nickyboy
Norven Mankey
- Location
- You want hills? We got hills
But your position is completely at odds with that of the Authorities who require the referees to interpret the Laws, and to interpret them differently at different levels of the game.
A "just enforce the Laws" model would result in uncontested scrums from kick off to no side and the complete abolition of lineouts in a matter of one or two seasons as, at every level of the game, in every one of these set pieces, at least one player breaks one Law, every single time. But not all Law breaking is material, or so the Authorities say, and they leave it to the referee to interpret that.
What I mean is that, as we have a game where it's laws are broken, for example, in every single line out, let's simplify the laws. It's a complete nonsense to have a set of laws that govern how the game should be played then accept a situation where the laws are broken in every single instance.
I don't want a situation where a referee has no option but to disregard laws being broken so as to actually produce a game that spectators want to watch. The answer is not to expect the referees to do this but for the authorities to produce a set of laws that players can play within. Then the referee's job is to penalise each and every infraction of the laws