Six Nations Week 3, Part 2

Incidents and readers' questions

We have discussed the three controversial ones and we have given the statistic. We shall try to move on, as calm starts to settle on the rugby world.

We have had numerous comments from readers just recently, some of them frankly rude. It's hard to have a discussion with somebody who shouts with you.

But our Law Discussion, as we have said often, is a law discussion. It's not an exercise in nitpicking or finger-pointing.

We have been asked why we do not say that a referee made a mistake. We have often done that but without making a great noise about it. The discussion is the thing, what the decision should be rather than what it was.

If you say, The referee missed a forward pass.

What do you say next? You can call him names and so on, but it won't change the game. It may be more relevant to refereeing to discuss the referee's position if that caused him to miss the forward pass.

People have called for an investigation into the Dublin match and its refereeing?  To what point? Nothing is going to change the result that made Ireland the winners over England.

Any call for an investigation smacks of vindictiveness.

The way of sport is that rough and smooth are accepted and the results stand. In 1932 Joe Jacobs shouted: "We wuz robbed!" It's become one of the great saying in sport. But at the end of it all Jack Sharkey still beat Max Schmeling and took the world heavyweight title off him. Joe Jacobs's "boy" was Max Schmeling who died just recently.

In our discussion of a few incidents this weekend we are largely going to keep away from Dublin because there is still so much emotion flying around that discussion becomes worthless, but we shall look at the Grewcock-O'Gara action. In any case we have done that fairly substantially. If you want to go back to it click here.

1. One for you, one for me

Dean Ryan, the Gloucester coach, complained loudly about the referee when his side played the Newcastle Falcons. One of Ryan's complaints was a penalty count of 9-1 against Gloucester in the second half. One of Andy Robinson's complaints in Dublin was the imbalance of penalties against his side.

The referee does not infringe,. He reacts to infringements. Some sides infringe more often than others.

Here are some oddities in the Six Nations so far:

France infringed eight times, Scotland 14 times in their match.
Wales infringed ten times, Italy four times. Italy were penalised just twice in each half.
In the second half between England and France,. France was penalised seven times, England three times.
In the first half between France and Wales, France were penalised four times, Wales just once.
In the first half in Dublin, England were penalised six times, Ireland once.

The figures do not matter. What matters is the correctness of the decision. A disparity in penalties awarded is no indication of bias at all.

2. Charged down into in-goal

Chris Cusiter of Scotland passes back to Gordon Ross, who is about four metres from his goal-line. From there Ross kicks. Sergio Parisse chares down the kick and the ball rolls into the Scottish in-goal where Andrea Masi fall on it for a try.

OK?

Yes.

Let's play around with it a bit.

a. What if Chris Paterson of Scotland had grounded the ball?

b. What if Ross had been in his in-goal and the ball had crossed the goal-line when Parisse charged it back into the in-goal where Paterson grounded it?

c. What if Ross had been in his in-goal and the ball had not crossed the goal-line when Parisse charge it back into the in-goal where Paterson had grounded it?

a. Drop-out
b. Drop-out
c. Five-metre scrum

Law 22.7 22.7 RESTARTING AFTER A TOUCH DOWN

(a) When an attacking player sends or carries the ball into the opponents in-goal and it becomes dead there, either because a defender grounded it or because it went into touch-in-goal or on or over the dead ball line, a drop-out is awarded.
(b) If an attacking player knocks-on or throws-forward in the field of play and the ball goes into the opponents in-goal and it is made dead there, a scrum is awarded where the knock-on or throw-forward happened.
(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.

3. Off the knee

Girvan Dempsey of Ireland, inside his 22, kicks down the touch-line on his right. Martin Corry goes to catch the ball 30 metres or do from his goal-line. He drops the ball. The ball bounces on its point and goes forward. He pats it back with his right hand.

The whistle goes for a scrum.

Commentator: "It went backwards to begin with. Then it came off Corry's knee and went forward. And if it comes off the knee nowadays it's a knock-on."

The other commentator thought it came forward off the hands.

Commentator: "You used to use the knee to dink it over the top sometimes. It's a knock-on now."

It was a tough call because the referee was, inevitably because of the lengths of the kicks, a long way downfield, but we are looking at the matter of the knee.

Striking the knee does not make a knock-on. That is reserved to hands and arms.

But, as the commentator correctly said, there is a recent ruling by the IRB, one which one hopes will vanish soon, that if a player deliberately plays the ball from his hands onto his knee and bounces it ahead, the referee is to declare it a knock-on.

This comes from a ruling made by the IRB in December 2004:

Welsh query: A player in possession of the ball drops it onto his thigh and propels it forward. What is the correct decision?

