When Waratah flanker Dean Mumm was blatantly offside at Newlands from a Bernard Foley kick-off, referee Mike Fraser had no option but to ping him.
I mention no option because Super Rugby referees across the board have turned a blind eye to that very facet of play, as they have to halfbacks rarely feeding the scrum straight into the tunnel.
The Mumm brain explosion was at a critical time, with the Stormers leading 14-5.
Instead of the Stormers being hemmed in their own quarter, they grabbed the opportunity to attack deep into the Waratahs’ quarter, only to be denied another try thanks to rock solid Waratah defence.
You could see why Mumm broke so early, he was just following the Sevens tactics where regaining possession from the kick-off invariably leads to a try,
It’s a bit more difficult with 15 players to deal with than just seven, but the principles are the same – it’s become a priceless asset in Sevens.
The reason why referees have turned a blind eye to breaking early from the kick-off has escaped SANZAAR, and the referee’s appointment board, even though the practice has become endemic.
So too the scrum feed where halfbacks are just as blatantly feeding under their own hooker’s feet – again endemic.
And while I’m on halfbacks, everyone of them are far too slow to feed anyway, waiting for a nod or a touch from the referee to proceed.
Effectively what the halfbacks are doing is trying a milk a penalty with both packs under extreme extra pressure at the set position, while the halfback is playing silly buggers in a waiting game.
There’s more than enough pressure in elite rugby without any unwanted additions.
And while the referee expands his attention to cover both points, keep any eye on kickers cribbing extra metres, either looking for the line, or shooting for goal.
Waratahs and Wallaby flyhalf Foley is a past master at it, subtly marking the take-off point and getting the clearance from the ref, then over-stepping the mark by some two metres going for touch, or planting his goal-kicking tee a couple of metres closer to the posts, especially on the longer penalty goal shots.
If referees give rugby footballers an inch, they will take a mile – that’s the nature of the beast.
So it’s up to the referees to police the kick-off, the scrum feed, and the take off area for penalties with no pressure on all three from the referee’s point of view.
But all three are the referee’s responsibility.
Maybe Dean Mumm has done the whistle blowers a favour.
Phantom
Roar Rookie
Not quite correct in my view. A player cannot stand still in general play whereby he is not between the ball and his own goalline. "In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball.
Clifto
Guest
Can I add another one... crawling forward after the tackle to gain an extra metre or two before releasing/recycling the ball. Beauden Barrett is an absolute master at this. I think if you look at the stats from last year he probably made more metres crawling illegally than running with ball in hand
Moreton Bait
Guest
Agreed Peter. Many SHs wait hoping that the ref will ping the other team for pushing early or any other front row indiscretion. However the wording of both laws mentions nothing requiring the Ref to command the put in. I admit it is now common practice for the Refs to manage the situation. However whether the ball is fed or not the Ref can still blow up either front row. There is no correlation between 20.1 and 20.5. The Refs have deliberately inserted themselves between these two laws. Eddie took advantage of very fast feeds with Japan at the World Cup, but not many others have done this.
Bfc
Guest
Never...
PeterK
Roar Guru
20.1 (j) (j) Stationary and parallel. Until the ball leaves the scrum half’s hands, the scrum must be stationary and the middle line must be parallel to the goal lines. A team must not shove the scrum away from the mark before the ball is thrown in. 20.5 Throwing the ball into the scrum No Delay. As soon as the front rows have come together, the scrum half must throw in the ball without delay. The scrum half must throw in the ball when told to do so by the referee. The scrum half must throw in the ball from the side of the scrum first chosen. So the half has to wait until the ref thinks the scrum is square and stationary, he instructs the half that he can feed the scrum. Once so instructed he must do it with no delay.
Moreton Bait
Guest
What? Who? No, sorry mate, Law 20.5 that I quote above is a copy and paste from World Rugby laws. It's not my opinion. Unlike your concoction - CROUCH – BIND – SET – ‘YES 9’ - which is your own fantasy, and incorrect. There is no "YES". Many do not understand this matter. According to Law there is nothing to stop the SH from feeding the scrum before getting a "YES" or a tap on the bum from the Ref. This could be better used tactically. Also note )below) that the "SET" is also not a command and the front rows can determine their own timing after the Ref calls "SET" Although my point is not about the engagement sequence, see below (also from the Laws) for the current situation The Scrum Steering Group and the Laws Representation Group have reconfirmed that the Trial Law 20.1(g) should read: The referee will call “crouch” then “touch”. The front rows crouch and using their outside arm each prop touches the point of the opposing prop’s outside shoulder. The props then withdraw their arms. Following a pause the referee will then call “set” when the front rows are ready. The front rows may then engage. The “set” call is not a command but an indication that the front rows may come together when ready.
