Law Discussion - Super 14 , Week 7

There has been a lot to talk about this weekend and still there is more. Rugby365.com has been doing this since 2000 and we have not once run out of things to talk about!

Which may speak volumes about the complexities of the Laws of the Game – and the ELVs did not seem to be making them simpler.

So far we have given statistics for the week, as usual, and we have discussed the extra man on the field in Durban and the high tackles in the week. We shall also add something on the vexed question of the tackle.

In addition there are eight clips on the South African Referees’ site (www.sareferees.co.za) which may well be of interest.

There is also one small topic from the match between London Wasps and Leicester Tigers in England’s Premiership.

We also have our weekly dose of Mextedisms.

1. Whose ball

There is a five-metre scrum to the Crusaders. The Hurricanes get a good shove on and seem to have won the ball but the scrum falls down, mainly on the Crusaders side. The referee can detect no infringement and orders a rescrum. He awards the ball to the Crusaders.

The crowd boo.

Law 20.4 THE TEAM THROWING THE BALL INTO THE SCRUM

(g) If a scrum collapses or lifts up into the air without penalty a further scrum will be ordered and the team who originally threw in the ball will throw the ball in again.

Referee 1, Booers 0

This happened after 17 minutes.

2. The splintered maul

This is a hard one.

The Crusaders forma a maul and have a drive on. It is a proper maul with Hurricanes involved. The ball is at the back when there are no Hurricanes left in the formation which keeps going forward. The Hurricanes stand off and then Jerry Collins of the Hurricanes steps forward and pulls part of it down. On the other side, the side where the referee is, Anthony Hore, the Hurricanes hooker, darts round to go to the back man who has the ball. The referee tells Hore to get back. “No.2, the maul is formed.”

The Crusaders win the ball and go along way down the filed for a line-out.

At the line-out the referee explains to Hore, that the maul had not ceased to be a maul because there were no Hurricanes.
No Crusaders had broken away. They had all stayed in the maul. The maul had not ended.

17.5 SUCCESSFUL END TO A MAUL

A maul ends successfully when the ball or a player with the ball leaves the maul. A maul ends successfully when the ball is on the ground, or is on or over the goal line.

17.6 UNSUCCESSFUL END TO A MAUL

(a) A maul ends unsuccessfully if it remains stationary or has stopped moving forward for longer than 5 seconds and a scrum is ordered.

(b) A maul ends unsuccessfully if the ball becomes unplayable or collapses (not as a result of foul play) and a scrum is ordered.

The maul had not ended successfully and it had not ended unsuccessfully. It had not ended.

It would have been different if a group of players in the maul had broken off with the ball at the back of them. Then the “truck & trailer” situation was possible.

In this case, Collins was wrong to try to pull the maul down and Hore was wrong to come darting round the side.

If there had been no Hurricanes involved before this situation there would have been no maul and so what they did would have been right.

This happened after 19 minutes.

3. Quick in in-goal

We had this last week. This week Sam Norton-Knight was the man behind his goal line and wanting to take a quick throw-in from touch-in-goal. He has been absent from the game for a while, which may explain.

A quick throw may be taken only from goal-line to goal-line.

This happened after 28 minutes.

4. Really off-side?

a. Kurtley Beale of the Waratahs passes inside to hooker Adam Frier who steams ahead but is tackled by Duanne Vermeulen and Tewis de Bruyn. Vermeulen goes high and De Bruyn to the torso. They all go to ground. De Bruyn bounces off Frier. The ball comes back from the tackle – it is just a tackle as no Cheetah approaches the tackle site, only Daniel Vickerman of the Waratahs – and Josh Valentine picks it up. De Bruyn gets to his feet and tackles Valentine. He is penalised for being off-side.

Off-side at what?

There was no ruck, just a tackle and he certainly grabbed and tackled Frier and he went to ground. He got to his feet before tackling Valentine.

The ELV Law 15.9 (e) Players must either play the ball at a tackle from an on-side position or retire behind the off-side line immediately. If a player loiters at the side of the tackle, the player is off-side.

Exception: A tackler who immediately regains that player’s feet may play the ball from any direction.

The exception may well have applied to De Bruyn.

That may have been a tough one.

