Law incidents from RWC's opener

The grand opening of the 2007 Rugby World Cup turned out to be a thriller as the dramatic match moved to its gripping end. And in the middle of it all with a baggy red jersey and blue shorts was a man with the middle ruling over, literally, hundreds of incidents, of which we have selected a few to refresh ourselves on the complex Laws of the Game.

It was not a silky smooth match by any stretch of the imagination. It was a clash and a collision, a jerky affair of broken parts. But the referee gave the players every chance to play and sought opportunities for advantage.

There were times when he seemed quick to call Advantage over. But he did call Advantage! when he was playing advantage and Advantage over! when he considered that the non-offending side had had enough of an advantage which may, according to the Laws of the Game be territorial or tactical. Whether the non-offending team has had advantage or not is purely at the judgement of the referee.

A good criterion for tactical advantage is if the non-offending team is left free to play the way it wants to play and makes that decision without being under pressure.

An old referee used to say: “Ask yourself if you would want to play on if you were the captain of the non-offending side.” In this match the referee gave the teams a chance to take advantage 23 times and they got the advantage 13 times. That is a high success rate.

We have so far given the stats of Friday’s match. We shall give the stats for each day’s rugby and have a law discussion after each day.

1. I want another ball

Twice when lining up kicks at goal, Felipe Contepomi wanted to change the ball. On each occasion the referee did not allow him to change the ball. On each occasion Contepomi goaled the kick.

Referee right?

Law 21.3 3 HOW THE PENALTY AND FREE KICKS ARE TAKEN

(c) The kicker must use the ball that was in play unless the referee decides it was defective.

It probably is a bit of anachronism in the case of great grounds with several match balls and it makes no difference which match ball is used. It is purely fortuitous that the kicker has the ball which was in play at the time to kick at goal.

2. Diving over

France are on the attack deep in Puma territory. Olivier Milloud charges and is brought down. A tackle/ruck/heap occurs and the ball comes back to France. Pierre Mignoni, the French scrum-half, picks up the ball and starts taking paces, as is his wont. When Mignoni has the ball in his hands, Juan Fernandez Lobbe dives over the heap – over not on – and knocks Mignoni’s arm so that the ball leaves his hand. Fernandez Lobbe does not knock the ball and the ball does not go forward from his perspective.

The referee penalises him and tells him that you can’t dive over. It’s hard to find a reason in law to penalise Fernandez Lobbe. If what he did was illegal then one could find many examples in the match where players dived on – on, not over – the tackle/ruck thing with impunity.

3. Scrum-half vs scrum-half

France put the ball into a scrum and heel it. Their scrumhalf Pierre Mignoni stands ahead of the ball and clearly with intent to get in the way of Agustin Pichot to make it easier for his number eight, Ima?ol Harinordoquy, to pick up the ball.

OK?

No.

Law 20.12 OFF-SIDE AT THE SCRUM DEFINITION

(b) Off-side for scrum-halves. When a team has won the ball in a scrum, the scrum-half of that team is off-side if both feet are in front of the ball while it is still in the scrum. If the scrum-half has only one foot in front of the ball, the scrum-half is not off-side.

4. In-goal mark

Juan Martin Hernandez of Argentina dropped at goal with his left foot. The kick dropped short and wide. Standing next to the padding of the post French fullback Cedric Heymans caught the ball and claimed a mark. When he did so he had one foot in the field of play and one foot in the in-goal.

Is Heymans in in-goal?

Yes.

Does the law allow for a mark to be made in in-goal?

Yes.

If Heymans had not marked the ball but withdrawn fully into the in-goal and grounded the ball, would France have had a drop-out?

Yes.

Law 1 DEFINITIONS

In-goal is the area between the goal-line and the dead-ball line, and between the touch-in-goal lines. It includes the goal-line but it does not include the dead-ball line or the touch-in-goal lines.

Law 18 A player from the defending team may make a mark in in-goal.

Law 22 A defending player who has one foot on the goal-line or in the in-goal who receives the ball is considered to be in in-goal.

Law 13.10 DROP-OUT

DEFINITION

A drop-out is used to restart play after an attacking player has put or taken the ball into the in-goal, without infringement, and a defending player has made the ball dead there or it has gone into touch-in-goal or on or over the dead-ball line.