- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
In the second Lions versus Wallabies Test, with 71 minutes on the clock, Australia chose to feed a scrum six metres out rather than take the three points from the penalty.
Australia knocks the ball forward. Referee plays advantage to the Lions.
They clear the ball to touch under heavy pressure from their dead ball line. The referee declares advantage over as the ball finds touch 15 metres out.
My question is, would it have been more advantageous to the Lions to have had a scrum feed five metres out as opposed to defending a lineout from 15 metres out?
My thought is that the clearance to touch was insufficient advantage to the Lions, particularly taking into account the pressure they were under to do so.
I think this was a big moment in the game.
Assuming the Lions secured steady possession from a defensive scrum it is probable that they would have cleared the ball much further down field than the 15 metres.
The laws regarding advantage state:
“the referee is sole judge of whether or not a team has gained an advantage”…
“advantage can be either territorial or tactical” …
“territorial advantage means a gain in ground”…
“tactical advantage means freedom for the non-offending team to play the ball as they wish.”…
The Lions did make a gain in ground however they were under heavy pressure, so did they have freedom to play the ball as they wished.
In my opinion, because the clearance was not great in distance, no advantage was gained thus a five metre scrum should have been awarded to the Lions.
Comments any one? Did the Lions receive a true advantage?
Join The Roar rugby editor Christy Doran, former Wallaby Matt Toomua and a cast of regular and special guests as they look at the biggest issues in the game on The Roar Rugby Podcast. If you’re looking for great odds on the next game check out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Chances are you’re about to lose. Set a deposit limit.