This happened on 60 minutes.

b. Daniel Braid of the Blues passes to Joe Rokocoko who kicks ahead and chases the ball. Zane Kirchner comes across but misses the ball. Falling back Bryan Habana of the Bulls falls on the ball but knocks it towards the Blues’ side. It is a knock-on. Troy Flavell of the Blues gathers the ball but Habana tackles him. Tackled Flavell tries to shovel the ball out to his right where Pedrie Wannenburg of the Bulls grabs the ball.

Who is off-side?

Habana is clearly not off-side when he knocks the ball on.
No Bulls player then prevents advantage for Flavell scoops it up.
Habana tackles Flavell. He cannot be off-side because he is the player who last played the ball and so not in front of the player of his side who last played the ball.
JP Nel is not off-side because Habana passes him.

That leaves Wannenburg.

First of all, he is not off-side because of a maul, because there is no maul.
Secondly he is not off-side because of a tackle, because in terms of the law there is no tackle because the tackled player (Flavell) does not go to ground.

This is general play.

Perhaps Wannenburg was off-side because he was a bit in front of Habana but then Flavell passed the ball.

Law 11.3 BEING PUT ON-SIDE BY OPPONENTS

In general play, there are three ways by which an off-side player can be put on-side by an action of the opposing team. These three ways do not apply to a player who is off-side under the 10-Metre law.

(a) Runs 5 metres with ball. When an opponent carrying the ball runs 5 metres, the off-side player is put on-side.

(b) Kicks or passes. When an opponent kicks or passes the ball, the off-side player is put on-side.

(c) Intentionally touches ball. When an opponent intentionally touches the ball but does not catch it, the off-side player is put

It’s hard to find an off-side to penalise.

c. Jason Eaton of the Chiefs runs with the ball. Daniel Carter of the Crusaders tackles the tall man around the ankles, felling him. Eaton plays the ball a long way back to his left where several Crusaders are amongst the Chiefs and play the ball.

The referee penalises the Crusaders.

Why?

Because the experimental law variations lay down off-side lines at the tackle.

Law 15.9 OFF-SIDE AT THE TACKLE

(a) The Off-side line. There are two off-side lines parallel to the goal-lines. Each off-side line runs through the hindmost part of the nearest player to each team’s goal-line, regardless of the team to which the player belongs.

Eaton’s head is the off-side line for the Crusaders.

That is how it looks. But is Eaton actually tackled? Is he holding the ball when he hits the ground?

Going slowly it would seem that Eaton passed the ball before he reached the ground. That would mean that there was no tackle. If there was no tackle there was no off-side line – head or no head!

5. Taken right back

Some way outside their 22 the Cheetahs steal a Waratah line-out with a slap-back. They form a tackle/ruck to protect the ball about five metres outside of their 22. From there Falie Oelschig passes the ball a long way back to Jacques-Louis Potgieter. He passes to his right to Meyer Bosman who passes to Hendrik Meyer who is about five metres from his goal-line. Meyer kicks the ball out on the full near his 10-metre line.

Where will the line-out be?

Because the Cheetahs took the ball back into their 22 sand there had been nothing like a tackle inside the 22 after that, the line-out will be five metres from the Cheetahs’ line.

6. Obstruction at the kick-off

It is not an uncommon form of obstruction but often undetected – until it is a clumsy as this one.

The Chiefs have scored and the Highlanders kick off. Lelia Masaga catches the ball but the referee penalises Kevin O’Neill.

As the ball was dropping O’Neill moved out of his line to block the path of Craig Newby of the Highlanders.

Even if he did this before Masaga caught the ball it was obstruction.

Law 10.1 (d) Blocking the ball. A player must not intentionally move or stand in a position that prevents an opponent from playing the ball.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

7. Obstructive pillar

George Pisi of the Blues attacks but the Bulls haul him down. A tackle/ruck occurs near to the Bulls’ line.

On the left of it unbound and ahead of the last foot is Isaia Toeava of the Blues (13).

On the right and on-side is Pierre Spies of the Bulls.

As the ball comes out, Spies makes to move forward but Toeava steps forward and blocks him. Keven Mealamu picks up the ball and scuttles round behind Toeava to score. The try is awarded.

Obstruction? Yes. Rugby football is not yet gridiron football.

