6 Nations incidents, Week 2

We look at the laws in action from the three Six Nations matches of the past weekend – England vs Italy, Scotland vs Wales and Ireland vs France.

Arising from those matches we have already given some statistics which largely about getting and losing possession, a discussion of advantage which was a burning issue at Croke Park and a scrumming report in the light of recent changes and decrees.

Now we shall look at a few incidents – not many because we are in danger of overkill.

1. Another no-maul maul – and a tackle

England throw into a line-out and Danny Grewcock catches and comes to earth. His team-mates gather round eager to move a maul at the Italians. But the Italians do not want to maul and stand clear. In fact they move back a bit.

England work the ball towards the back of their formation where prop Phil Vickery has it in his possession at he back. England move their formation forward.

When they have gone forward and out of the box of the original line-out, clever ?? Festuccia. Italy’s hooker, comes round behind Vickery and tackles him by the lower legs. Vickery goes partially to ground – his lower legs and hands at least. Festuccia hangs on. Vickery rises up.

The referee penalises Vickery – of all people.

There is a lot in this.

First, if the Italians had significantly left the line-out, they would have been liable for penalty. That, apparently, did not happen.

Secondly, there was no obstruction as England moved their formation forward because they did not make head-on contact with the Italian forces.

Thirdly, Festuccia was not off-side because there was nothing to be off-side to.

Fourthly Vickery was held and went to ground. That means he was tackled in terms of the law.

Fifthly, he was adjudged not to have released the ball but got up with it.

That means the referee was right.

2. Hairline touch-line decisions

We have two – one from Super 14.

a. Geordan Murphy kicks downfield. The ball is close to touch. The French fullback Clement Poitrenaud is near touch, his feet dancing. Then he is in touch, with both feet. Then he catches the ball.

The touch judge gives the throw-in to France.

The crowd boo.

Commentator: “He could have given the ball to either side to be honest.”

Crowd wrong, commentator wrong even with slow motion, touch judge right.

Law 20 DEFINITIONS The ball is in touch if a player catches the ball and that player has a foot on the touch-line or the ground beyond the touch line.

Both feet are even better!

b. The Waratahs play the Sharks in Durban. Peter Hewat goals a penalty for the Waratahs and the Sharks kick off. The ball sails towards touch where Hewat, back pedalling, jumps as he catches it. He catches it and then steps over the line.

What next?

A line-out to the Sharks where Hewat stepped out.

The touch judge reported to the referee that the ball had gone directly into touch.

The crowd booed.

The crowd was right – right to belicve that the decision was wrong, but wrong to voice their opinion with that rude, ugly sound..

When Hewat caught the ball he was in the field of play and so was the ball when he stepped back into touch he took the ball into touch.

c. The same sort of thing happened when the Brumbies played the Blues. Stephen Larkham of the Brumbies kicked a long kick from around the half-way line down into the Blues 22. Near touch but in the field of play Doug Howlett of the Blues caught the ball and then stepped a long leg into touch.

The touch judge showed the ball as directly in touch and they went back to a Blues line-out near the half-way line.

The commentators were upset as the slow motion clearly showed Howlett catching the ball and then stepping into touch.

The commentators were right.

3. Horan, Harinordoquy and Poitrenaud

We have discussed part of this incident in discussing advantage.

It started with a Denis Hickie dart from a tackle/ruck past Pierre Mignoni till he is tackled by Jerome Thion. And he is tackled he gets a pass away to Horan.

Marcus Horan, agile Irish prop, runs towards the French 22 as tall Imanol Harinordoquy comes across from Horan’s right in cover. Horan is a skilled prop and drops the ball into his right foot and grubbers with perfect weight towards the French line, past Clement Poitrenaud who is sanding in front of him.

Just after he has grubbered, in his subsequent stride in fact, Harinordoquy tugs at Horan’s jersey up around his right shoulder and releases his grasp immediately. The action hardly breaks Horan’s stride.

Horan runs towards Poitrenaud and then veers slightly right to go past the French fullback. Horan makes slight contact with Poitrenaud who has turned sideways with his hands up in front of his chest and, it seems, reaching out to grab Horan, but daintily. This time there is more of a shudder in Horan’s stride but he is on and gets to the ball first, only to knock it on. France recover the ball and clear.

The crowd are incensed and boo loudly.

Even with slow motion and replaying and watching it is not all that clear unless you get a shot from exactly side on.

The referee’s view was more difficult. Bird’s eye view was easier and slow motion much easier. As Hickie was tackled he was close to the referee who was on his left with Horan charging on the right. The referee got behind play as he had top get past Mignoni, Hickie and Thion.

When Poitrenaud turned he turned to his right and so had his back to the referee, as did the charging Horan. On the replays it is hard to see if Poitrenaud did grab Horan.

There was nothing wrong with where Poitrenaud was. He was quite entitled to be in front of Horan, as he was before Horan grubbered. He did not move off his line to impede Horan and could not be expected to evaporate. It’s hard to see that what he did was wrong – unless he actually grabbed Horan.

What Harinordoquy was wrong. In the first half the referee had penalised Lionel Nallet for pulling a jersey to obstruct. Presumably if he had seen what Harinordoquy had done and that it had been wrong, he would have penalised again.

4. Look, Ma, no boots

Early in the second half, Robert Sidoli’s boots did the manufacturers no favour for there they were, coloured uppers but no studs on the soles. Sidoli took them off and with a look of disgust walked down the touch-line towards the bench. But there were no spare boots. Ian Gough, sitting on the bench offered to take his off.

It was a rare occurrence!

The referee wanted to play on. After all if there were no other boots, the wait could be interminable.

Wales, it seems, had two options. Sidoli could play on in stockinged feet or Gough could replace him. Sidoli opted to play on with just his socks top protect his feet.

There is nothing in the laws which says that players must swear boots. All it does is tell you the restrictions on boots if they are worn.

Eventually boots were brought to Sidoli and the referee allowed him time to put them on.

But is a player allowed time to replace boots?

Law 5. (b) Replacing players’ clothing. When the ball is dead, the referee allows time for a player to replace or repair a badly torn jersey, shorts or boots. Time is allowed for a player to re-tie a boot-lace.

The law was on Sidoli’s side.