Law Discussion from the quarters

The four quarter-finals in the 2007 Rugby World Cup were tense affairs and there are things to talk about scrums – apart from the obvious ones.

So far we have given three lots of statistics from the quarter-finals including an interesting one on how each team used possession. We have also discussed the contentious issues in the France-New Zealand match which has caused so much upset to New Zealanders.

We shall now look at other law matters.Let’s say again, as we have said often before over the last seven years, that this a law discussion. It uses incidents to make us aware of rugby’s complex laws. It’s not a blame machine.

1. Things to watch

Just one little thing from the statistics. One realises how many things require a referee’s attention during the 80 minutes of a match.

If you went to the France-New Zealand match and added up all the things referees have to watch, the figure is surprising. Add up kick-offs and drop-outs, passes, kicks, scrums, tackle/ruck/mauls, line-outs, turning over possession, as at knock-ons leading to advantage, and scores (tries, conversions, penalties and attempted drop goals), and you have a great number. It adds up to 634.

2. Scrums

The first scrum in the match between England and Australia was a scrum to Australia. From the time the referee blew the whistle for the scrum for accidental off-side until he eventually put a merciful end to it with a penalty it lasted 3 minutes 32 seconds. This included a stoppage for injury to Nathan Sharpe. Then after a collapse there was another stoppage while Phil Vickery was attended to. In all that scrum was reset three times, collapsed four times an ended in a penalty.

The scrums in the four matches (own ball) went like this:

Australia: 10 scrums – 10 reset, 13 collapses, 2 penalties, 1 free kick
England: 4 scrums – 1 collapse, 1 penalty

France: 10 scrums – 2 reset, 2 collapses, 1 free kick, 1 penalty, 1 wheel
New Zealand: 5 scrums – 3 reset, 4 collapses

South Africa: 14 scrums – 1 reset
Fiji: 10 scrums – 1 reset, 1 collapse, 1 lost

Argentina: 8 scrums – 1 reset, 1 collapse, 1 free kick, 1 lost
Scotland: 8 scrums – 4 reset, 3 collapses, 1 free kick, 1 wheel

Other teams put the ball into 59 scrums, almost six times as many as Australia did. They had, in total, fewer resets and fewer collapses. It must be cause for concern.

Imagine a match where each scrum took 3 and a half minutes. In the England-Australia match that would have meant 49 minutes spent scrummaging!

3. Long drop

There are two incidents:

a. Berrick Barnes drops out for Australia, a long kick which rolls and rolls till it stops in the England in-goal.

Andy Gomarsall picks the ball up, strolls a while to lure the Australians to him and then dots the ball down.

(There is a clip with Gomarsall’s action on www.sareferees.co.za)

b. In the Currie Cup match between the Cheetahs and the Blue Bulls in Pretoria on the same day, Willem de Waal of the Cheetahs dropped out. It went far and rolled till it stopped in the Blue Bulls in-goal where Derick Hougaard grounded the ball.

In the England case the referee awarded a drop-out to England. In the Blue Bulls case the referee awarded a scrum to the Blue Bulls on the Cheetahs 22.

That’s a huge difference.

Why the difference?

Law 13.15 BALL GOES INTO THE IN-GOAL FROM A DROP-OUT

(a) If the ball is kicked into the opponents’ in-goal without having touched or been touched by a player, the opposing team has three choices:

To ground the ball, or
To make it dead, or
To play on.

(b) If the opposing team grounds the ball, or makes it dead, or if the ball goes dead by going into touch-in-goal, or on or over the dead-ball line, they have two choices:

To have a scrum formed at the centre of the 22m-line from where the kick was taken and they throw in the ball, or
To have the other team drop out again.

(c) If they opt to ground the ball or make it dead, they must do so without delay. Any other action with the ball by a defending player means the player has elected to play on.

The difference is in (c). Gomarsall did not act without delay but chose to go on a stroll – and deprived his team of a great advantage.

4. Tough one

England are on the attack. Scrum-half Andy Gomarsall kicks a high diagonal kick towards the Australian goal-line. The Australians have a difficulty watching the ball come down with the Marseille sun behind it and the ball bounces high. Rocky Elsom knocks it on and England have the ball to put in to a scrum five metres from the Australian line.

England heel and get a shove on. The ball is at the feet of Nick Easter who releases his bind, holding on to his locks by fist only as he struggles to control the ball.

Elsom leaves the scrum and dives for the ball at Easter’s feet. The referee penalises Elsom, rubbing his hand along his arm to signal that Elsom had not been bound.