Ruling of the IRB's Designated Members: If this occurred in general play the following would apply. By definition 'A kick is made by hitting the ball with any part of the leg or foot, except the heel, from the toe to the knee but not including the knee&'. In the case described the ball has not been kicked but has been dropped onto the thigh and this is ruled as a knock-on or throw forward. If the action as described was taken by a player after his team had been awarded a penalty kick or free kick, then a penalty kick or free kick has not been correctly taken. Under Law 21.3 (b) bouncing the ball on the thigh can in this case be taken to include the knee as this is also in the definition above. Thus, the player has infringed this Law and a scrum to the opposing team should be ordered.

One would hope that if it occurred the referee would get something in his eye momentarily blinding him!

5. The Grewcock clean-out/clear-out

Ireland have just scored. Harry Ellis and Josh Lewsey go cleverly down the blind. Lewsey tackled, England play to Lewis Moody who charges. There are three Irish players in Moody's way - Paul O'Connell, Ronan O'Gara and Shane Horgan. O'Connell and Horgan do most of the work in bringing Moody to ground though O'Gara is right there, hands on Moody.

Danny Grewcock, the England lock arrives and drives O'Gara off and to the left side as O'Gara looks at it. Ben Kay, the England lock, arrives and drives Johnny O'Connor away to the Irish right.

Both Grewcock and Kay comes from behind the tackle.

There is no ruck formed - just a tackle.

Several readers have made the point about this business of cleaning out, as well they may.

Some have said that Grewcock was obliged to bind on a team-mate, but there was no ruck and his only team-mate - Lewis Moody - was on the ground. Hard to bind. (This binding on a team-mate business is silly. It just does not happen in practice. Was Grewcock meant to wait for Kay to arrive and then bind on him to plod forward in unison?)

The clear-out/clean-out does not exist explicitly in law and in fact looks too much like playing a man without the ball. But at a tackle players are allowed to drive in to form a ruck. As at the ruck the clear-out, according to an aide memoire to referees after a meeting at Lensbury at the end of last year, "can only take place within a metre circle of the ball and the arms must be used in the action".

Grewcock and Kay are within a metre circle and both used their arms.

Perhaps all would be far better off if the clear-out were explicitly contained in the Laws of the Game.

The debate in this particular one is Grewcock's action after he drives O'Gara backwards. Grewcock stumbles over the players on the ground and falls to ground himself, still holding O'Gara's legs. Does he tackle O'Gara out side of the "allowed" circle? Does O'Gara fall as he backs away?

It's not an easy decision at all.

It may be the one most debatable of the three "controversial" decisions in the match.

6. Reader's questions: Throwing the ball into touch

Both these questions arise from an incident in the France-England's match at Twickenham some time ago.

Mark Cueto kicks the ball down into the French 22 on their right. The ball bounces awkwardly but Pépito Elhorga gets it. Josh Lewsey gets hold of  Elhorga and so does Cueto with Graham Rowntree approaching menacingly. Elhorga, about four metres in from touch, stays on his feet and throws the ball out over the touch-line.

Reader 1: I haven't had the benefit of running through it on replay but the thought did occur to me that a try could "probably" been scored from that point. If Elhorga had released the ball as he should, here were three white players there and no blues between them and the try-line.  I don't remember any blues looking likely to provide any support at that point but like I said, I've not seen a replay. Mind you, you could argue that the way England were playing they weren't "probably" going to score a try.
Simon Duxbury.

Reader 2: As he was the last line of defence and well inside the 22 with 2-3 opponents around him, should a penalty try have been awarded? Surely if he had released the ball then his opponents were more than likely to score a try?

Just a thought, from an English amateur referee.
Tim Ashby

Comment: There was no obligation on Elhorga to release the ball. He was on his feet. There was thus no tackle. He had the ball.

Up to the time he threw the ball out there was not even the possibility of a try as a Frenchman had the ball.

I think it would have been farfetched to have awarded a try.

7. Off-side?

Reader: I have a question relating to the offside law.

I recently completed a Level 1 reffing course in which there was significant discussion about being offside in open play, particularly when you are the defending team. The general view in the course (from other participants and the instructors) was that on defense in open play, if you are ahead of the ball (i.e.. closer to the opponents' goal-line), then you would be in an off-side position. However, I do not believe that the Laws define this at all. The Laws define being off-side in open play, but only when your own team is in possession of the ball (being in front of a team-mate who has the ball or last played the  ball).

Example - an outside centre is lining up defensively at a scrum. The opposition successfully wins the scrum and the outside centre charges up on defense, getting ahead of the ball. He positions himself between the opposition centres and looks for the intercept pass. While this may not happen at all regularly, situations such as this do happen during rugby games. Would the outside centre in this case be considered in an offside position?

Just looking for some clarification.
Andrew McMaster - Nova Scotia

Comment: You are right. You are off-side at certain organised phases of play - scrum, line-out, ruck maul and now in a limited way a tackle. Otherwise you are in an off-side position - not necessarily penalisable - if you are ahead of a player of your own team who last played the ball.

If your opponents are playing with the ball you can wander at will.