Missed?

Yes.

First Toeava’s position as a pillar was penalisable and then so, too, was the obstruction. But the referee was on the “other” side.

Could the referee’s assistant (touch judge) have tipped the referee off? Yes. But if you watch carefully you will see that the referee’s assistant is looking down to see if Mealamu stays in from touch.

Could the referee have referred the matter to the television match official?

No.

TMO’s protocol:

3. Area of Adjudication

The areas of adjudication are limited to Law 6. 8 (b), 6.8 (d) and 6.8 (e) and therefore relate to:

– Grounding of the ball for try and touch down
– Touch, touch-in-goal, ball being made dead during the act of grounding the ball.

This includes situations where a player may or may not have stepped in touch in the act of grounding the ball on or over the goal line.

The TMO could therefore be requested to assist the referee in making the following decisions:

* Try
* No try and scrum awarded 5 metres
* Touch down by a defender
* In touch – line-out
* Touch-in-goal
* Ball dead on or over the dead ball line
* Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal
* All kicks at goal including dropped goals.

The TMO must not be requested to provide information on players prior to the ball going into in-goal (except touch in the act of grounding the ball).

The TMO must not be asked to assist in any other decision other than those listed.

The referee must make an effort to make an adjudication.  If he is unsighted or has doubt, he will then use the following process (4).

Obstruction is a part of foul play but this did not occur in the in-goal. It could not be referred to the TMO, which is why the referee asked his assistant if anything untoward had happened in in-goal.

8. Line-out off-side?

At Welford Road, James Haskell is tackled out at the Leicester Tigers’ cornerpost on his right. That produces a line-out, Tigers’ throw-in.

Leicester Tigers opt for a four-man line-out and throw the ball to Martin Corry who comes straight down with the ball while his team-mates gather around.

immediately Tom Croft, who was not in the line-out, runs the short distance from the goal-line to join the maul.

OK?

No.

19.15 OFF-SIDE WHEN NOT TAKING PART IN THE LINE-OUT

(a) Before the line-out has ended. The off-side line is 10 metres behind the line of touch, or the player’s goal line, whichever is nearer.

A player who is not taking part in the line-out is off-side if that player oversteps the off-side line before the line-out has ended.
Penalty: Penalty Kick on the offending team’s off-side line opposite the place of infringement, at least 15 metres from the touchline.

Wasps would probably have liked the penalty in this tight match.

9. What they say

We have some Mextedisms from rugby’s most entertaining commentator who occasionally misses the mark.

a. “I think that’s a tough call.” His standard response to a penalty.

b. The referee penalised Jerry Collins for a high tackle. Richie McCaw, the Crusaders captain, suggested that this was always a problem when they played the Hurricanes.

Referee: “I’m dealing with today. I’m not dealing with history.”

MM: “Richie McCaw is probably learning to manage the referee. One of the strengths of a good captain is the ability to manage the referee. The guy who springs to mind for me is Sean Fitzpatrick. He was very good at managing them, telling them. Another was Graeme Mourie. Mourie would say things to his team so that the referee would hear it. A guy like Steve Walsh I’m sure can be influenced by what a sensible lad like McCaw says. Some captains couldn’t manage referees. George Gregan had trouble with some, though I think he was a fantastic player.”

c. Mose Tuiali’i charged at the Hurricanes’ line. He was tackled just short and the Hurricanes’ scrumhalf Piri Weepu dived straight in to the ball, lying on the prone body of Tuiali’i. Thee referee penalised Weepu

Referee to Rodney So’oialo: “This is a willful infringement by this man.”

So’oialo: “Willful?”

Referee: “Deliberate. Look where we are.”

MM: “I’ve long though this referee rides the attacking side. So if I was designing my game plan with this referee, I’d just hold onto the ball and keep attacking because it’s almost impossible for the opposition to win  the ball back. Now that was won fair square, but he doesn’t see those sorts of things Steve Walsh. That was stolen at the tackle.”

Commentator 2: “Hold on, Mex. He’s off his feet.”

MM: “Was he?”

Commentator 2: His legs were on the player on the ground.”

MM: “I might have another look at that.”

That certainly was one Murray got wrong – and skirting on the edge of libel.