker pack a way to avoid turning over posession immediately to the team that committed the error but have a heavy pack.

(Photo by Rod McCracken - Iconic: the scrum is one of rugby's centrepieces, but is it being marginalised?)

RT: Which laws would you like to see changed/deleted/added?

Ref 1: The worst law I’ve ever seen was making pulling down a rolling maul legal but thankfully that ELV never made it into full law. What I would like to see concentrated on is creating a single interpreation between hemispheres to avoid the situation where some actions are permitted in one nation but not another. Having such grey areas isn’t fair to national sides and it’s not fair to referees who are constantly being criticised when a Northern hemipshere nation plays a Southern one for interpreting the law according to the ethos in whichever hemisphere they were raised. I realise that this doesn’t apply so much to Finnish rugby but the laws are evolving reasonably well.

Next week in the final part of Respect My Authoritaaaaaah! we conclude with a look at attitudes in the Finnish game and some of the more memorable moments witnessed by the officials.

Respect My Authoritaaaaaah! Part 1

We all have a love/hate relationship with referees. On the one hand our passions often compel us to vocalise our opinions on their work, but on the other hand the proud traditions of rugby require us to respect the ref at all times. Rugby players throughout the world frequently berate loutish football players for surrounding, intimidating and sometimes manhandling their referee. Whatever your opinion of them, their word is law. In the first of several interviews, we sit down with three of Finland's top referees to discuss life behind the whistle. The names have been changed to protect the "innocent".

Ruck Tales (RT): Most refs in Finland are close personally to one club or another - has this ever caused any problems on the field or off it?

Ref 1: I’ve heard complaints about biased refs several times in Finland and it’s nearly always based exclusively on a perceived association (real or not) between the referee and the opposition. The accusation always gets to me (whether it’s aimed at me or another referee) as it’s nearly always unfounded and effectively calls the referee a cheat. In sports, for me, there’s nothing worse that to be a cheat.

Ref 2: It did when I first started. The opposition thought I was biased towards my team and my team thought I was penalising them harder due to me trying to not appear biased. Off the field not so much, as I make myself available to the players from both teams and explain any calls they were not too sure about.

Ref 3: I’ve played around 10 years with my club and I’m still very close to it. It’s never nice to give a card to a friend but I had to do it once. It's never raised, to my knowledge, any problem on or off the pitch. I’ve asked our competition manager to minimise the matches I have to referee them, but it has happened and I had to do it.

RT: Refs have to step in and make big calls (such as Alain Rolland giving Warburton the red card in RWC) – how easy is it to make those calls when the rugby community here is so small and you know many of the players?

Ref 3: Well the Finnish championship is not really comparable, in importance, to RWC! Of course, we – players, coaches, referees – strive to be as good as we can. Knowing most of the players/coaches personally adds an extra ”pressure” to be as prepared as possible (fitness, knowledge of laws/the game) but as far as I’m concerned it’s still a hobby where I try to be as good as possible - but no one’s career depends on my calls!

Ref 1: I have never had a problem issuing the cards when required but it is in the back of your mind that you’re going to see this same player maybe three or four more times during the season and he’s probably not going to be the happiest to see you the following week.

Ref 2: It actually makes it easier, as explaining things/calls can (sometimes) be easier with people you know.

(photo by Rod McCracken - Law and Order: remember the ref is only doing his job!)

RT: Tempers can get a bit frayed during matches: any memorable incidents and how did you deal with it/them?

Ref 3: Over the last years, I learned how to deal with tempers. Basic management techniques (lower voice, keeping calm) usually help, but I’ve never had a problem giving players a 10-minute rest.

Ref 2: I did get given the finger and told to F-off during a game (the guy just happened to be the one that received the “team” yellow for repeated infringements). He turned his yellow into a red and got banned for a few games. Sometimes player will use colourful language when querying a call, but a ten-metre walk and a quick chat to the captain normally sorts this. Most players want to stay on the field, so a warning with “I do have other options” (complete with a pat on your pocket to indicate that you have cards) also cools things down. Refs are told that if you have to use yellow/red cards during a game you’ve failed at communicating, so I tend to use them as a last resort.

