Get Newsletter

Heineken final incidents

London Wasps rule Europe! It may have been a surprise result when Wasps beat Leicester Tigers 25-9 but a deserved one. We have some points of law from the match to talk about.

The incidents we have are thanks to Peter Shortell of Cheltenham.

1. Two line-out tries

a. Wasps had a line-out some 15 metres from the Leicester goal-line. As Raphael Iba?ez shaped to throw in, Wasps’ lock Simon Shaw and his supporters back-pedalled, and Leicester shadowed them, leaving a gap at the front. Iba?ez immediately switched to an underarm throw as Eoin Reddan, Wasps’ scrumhalf, burst round the front of the line-out, and scored in the corner.

b. Later in the half, Wasps had a line-out in a similar position on the opposite side of the field. This time Shaw looked to be switching places in the line-out, but as he came round to the front, Iba?ez dumped the ball off to him. Shaw drove at the sole defender and off-loaded to Iba?ez, who gleefully dived in at the corner.

The officials had two main questions:

(1) Was the throw straight?

In both cases it seemed straighter than one has grown accustomed to.

(2) Did the ball travel 5 metres?

It certainly did in the first case. The Wasps forwards had left a large gap, and Reddan was a metre or two the right side of the five-metre line.

The second case was very close. Shaw’s feet were the correct side of the line, but did he reach over it? If he did, it was a matter of centimetres, and there was no Leicester player near. The officials are at right angles to the line, and the only camera angle looking down the pitch still left it unclear.

Unless the officials were clear that the ball had not travelled five metres, they were right to keep quiet.

By the way the ball is required to travel five metres through the air. If the player is five metres away and stretches over the five-metre line, it has not travelled five metres – not that that is the case here.

Law 19.5 HOW THE THROW-IN IS TAKEN

The player taking the throw-in must stand at the correct place. The player must not step into the field-of-play when the ball is thrown. The ball must be thrown straight, so that it travels at least 5 metres along the line-of-touch before it first touches the ground or touches or is touched by a player.

2. Obstruction from the kick-off

When Leicester kicked off after the second try, Joe Worsley was waiting to catch the ball just inside his 22. Lewis Moody was as ever steaming up the field in pursuit. Fraser Waters, who had started in front of Worsley was
making his way back but looked up and jumped across in front of Moody.

What should players on the receiving teams do when the ball goes over their heads? They are not off-side until one of their own players plays it. They are still not allowed to obstruct, but equally they cannot be expected to disappear into thin air.

Law 10.1 (c) Blocking the tackler. A player must not intentionally move or stand in a position that prevents an opponent from tackling a ball-carrier.

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

Waters could not realistically have claimed to be jumping for the ball, and so his action was clearly an intentional move to block Moody. The referee could be heard to say “You must not change your angle. Stupid. Stupid.” Whatever
the area of uncertainty in other cases, this time one could but agree.

3. Crooked feed

Paddy O’Brien has made it clear he expects referees to clamp down on crooked throw-ins to the scrum. At least one referee was listening. Eoin Reddan was pulled up twice in quick succession early in the game, and warned that a
third offence would be a penalty (for repeated infringement).

To be brutally honest, it looked as if a number of other throw-ins were not exactly straight either, but then the camera rarely shows the best angle. So let’s be generous. At least it was a move in the right direction.

But a penalty?

The free kick is correct for a crooked feed, the penalty for repeated infringement. In fact the law frowns mightily upon it.

Law 10.3 REPEATED INFRINGEMENTS

(a) Repeatedly offending. A player must not repeatedly infringe any Law. Repeated infringement is a matter of fact. The question of whether or not the player intended to infringe is irrelevant.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

A player penalised for repeated infringements must be cautioned and temporarily suspended. If that player then commits a further cautionable offence, or the same offence,

(b) Infringements. The problem of repeated infringements usually arises with the scrum, line-out, off-side, ruck, maul or tackle laws. A player penalised for several infringements of one of these laws is cautioned and temporarily suspended from the match for a period of ten minutes’ playing time. If the player repeats the offence, the player is sent off.

(c) Repeated infringements by the team. When different players of the same team repeatedly commit the same offence, the referee must decide whether or not this amounts to repeated infringement. If it does, the referee gives a general warning to the team and if they then repeat the offence the referee cautions and temporarily suspends the guilty player(s) for a period of ten minutes’ playing time. If a player of that team then repeats the offence the referee sends off the guilty player(s).
Penalty: Penalty Kick

A penalty try must be awarded if the offence prevents a try that would probably otherwise have been scored.

(d) Repeated infringements: standard applied by referee. When the referee decides how many offences constitute repeated infringement, the referee must always apply a strict standard in representative and senior matches. When a player offends three times the referee must caution that player.

The referee may relax this standard in junior or minor matches, where infringements may be the result of ignorance of the laws or lack of skill.

It would be better to put the thing in straight and be done with it.

Not that it has been perfect in the Super 14 but it has been much better and this year there were 35 heels against the head as against 18 last year.

ADVERTISEMENT

Join free

HSBC Sevens Challenger - Munich - Day 2

HSBC Sevens Challenger -Krakow - Day 2

Japan Rugby League One Semi-Final | Wildknights v Eagles | Full Match Replay

Allianz Premiership Women's Rugby 2023/24 | Round 15 Highlights

Pieter-Steph du Toit, The Malmesbury Missile, in conversation with Big Jim

The Antoine Dupont Interview

Chasing The Sun | Series 1 Episode 1

Write A Comment