Wilkinson goals and makes the score 12-10.

OK?

It’s not an easy one.

First there is the matter of timing. At what stage did Elsom release his binding? Had Easter released his binding before Elsom did? It would certainly appear so.

But was the scrum over because Elsom released his binding? The wording of the law is not crystal clear.

Law 20.10 ENDING THE SCRUM

(a) The ball comes out. When the ball comes out of the scrum in any direction except the tunnel, the scrum ends.

(b) Scrum in an in-goal. A scrum cannot take place in an In-goal. When the ball in a scrum is on or over the goal-line, the scrum ends and an attacker or a defender may legally ground the ball for a try or a touch-down.

(c) Hindmost player unbinds. The hindmost player in a scrum is the player whose feet are nearest the team’s own goal-line. If the hindmost player unbinds from the scrum with the ball at that player’s feet and picks up the ball, the scrum ends.

Easter was unbound but he did not pick up the ball. Does that mean the scrum is not over?

If he is not bound, he is no longer a part of the scrum. If he is not in the scrum how on earth can the ball then still be in the scrum?

If he is not binding he has left the scrum. Is he then not liable to penalty if he does not pick up the ball?

Law 20 DEFINITION: A scrum is formed in the field-of-play when eight players from each team, bound together in three rows for each team.

Binding is also defined.

Law 20.3 BINDING IN THE SCRUM DEFINITION

When a player binds on a team-mate that player must use the whole arm from hand to shoulder to grasp the team-mate’s body at or below the level of the armpit. Placing only a hand on another player is not satisfactory binding.

Law 20.3 (f) Binding by all other players. All players in a scrum, other than front-row players, must bind on a lock’s body with at least one arm. The locks must bind with the props in front of them. No player other than a prop may hold an opponent.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Easter is unbound. If the ball is at his feet he is allowed to unbind and pick the ball up. He does not pick the ball up and Elsom arrives to play the ball.

Who has offended?

It is not an easy question to answer but it’s hard to see that Elsom was in the wrong.

You can’t really eat your cake and have it. Either the scrum is over or Easter has left a scrum which is not over.

The wording of the law may need closer attention.

5. Off-side but why?

Jerry Collins has the ball going left and Thierry Dusautoir tackles him. Collins goes beyond Dusautoir, leaving the Frenchman lying on the ground. A ruck forms where Collins is and Dusautoir picks himself up to return to his off-side line.

Anton Oliver of New Zealand picks up the ball and goes on a pick-‘n-drive but in about the middle of the tackle/ruck Dusautoir tackles him.

The referee penalises Dusautoir. But he was the tackler but by the time he tackled Oliver a ruck had formed. He was a loiterer/lazy runner and offside because of the ruck..

He was offside – not at a tackle, which does not produce an offside line, but at a ruck.

6. Mind your head, guv’nor

After their quarter-final match with Fiji, the South Africans complained about high tackles of the kind the law says are dangerous.

Law 10.4 (e) Dangerous tackling. A player must not tackle an opponent early, late or dangerously.

A player must not tackle (or try to tackle) an opponent above the line of the shoulders. A tackle around the opponent’s neck or head is dangerous play.

There was two penalties in the match for dangerous tackles in this regard. One earned Seru Rabeni a yellow card for a tackle on Butch James that was high and armless at a time when James did not have the ball at all. The other was against Juan Smith for a high tackle on Ifereimi Rawaqa, the Fijian lock.

But there were many more. One ended in a citing and a week’s suspension for Seremaia Bai, the Fijian fly-half who charged across with his right arm swinging around Danie Rossouw’s neck. This action happened near the Fijian cornerpost. Just behind Rossouw, Schalk Burger was hauled down by Vilimoni Delasau of Fijian with an arm around his neck.

The players were pretty well in the open with the touch judge close by – close enough to have seen the action.

The first high tackle happened within five metres. It was not a reflex tackle or a case where a player ducks. In this case Fijian flank Semisi Naevo actually jumped to clamp an arm right around the neck of Bryan Habana. This happened about six metres in from touch.

There were others.

Tackling a player in the air is dangerous.

Law 10.4 (e) A player must not tackle an opponent whose feet are off the ground.
Exception: A player is permitted to attempt to tackle a player who is in possession of the ball and is in the act of diving in an attempt to score a try.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Bakkies Botha was penalised for an air tackle in the line-out. Botha pulls down lock Ifereimi Rawaqa while he is in the air and Botha on the ground. Botha was the victim of an air-tackle himself but with a difference. In his case the Fijians drove in under him while he was in the air, which was also dangerous.

