Law Discussion: Heineken Cup, Week 3

There always is the fun of talking about the laws and their application after matches. One hopes that the changes will not make the game so bland that there is nothing to talk about!

One of the matches would have thrilled the purists – four line-outs blown skew and one scrum feed.

1. I need to see

The weather in Europe this last weekend was miserable. It was West Walian wet in Llanelli when the Scarlets played Munster. At one stage the referee the rain came pelting down at a sharp angle and the referee called the captains to him. He suggested that they stop playing for 30 seconds till the worst passed, saying: “All I want is to be able to see,”

Heard that before?

There are those who believe that referees don’t see any way. Traditionally referees are blind, carry a white stick and need a guide dog. But here we have a referee admitting that he could not see.

There have been cases where the referee has stopped the match because of danger to the players. In fact that once happened in a Test match between the USA and France in Colorado Springs in 1991 and an electric storm broke out. When lightning destroyed the scoreboard on the side of the field the referee, Albert Adams of South Africa, called the game off.

But that was for danger to the players, which is the only criterion the laws lay down.

Law 6.A.8 THE REFEREE’S WHISTLE

(b) The referee has power to stop play at any time.

(g) The referee must blow the whistle when it would be dangerous to let play continue. This includes when a scrum collapses, or when a front-row player is lifted into the air or is forced upwards out of a scrum, or when it is probable that a player has been seriously injured.

(h) The referee may blow the whistle to stop play for any other reason according to the laws.

Law 6.A.9 THE REFEREE AND INJURY

(a) If a player is injured and continuation of play would be dangerous, the referee must blow the whistle immediately.

(c) The referee must blow the whistle if continuation of play would be dangerous for any reason.

In the discussion between the referee and the captains, Ronan O’Gara, on behalf of Munster, suggested that they go off for five minutes. The referee said: “That means I have to come back.”

There are two things here.

Sometimes a referee’s position needs to be adapted to geography. If the sun is setting low and bright, it would be better for the referee to position himself in such a way that the sun is at his back. The same principle could have applied to the rain in this case. The rain was coming at an angle and refereeing with the back to the rain may well have helped.

Any way the match was able to proceed.

There is another little point. How wise is it for the referee to use I on the field. He would claim to want to be No.31 on the field and to be exercising his function for the players. The players are his concern, not himself. Would it not be better to avoid I, me and my.

How good is it to hear a referee say: “I want you…” Is what he wants so important or is it really what the game and its players want?

2. TMO – again

We often discuss TMO decisions, which suggests that the job is no sinecure. Of course, the TMO’s advice is sought only in uncertain and therefore difficult situations.

This incident occurred within a minute of the start of the match between Leinster and Edinburgh in Dublin. The TMO could hardly have settled into his seat when the referee referred to him.

Running down the left-hand touch-line Shane Horgan of Leinster grubbered hard ahead for the Edinburgh line. Rob Kearney of Leinster set off after it as Mike Blair of Edinburgh scampered back. Kearney and Blair dived for the ball, Blair ahead of Kearney.

The referee referred to the TMO, whose decision was odd.

Replays suggest that Kearney was the only one of the two who made contact with the ball. His hand touched the ball. Then his torso fell on the ball.

The TMO advised a drop-out. It was hard to see how it was a drop out.

If Kearney had knocked on, then it would have been a defensive five-metre scrum to Edinburgh.

If the ball did not go forward off his hands – and it seemed not to for his hands were beyond the ball and so more likely to knock it backwards – then the try was possible because his torso fell on the ball.

The commentator with a (hopeful?) Scottish accent said after a replay: “If you see it at that pace, it looks as though it’s not under control. Kearney certainly gets his chest to the ball. Is it under his control?

Law 22.1 GROUNDING THE BALL

There are two ways a player can ground the ball:

(a) Player touches the ground with the ball. A player grounds the ball by holding the ball and touching the ground with it, in in-goal. ‘Holding’ means holding in the hand or hands, or in the arm or arms. No downward pressure is required.

(b) Player presses down on the ball. A player grounds the ball when it is on the ground in the in-goal and the player presses down on it with a hand or hands, arm or arms, or the front of the player’s body from waist to neck inclusive.

Nowhere in all of this is there anything about “control”. Damn the man who first spoke about control. It has become endemic.

Kearney does not hold the ball, which means that (a) is out.

But then, if he pressed down on the ball with a hand, it was a try under (b).

If he did not knock the ball forward but pressed down on the ball with his chest, it was a try under (b).

But back to the decision – the drop-out.

The only way that that was possible was if Blair grounded the ball first. His left hand gets closer to the ball than his right hand and his fingers may well have been in contact with the ball when it was on the ground. May.

The principle of grounding the ball for the defending player is the same as it is for the attacking player. (In this case Blair would have had to press down on the ball as (b) requires.

If you were the TMO and could not make up your mind, what would happen?

You would tell the referee that. If he decides that he, too, cannot decide, then he would award a five-metre scrum to Leinster.