Ref 1: I’ve never refereed a game here that disolved into a mass-brawl or anything like that. Most of the time a yellow or red card to an offending player will sort out the problem and allow the rest of us to get back to the game at hand.

 

 Part 2 coming next week!  Have a rucking good weekend, everybody!

Little Ruckers: part 1

Junior rugby has been a stop-start process in Finland. There is no official junior league running, but a dedicated few around the country are spearheading the development of Finland's future rugby players. In the first of several interviews with key persons on the junior seen, Ruck Tales talks to Miika Valo, who is heading up junior rugby in Tampere and at the forefront of national junior development.

 

Ruck Tales (RT): What’s your background in rugby, Miika?

Miika Valo (MV): My work has taken me around world for the past 25 years: Germany, Israel, China, the Netherlands - but luckily I’ve always been able to find a rugby team to silly enough to allow me to run the ball with them. A few years back it finally dawned on me that the others were not actually getting faster but I was getting slower and so my rugby turned into playing only touch and I got involved in junior coaching, in the Netherlands.

RT: What is the current state of junior rugby in Finland?

MV: Most clubs have juniors, albeit in numbers too small to put together a team for a junior competition. This past year the tactic has been to organise junior get-togethers (national training days) which has proven rather successful, with attendances of 20-35 players from all age groups. There is a lot of will and motivation from the juniors; however, it is still a very ‘tentative’ attempt to form an actual active age-group rugby structure in the country, i.e. a lot of work ahead. Juniors have had 5 major events from 2011 (snow events) to 2012 with players participating from most of the clubs.

RT: What are some of the key problems in expanding the junior game?

MV:  In my view, it all boils down to motivation & energy, i.e. the clubs need to REALLY want juniors - the rest is just ‘technicalities’. It might not make me hugely popular, but when I hear clubs name their key problems as recruiting, facilities, lack of coaches or support from SRL, I cannot help but see it as a mix-up between the cause and the effect - the latter being the effect - I must go back to old wisdom: ‘when there is a will, there’s a way’! Having said that, there are also objective challenges relating to budgets, municipality priorities and to fact that the season is being played during the school vacation period. One key problem that should be addressed, on the national level (top down solution) is publicity of the sport – rugby is not a sport people generally know about in Finland and this matter should be dealt with, post haste. Having witnessed the rise of American football in the early eighties, they clearly did something right and one of the key items they cared for was making the sport known to all, but namely to young people. 

 (photo by Tony Brick - Junior camps, such as this one in Helsinki, have been a lifeline for future players)

RT: How much of a problem is rugby’s image as a ‘violent’ or ‘dangerous’ sport?

MV: I don’t think this is an issue - quite the contrary. Finns don’t mind a bit of physicality, and I think that the contact side of the game should be used to attract new players. Furthermore, rugby’s ethos of sportsmanship and fairness (‘a hooligan’s game played by gentlemen’) should appeal to the local mentality of honour and fair contest.

RT: How do we move forward with junior rugby in Finland?

MV: There needs to be a clear statement made across the board placing age group rugby as a national priority in the development of the sport. The SRL and clubs need to acknowledge that only through an proper junior programme will the sport grow beyond its current niche state. I am aware of lot of good work that has been and is done in development and the numbers are growing, however now it is time to address the actual growing platform, i.e. the juniors. One of the key problems is that when someone gets juniors going in one club, the effort turns out to be counterproductive when other clubs do not, and the juniors leave the sport disappointed, as there is no-one to play against. The sport needs to “mushroom”, with 3-5 clubs pushing the junior development forward simultaneously.

One practical way would be to start a winter league, of national touch rugby competition, combined with large training events. The touch rugby tournament should be mixed gender and age, from which all players would benefit. I think that this platform would work better than the attempt to get tag rugby in schools going. I don’t mean that the school programme should be cancelled, but work in parallel with the club work.

Recruiting should be aimed first and foremost at age groups 13-17, and not 17-19, which is the feeding group to adult rugby. This would assure much higher skill levels by the time they players reach adult rugby, but more importantly a complete different club management mind-set, since coaching these age groups means specific junior coaching. I firmly believe that many ex-players would be excited by the challenge of developing rugby in Finland by passing their experience to the lads and lassies.