Law Discussion - Super 14, Wk 6

There are law matters to talk about after Week 6 of the Super 14. There are also other matters, related matters, which are not an edifying part of rugby football.

These are uncertain times in the matter of the application of the laws and several sets  apply in the world of rugby with inevitable uncertainty for players and referees. This may be the reason for some of the querulousness and a loss of the good manners which have always characterised the game.

It started with a coach, Laurie Fisher, complaining about Willie Roos’s refereeing in Canberra. He sent in a report which became public property. The Australian referees’ manager added a critical voice, which may well have been a signal for open day on referees.

The next week, Rassie Erasmus had a go at referee Paul Marks, claiming that he was influenced by the Auckland crowd. He also complained about inconsistency in using the yellow card – a yellow card for a tackle infringement but not for a punch.

Phil Waugh, the Waratahs captain, then had some spiteful things to say about Craig Joubert and his penalty against Daniel Vickerman.

On the field there were at least two cases of dubious manners.

In Canberra the referee found the Cheetahs’ manners poor. He penalised them three times for dissent and sent Falie Oelschig to the sin bin for his bad-language contribution.

This is the second week in a row that a player in Canberra was sent to the sin bin for this form of poor sportsmanship.

In Johannesburg the referee penalised Chris Latham for shouting at him three times.

But there was worse. Jaco Van Schalkwyk kicked a drop from a long way out, high and dropping. It was certainly straight enough and Latham was right in front of the posts and about four metres from crossbar. He did his best to signify that the kick was not over. The kick was clearly over.

Not a great attitude.  No something worthy of the player’s greatness or the game’s traditions and not likely to help in the refereeing of the match,

The game deserves better than all of this. There is a mechanism for dealing with what is perceived to be inadequate refereeing in matches of this stature. There is room for coaches and captains to make their voices heard. There are systems for referees to examine and evaluate performances in general and in specific detail. Going public and with generalisation is not helpful.

We shall talk about the incident which angered Waugh.

We also have some Mextedisms. Murray Mexted must be the most entertaining commentator in the world of rugby.

1. Taking him gently

The Crusaders throw in to the first line-out of the match. Up goes Ali Williams of the Crusaders for the ball. Daniel Vickerman of the Waratahs does not really jump for the ball but he is so tall that he is still a long way off the ground when he puts his right arm around Williams’s body while Williams is still airborne. It does not seem an attempt to knock Williams to ground and Williams lands without difficulty.

The referee penalises Vickerman because he playing Williams in the air.

Phil Waugh’s argument is that what Vickerman did was not dangerous.

Law 10.4 (g) A player must not tackle a player whose feet are off the ground.
Penalty:  Penalty Kick.

The referee had right on his side and it may well have been that he wanted to set standards early. It may well have worked as it was a match of few penalties – just seven. The Crusaders were not penalised in the first half and the Waratahs were not penalised in the second half.

Murray Mexted’s comment on the penalty: “It’s getting gentle, the game of rugby.”

2. Off-side at the tackle

This was the other penalty that the Waratahs conceded which cost them three points. It was a minuted before half-time.

The Crusaders have the ball and go right where Richie McCaw seemed to obstruct a defender as Corey Flynn crossed behind him. Play went on.

Flynn passed inside to McCaw who easily beat Lote Tuqiri and ran beyond him till he was tackled. Falling back Tuqiri ran straight at the ball behind McCaw. He runs at the ball and the ball gives every impression of striking his foot and going back to the Waratahs.

The referee penalises Tuqiri.

Tuqiri is penalisable under the non-ELV laws for not approaching the tackle from behind the ball and under the ELVs for being off-side at the tackle.

Law 15.5 (c) At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the ball and from directly behind the tackled player or the tackler closest to those players’ goal line.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

That applies to the ELVs as well.

ELVs’ 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 that player belongs.

(b) At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the off-side line nearer to their goal-line at the tackle and from directly behind the tackled player and/or the tackler(s) closest to those players’ goal-line.

3. How did it die?

The referee awards a free kick to the Cheetahs on the half-way line. Scrumhalf Falie Oelschig kicks the ball down towards the Brumbies’ cornerpost on his left. The ball roils and rolls. It rolls into the Brumbies’ in-goal area towards the dead-ball line. Peter Playford of the Brumbies waits on the ball which is losing impetus but quite possibly still moving when the Playford puts his hands on the ball to ground it.