It was not an easy decision with four possible outcomes – try, 5-metre to Leinster, 5-metre to Edinburgh, drop-out.

3. Pillars of Hercules

Don’t say it does not happen!

(a) Leicester Tigers attack Toulouse on the right. They batter and batter again at the line with Martin Corry to lead their efforts. In yet another phase they go to ground and players rally round in a tackle/ruck thing.

Louis Deacon is well on the Toulouse side of the tackle ruck, a good stride beyond the last foot on the Toulouse side. There he first wards off Jean-Baptiste Poux of Toulouse as the prop approaches the tackle/ruck. Then Deacon grabs Patricio Albacete and pulls him away from the tackle/ruck, which annoys Albacete.

The referee calls come back, but the lock takes no notice. The referee penalises him, saying: “No.4, I asked you to come back from there. No.4, you stayed there blocking the defence.”

That happens after about 16 minutes.

(b) Cardiff Blues have the ball in a slightly defensive position but they move it forward and a tackle/ruck occurs. Gareth Thomas of Cardiff Blues, who understands English, is at the side of the tackle ruck, not bound but standing in the middle with his back to Stade Francais. Three times the referee calls: “Centre, get out of there.” Three times Pascal Pape of Stade Francais tries to push forward and three times Thomas wards him off.

The referee eventually penalises Thomas who looks uncomprehending when he is penalised.

That happens after about 9 minutes.

(c) Just before the final whistle and leading 12-6, Stade Francais go on the pick-‘n-drive to try to get to the final whistle. At one stage there is a tackle-ruck with Stade Francais in control of the ball. The Stade Francais flank Antoine Burban is well ahead of the tackle/ruck, in much the same way as Louis Deacon had been in (a) above. He is not penalised.

Presumably he was not seen.

That happened after 82 minutes.

4. Kicking to death

We have four incidents on this windy weekend.

(a) Vincent Clerc of Toulouse races down the right touch-line and grubbers ahead. The ball rolls into the Leicester Tigers in-goal where their fullback Sam Vesty watches the ball rolling. It’s impetus is petering out when Vesty with one foot grounded behind the dead-ball line, picks up the ball and takes it back to ground it over the dead-ball line.

The referee offers Leicester Tigers to option of a drop-out or a scrum where Clerc kicked the ball. They opt for the scrum.

That happened after 47 minutes.

(b) Dan Parks of Glasgow Warriors kicks ahead. The ball rolls into the Biarritz in-goal and rolls dead.

Conversation is not audible but Biarritz drop out – disastrously.

(c) Damien Traille, with the wind at his back, drops out for Biarritz. The ball bounces inside the Glasgow Warriors 22 and rolls into the in-goal where Dan Parks snaps it up and immediately dots it down – pointing to the 22. Again conversation is inaudible but the upshot is a scrum to the Glasgow Warriors in the middle of the 22.

(d) Ben Blair of Stade Francais, wind at his back, drops out. The ball flies down the field and rolls over the dread-ball line.

The referee gives Cardiff Blues the option of a scrum at the middle of the 22 or a drop-out. The choose the scrum, as one would expect.

In each case what happened was entirely credible.

Law 22.8 BALL KICKED DEAD IN IN-GOAL

If a team kicks the ball through their opponents’ in-goal, into touch-in-goal or on or over the dead ball line, except by an unsuccessful kick at goal or attempted dropped goal, the defending team has two choices:

To have a drop-out, or
To have a scrum at the place where the ball was kicked and they throw in.

Law 22.11 BALL DEAD IN IN-GOAL

(b) When the ball or a player carrying it touches the corner post, the touch-in-goal line or the dead-ball line, or touches the ground beyond those lines, the ball becomes dead. If the ball was carried or played into in-goal by the attacking team, a drop-out shall be awarded to the defending team. If the ball was carried or played into in-goal by the defending team, a 5-metre scrum shall be awarded and the attacking team throws in the ball.

5. Playing into in-goal

This one is a relative of the incidents above.

Dan Parks of the Glasgow Warriors kicks down on his right. Near his 22, Benjamin Thiery of Biarritz tries to grab to low-flying ball. He touches it and the ball then goes back into the Biarritz in-goal. Thiery falls back, picks up the ball and grounds it.

The referee orders a five-metre scrum, Glasgow Warriors ball.

Right?

Law 22.7 RESTARTING AFTER A TOUCH DOWN

(d) If a defending player threw or took the ball into the In-goal, and a defending player grounded it, and there has been no infringement, play is restarted by a 5-metre scrum. The position of the scrum is in line with where the ball has been touched down. The attacking side throws in the ball.

6. The unsuccessful maul

(a) Replacement Maleli Kunavore charges ahead. He is grabbed and held and a maul forms with three Leicester Tigers on one side and three of Toulouse on the other. Others gather and Toulouse push the maul forward. It stops going forward and crabs about a bit.

The referee blows his whistle and says that the maul is not going anywhere. He awards the scrum to Leicester Tigers.

