0
A couple of interesting ones recently:
Clarification 2-2011
Union ARU
Law Reference 17
Date 14 November '11
Request for clarification from the ARU the correspondence is reproduced below.
“Law 17.6(g) says: “If the ball carrier in a maul goes to ground, including being on one or both knees or sitting, the referee orders a scrum unless the ball is immediately available.”
Often situations arise in the game when a ball carrier in a maul (especially when the maul consists of only 3 or 4 players) goes to ground with an opponent remaining on his feet with his arms wrapped around the ball. ARU asks the following questions:
a) Does the opponent on his feet need to release the ball carrier given that this is a collapsed maul and not a tackle?
b) Does the ball carrier have to release the ball to the opponent on his feet? Law 17.6 (g) indicates a scrum unless the ball is immediately available but places no obligation on the ball carrier to make it available by releasing it.
c) When a maul collapses, is there any obligation on players to roll away from the ball in order to make the ball available?
d) When a maul collapses, are players who go to ground able to interfere with the ball as it is being made available while they are still off their feet? If not, what is the sanction and what is the basis in Law?”
Clarification of the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
Questions (a), (b) and (c) relate to questions of Law and (d) relates more to the application of Law.
There is a further variable to be taken into account when the ball goes to ground at a collapsed maul and there are players from both sides on their feet bound over the ball so that Law 16 – Ruck becomes applicable.
(a) If a maul collapses and the ball does not touch the ground the player on his feet is not obliged to release the ball or ball carrier unless the ball touches the ground and a ruck is formed.
(b) The original ball carrier who goes to ground (knee or sitting) who can play the ball must do so immediately and the referee then has a judgement to make:
i. When the ball carrier goes to ground and the ball is unplayable (i.e. the ball is not available immediately), through no fault of the ball carrier, then the referee awards a scrum as per 17.6(g).
ii. When the ball carrier goes to ground and that player fails to make the ball available the sanction is a penalty kick to the opposition as per 17.2(d)
(c) At a collapsed maul there is no obligation in Law for players to roll away unless a ruck subsequently occurs.
(d) If this occurs Law 17 has not been applied because the ball has not been made available immediately and the referee should have stopped the game and awarded a scrum or a penalty sanction dependent on the actions of players before.
So if a maul collapses, the defenders don't have to release the player or roll away but the ref has to make an instantaneous decision as to whether the ball is unplayable or the ball carrier hasn't played it. That should make life easy on the ref then!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clarification 4-2011
Union ARU
Law Reference 12
Date 14 November '11
Request for clarification from the ARU the correspondence is reproduced below.
“Law 12, Definitions state: “A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.”
The Law does not explicitly cover scenarios where the ball is ripped out of the possession of a ball-carrier by an opponent. In these situations it is almost impossible for the referee to determine exactly who last touched or had physical contact with the ball.
For the sake of improving consistency of ruling from referees worldwide, in the following scenarios, has a knock-on occurred? If so, who has knocked the ball on?
1. Ball-carrier A from the red team runs towards the blue team’s dead ball line. Opponent B approaches A from in front and rips the ball out of A’s hands such that neither player has possession of the ball and the ball travels towards the blue team’s goal line. (We often see this ruled a knock-on by A).
2. Ball-carrier A from the red team runs towards the blue team’s dead ball line. Opponent B approaches A from behind and rips the ball out of A’s hands such that neither player has possession of the ball and the ball travels towards the red team’s goal line. (We often see this either ruled play or a knock-on by B).”
Clarification of the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
In each of the scenarios outlined the ball carrier is not responsible for losing possession.
In scenario 1 the ball has been ripped from the ball carrier by a player ripping the ball from the ball carrier’s hands and it goes towards that player’s goal line. There is no infringement in Law and play should continue.
In scenario 2 the player ripping the ball out of the ball carrier’s hands is effectively throwing the ball towards the opposition team’s goal line and this is an infringement which requires the referee to award a scrum with the non-offending team throwing in subject to advantage.
Much more interesting. So basically, strip the ball and it is either play on or a scrum against you depending on where the ball goes.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Sheikh