The referee awards a drop-out from the 22.

Playford is puzzled.

The commentators are puzzled.

There are two ways the dead-ball line kills the ball.

One is if the ball touches or crosses the dead-ball line.
The other is if a player carrying the ball touches or crosses the dead-ball line.

Neither of those happened here.

If an attacker puts the ball into the opponents’ in-goal and a defender touches it down, it is a 22.

What Playford did was touch the ball down.

If the ball had been rolling and he was standing on or over the dead-ball line and gathered the ball so that he became the ball-carrier, the scrum would have been an option on the half-way line.

People may have been confused because a referee the week before gave the scrum in a similar situation – wrongly.

4. Crawling and rolling

a. Matt Giteau of the Western Force kicks a diagonal kick towards his right. Scott Staniforth gathers it and sets off for the line nearly 40 metres away. He beats two defenders but lock Hoani MacDonald tackles him from behind. They both go to ground. Not held, Staniforth gets the ball over the line but the referee penalises him.

This causes much indignation amongst the commentators on the grounds that Staniforth was not held. They described it as an “awful decision”/ They returned to it declaring that the Force had been “robbed of a genuine try” and used “robbed” again when interviewing Giteau who was not drawn into a debate.

Let’s accept that Staniforth was not tackled but knocked to the ground though the evidence suggests that MacDonald was holding onto Staniforth when they went to ground, which would have constituted a tackle even if they were later separated.

Lets accept that all MacDonald di was knock Staniforth down.

Could Staniforth then do what he did? Lying still he propelled his body  forward – not much but forward – which enabled him to ground the ball over the line.

The answer is No.

The only difference between a tackled player with the ball and a player lying on the ground with he  ball is that the player lying on the ground is allowed to get up with the ball.

That’s all.

He is not allowed to crawl or propel his body forward.

Tough but probably fair. Not robbery at all.

b. From a  five-metre line-out the Bulls maul in gentle fashion. Eventually hooker Derick Kuün charges at the tine. He is tackled and from the tackle ruck Fourie du Preez feeds Deon Stegman coming round. He charges at Stephen Donald of the Chiefs who seems to sling him backwards. Stegman rolls and rolls and rolls and is over the line where the try is awarded.

Presumably the referee judged that the rolling was a continuous action of momentum and not a propelling of the body forward.

As in the Staniforth case, whether Stegman was held when brought to ground is not really material.

There were probably days when the Staniforth try would have been allowed and the Stegman try penalised!

5. The things they say

a. MM: “The Crusaders never do anything by accident.”

“It’s getting gentle the game of rugby.”

b. MM when the ball slewed off a kicker’s boot; “Why do they call it a banana kick? Because it’s shaped like a banana? No. Because it comes from the islands. A miscued kick.

“Maybe it’s called a banana kick because of the curve.”

Sort that out!

c. MM: The new laws expose teams that aren’t fit enough or don’t have the skills for the momentum they’re creating. And they also expose coaches for their inability to create space from scrums.”

Referee to the Crusaders: “It seems that every time we get into this zone you’re happy to give away a free kick. The next one’s a penalty.”

That’s good an direct.

d. Rory Duncan, the Cheetahs’ captain, to the New Zealand referee: “He didn’t swear at you, ref. He was talking Afrikaans.”

Referee: “I disagree with you.”

He must have picked up some Afrikaans on his many trips to South Africa!

e. Referee to Duncan: “Let me give you an instruction. One bit of foul language directed by your  players at me and it’ll be a red card.”

That’s good and direct.

f. Referee to Reds’ captain: “If I move to penalties, you’ve heard the reasons.”

g. The really bad one.

Tonderai Chavangha of the Stormers runs down near the touch-line on his left. He passes the ball infield.

Commentator: “Put a foot into touch. Flag stayed down.”

Play goes on and Troy Flavell of the Blues is penalised.

Commentator: “Well, there was a clear foot on the line in the lead-up.”

There is a replay. Clearly – but really clearly this time – the foot is not on the line.

“Commentator: “We’ll give him that one. He got the pass away before the foot hit the line.” And then he went on to explain why Flavell was off-side.