Right?

Yes.

Law 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.

(c) Scrum following maul. The ball is thrown in by the team not in possession when the maul began. If the referee cannot decide which team had possession, the team moving forward before the maul stopped throws in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball.

This happens after 74 minutes.

(b) Biarritz kick high. Bernardo Stortoni of Glasgow Warriors and Damien Traille leap for the ball. Stortoni catches it and as he comes to ground Traille grabs Stortoni and quickly other players gather to form a maul.

The maul falls to ground.

The referee gives the scrum to Glasgow Warriors.

Right?

Yes.

Law 17.6 (h) Scrum after a maul when catcher is held. If a player catches the ball direct from an opponent’s kick, except from a kick-off or a drop-out, and the player is immediately held by an opponent, a maul may form. Then if the maul remains stationary, stops moving forward for longer than 5 seconds, or if the ball becomes unplayable, and a scrum is ordered, the team of the ball catcher throws in the ball.

‘Direct from an opponent’s kick’ means the ball did not touch another player or the ground before the player caught it.

If the dropping ball had touched Traille the scrum would have gone to Biarritz.

This happened after 66 minutes.

7. Heavy necking

Glasgow warriors throw into a line-out and Dan Turner catches the ball in the middle. A maul forms around him. His head is sticking out of the top of the maul and so is Jerome Thion’s. Thion wraps an arm around Turner’s neck and tries to pull him backwards. Kelly Brown of Glasgow warriors wraps and arm around Thion’s neck to encourage him to leave Turner alone.

Both Thion and Brown are wrong – seriously wrong. They are not allowed to wrap arms around opponents’ necks. That is probably a case of an immediate penalty for dangerous play.

This happened after 56 minutes.

8. The dubious quick throw-in

Rhys Priestland of Llanelli Scarlets kicks the ball directly into touch from his 22. The low kick ricochets back into the field of play near the touch-line on the Munster left where Peter Stringer picks it up, goes into touch and throws a lone quick throw to David Wallace who is near the 15-metre line. Wallace races over to score at the posts.

Replays who what went wrong.

When Stringer threw in he took a lone stride with his right foot into the field of play. After all it was a long pass even for a scrumhalf with a long pass.

Law 19.2 QUICK THROW-IN

(e) At a quick throw-in, if the player does not throw the ball in straight so that it travels at least 5 metres along the line-of-touch before it touches the ground or another player, or if the player steps into the field-of-play when the ball is thrown, then the quick throw-in is disallowed. The opposing team chooses to throw in at either a line-out where the quick throw-in was attempted, or a scrum on the 15-metre line at that place. If they too throw in the ball incorrectly at the line-out, a scrum is formed on the 15-metre line. The team that first threw in the ball throws in the ball at the scrum.

Stringer certainly stepped into the field of play and his action certainly had a bearing on subsequent events. The Scarlets should have been offered the choice of a scrum or a line-out.

There are two other aspects of this throw worth noting.

Firstly the touch judge was in a position to act. In fact he seemed to keep his flag up after the throw but then lowered it.

Law 6.B.4 (d) When to lower the flag. When the ball is thrown in, the touch judge must lower the flag, with the following exceptions:

Exception 1: When the player throwing in puts any part of either foot in the field-of-play, the touch judge keeps the flag up.

Exception 2: When the team not entitled to throw-in has done so, the touch judge keeps the flag up.

Exception 3: When, at a quick throw-in, the ball that went into touch is replaced by another ball, or after it went into or it has been touched by anyone except the player who takes the throw-in, the touch judge keeps the flag up.

Certainly Exception 1 applies.

If the ball had ricocheted off spectators, Exception 3 would have applied. But if the ball had ricocheted off the railing or the advertising boards or a girder or the roof or a passing dog, the quick throw-in could still take place. Natural hazards do not count as they cannot wittingly give a side an unfair advantage.

This happened after 36 minutes.

9. No letting up

Jerome Fillol of Stade Francais grubbers ahead and Dimitri Szarzewski of Stade Francais bustles after the ball. Tall Paul Tito drops on the ball and Szarzewski drops on Tito. The referee penalises Szarzewski, which is right.

Commentator: “Szarzewski clearly did not let him up.”

It’s not a matter of letting him up. There is – in the laws of the game – no obligation on Szarzewski to let Tito up. The laws forbid Szarzewski to fall on Tito, which is not the same thing as not letting him up. He could prevent his getting up without falling on him and the laws would not forbid that,

Law 14.2 WHAT THE PLAYER MUST NOT DO

(a) Lying on or around the ball. A player must not lie on, over or near the ball to prevent opponents getting possession of it.

(b) Falling over the player on the ground with the ball. A player must not intentionally fall on or over a player with the ball who is lying on the ground.

(c) Falling over players lying on the ground near the ball. A player must not intentionally fall on or over players lying on the ground with the ball between them or near them.

Penalty: Penalty Kick

This happened after 28 minutes.