Law Discussion: Maul over
Commentators tell the world and the world believes. This is a pity when it comes to the laws of rugby football for the commentators often get it wrong – even those who have themselves played the game at international level. Here we have an example from a club match.
Newcastle Falcons kicks an up and-under-high but Ben Foden of Northampton Saints catches the ball and sets off on a devastating run. When Adam Powell of Newcastle kicks out, the Saints have a line-out about 15 metres from the Newcastle line. The Saints form a maul and shove it towards the Newcastle goal-line, gathering speed as they go. A part breaks off but the main body, which has the ball, speeds on until a metre or so from the Newcastle goal-line Richard Mayhew and Mark Wilson of Newcastle bring the ball-carrying group down.
The referee awards a penalty try.
As the replay unfolds, the assistant commentator reviews what has happened and says: "What to watch for is if there were any Newcastle players when Northampton get that speed towards the line-out (sic – he clearly means goal-line). Is it just Northampton players in this charge? Is it just a tackle? Thered is one player in there. Now they come free. That's a tackle situation. That's not a penalty try. No one was in there from Newcastle. It's therefore not a maul. Wrong decision."
That is spoken in a voice of authority and is confident of being right.
Was it right?
Law 17 deals with the maul. Certainly there was a maul.
When does a maul end?
Law 17.5 SUCCESSFUL END TO A MAUL
A maul ends successfully when :
• the ball or a player with the ball leaves the maul
• the ball is on the ground
• the ball is on or over the goal-line.
None of those things happened. In other word the maul did not end successfully.
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.
(b) A maul ends unsuccessfully if the ball becomes unplayable or collapses (not as a result of foul play) and a scrum is ordered.
Neither of these happens. In other words the maul did not en unsuccessfully.
In other words the maul did not end. In other words the maul continues.
Law 17.4 (f) When players of the team who are not in possession of the ball in the maul voluntarily leave the maul such that there are no players of that team left in the maul, the maul may continue.
Even though there were no players from Newcastle it was still a maul.
It is illegal to collapse a maul. That is a part of foul play.
Law 10.4 (k) Players must not intentionally collapse a scrum, ruck or maul.
The momentum of the Northampton maul was such, after driving for 12 metres and gathering impetus, that a try seemed probable. It was stopped by an act of foul play
Law 22.4 (h) Penalty try. A penalty try is awarded if a try would probably have been scored but for foul play by the defending team.
It would seem that the commentator was wrong and the referee was right. It's hard to put that right with all the people who heard the original outburst.