Indicating foul play is within the touch judge’s scope of activities.

7. “Tough, tough penalty”

Strong Akapusi Qera charges ahead with the ball but is brought to ground by Francois Steyn of South Africa who hangs onto him. Butch James is there as Qera comes to ground. Fijian lock Kele Leawere charges in from the side ahead of Qera and into James.

The referee penalises Leawere.

Commentator:/ “Tough penalty – tough, tough penalty. You feel now the referee has got that one wrong, Alan Lewis. You feel the advantage has got to go with the attacking side.”

It’s hard to follow the logic of that. The attacking side still has to play by the laws. It does not have the licence to cheat in the scrums, pass forward or dive in at the side.

Leawere would be regarded as “other players” at the tackle and other players are required to come through the gate.

Law 15.6 OTHER PLAYERS

(a) After a tackle, all other players must be on their feet when they play the ball. Players are on their feet if no other part of their body is supported by the ground or players on the ground.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

(b) After a tackle players on their feet may attempt to gain possession by taking the ball from the ball carrier’s possession.

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

The law governing the ruck is also relevant.

Law 16.2 JOINING A RUCK

(b) A player joining a ruck must bind onto the ruck with at least one arm around the body of a team-mate, using the whole arm.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Rugby is about attack and defence. Win one and you are likely to win the match. The French showed how defence can be a winning activity. At a tackle, the tackler has had a little victory. He deserves a reward. The reward is a fair opportunity to compete for the ball. The ball-carrier, beaten by the tackle, does not have the right to suspend the laws because he was the ball-carrier but he is rewarded for his enterprise by being able to manipulate the ball as favourably as he can for his side.

8. Scrum for 20-20

South Africa were playing Fiji and Fiji knocked on in making a tackle. Victor Matfield of South Africa picked up the ball and Vilimoni Delasau – for the second time in the match – was guilty of a high tackle. Play went on and Bakkies Botha of South Africa grabbed Sireli Bobo who did not have the ball. Bobo fell to the ground. The score at the time was 20-20 and play was in Fijian territory.

The referee consulted his touch judges. One reported Delasau’s high tackle and the other reported that Botha had body-checked Bobo.

The referee said: “I’ll tell you what we’ll do at 20-all. I’m going to scrum it.”

He explained this to the captains, Botha and Delasau, saying: “We’ve got to keep ourselves disciplined.”

Commentator:/ “Surely you’ve got to make a decision – what is right and what is wrong.”

It is understandable that the referee would not want a match decided by a penalty and yet if that is what needs to be done, that is what he must do. In fact from the ensuing scrum the South Africans mauled and Ifereimi Rawaqa was penalised for going in the side. Percy Montgomery goaled the penalty.

The commentator has a point. But how would you go? The high tackle superceded the knock-on – penalty against Fiji. Then Botha was guilty of playing a man without the ball, described as a body check – penalty.

The three infringements happened while play was live. They were separate incidents. There was no question of retaliation or foul play after the whistle. The referee had not seen either incident of foul play and neither touch judge had seen the foul play which the other had reported. There was thus no way of equating the relative seriousness of the foul play.

Maybe the scrum was a Solomon-esque decision. But mentioning the score may well have been inappropriate.

There were 20 minutes to go in the match.

In fact it may have been better had foul play been more obviously punished. In order to evaluate the nature of the foul play, the referee would have had to have taken more time and asked more questions. Then he could have penalised the more serious offence.

At worst he could have given a defensive penalty.

The scrum was perhaps an indecisive way of restarting the match and may well have disaffected the touch judges who had gone to the trouble of pointing out foul play.

9. Anything goes?

Fiji are under enormous pressure on their own line as fullback Norman Ligairi tries to move the ball beyond his goal-line. The South Africans bash into them shunting them further back.

It may have been a ruck? Then the ball is up. Perhaps it was a maul. Perhaps it was a tackle.

It doesn’t matter if it was a ruck, a maul or a tackle because when it got over the goal-line, there was no more ruck, maul or tackle. There was nothing to stop the South Africans from going round to play the ball with their hands.

Commentator:/ “Remember anything goes in in-goal.”

It was not quite a situation of anything goes. They were still not allowed to dive on players or commit any other acts of foul play or knock-on or pass forward.

Law 16.6 A ruck ends successfully when the ball leaves the ruck or when the ball is on or over the goal-line.

Law 17.5 A maul ends successfully when the ball is on the ground or when is on or over the goal-line.

Law 15.1 A tackle can take place only in the field of play.

There is also a clip of this incident on www.sareferees.co.za