Who?
Guest
You're wrong. The correct wording for the scrum engagement sequence is - CROUCH - BIND - SET - 'YES 9'. Except that the 'YES 9' is now able to be non-verbal - a nod or a tap from the ref, dependent on where the ref is standing. The point of the 'set' is to get both teams engaged. The teams will use that opportunity to get their best possible bind/positioning, but they're not to push off the mark. The point of the 'Yes 9' is to ensure that the scrums are square and steady before the feed. The scrum does not start until the ball is fed. So, if the scrum hasn't started, there shouldn't be any pushing off the mark. If a team is able to push off the mark before the ball is fed - or, even moreso, as the ball is being fed - they are at a significant advantage. If a scrum is moving before the ref calls 'Yes 9', he has two options. One is to wait until the scrum is 'square and steady' before allowing the feed. The second is to FK or then Penalize the offending scrum for an early push. If the scrum is genuinely square and steady, then there's no excuse for crooked feeds. Each part of the process is highly considered - it's there for a reason. And, with the process enforced correctly, the scrum is a much more even contest - something we all enjoy. Completely, completely agree about the frustration with teams (not usually the Waratahs, notably) being offside at the kick off and kickers cribbing extra metres, though.
soapit
Guest
shame that asking a simple question prompts insults
Carlos the Argie
Roar Guru
Last year, Glenn Jackson penalized the Pumas scrum half for putting the ball in the scrum BEFORE he gave him the nod. This was the last play of the game and the Pumas scrum was dominant over the Wallabies. This penalization saved the Wallabies and they won the game. Since then, I am of the opinion that Jackson is an idiot.
Nobrain
Guest
Hahaha, feed the ball straight. I have not seen a game in SR that feeding was done in a correct manner. You stats fans, tell me how many penalties has been awarded in this issue since the beginning of the tournament ?
Moreton Bait
Guest
I am not sure the SH has to wait for the Ref to tell them to feed. At least this was not the case until the scrum engagement protocols were introduced. I am fairly sure the law does not require the Ref to "manage" the put in except in situations where a SH is delaying the put in for too long. In this case a Ref can order the SH to put the ball in so as to avoid a scrum collapse and potential re-sets. Problem appears to be that either a custom has developed where all SHs wait to be instructed, and/or all Refs expect to be scrum feeding executors. The actual wording of the relevant law is: "20.5 Throwing the ball into the scrum No Delay. As soon as the front rows have come together, the scrum half must throw in the ball without delay. The scrum half must throw in the ball when told to do so by the referee. The scrum half must throw in the ball from the side of the scrum first chosen. Sanction: Free Kick"
soapit
Guest
i have seen someone pinged for delaying it im sure
ClarkeG
Guest
CUW – Justin does get muddled at times but what he means is as follows: - “When a team has won the ball in a scrum, the scrum half of the opposing team is offside if that scrum half steps in front of the ball with either foot while the ball is still in the scrum. This scrum-half may not move into the space between the flanker and No. 8 when following the ball through the scrum.” The first part has been the law as long as I can remember but the second part is a trial I believe although there are so many different proposals being kicked around I have lost track to be honest. But that is what Justin is referring to.
ClarkeG
Guest
Yes Peter that is why I asked him what was his definition of offside. There is an assumption often that there is an offside line at every tackle. Which of course is not the case. This will all change of course when they trial the proposed law that a ruck is formed once an attacking support player is over the ball.
jameswm
Roar Guru
Here's another - the blockers protecting the half on the box kick. Too often in front of the last feet and move. I don't really like it - it's cynical, but completely legal if done right.
Train Without A Terminus
Guest
What a kvetch you are.
chucked
Guest
You wanna talk about a rule not punished nearly enough - try interference on the defending team dummy runners entering there line. The Brumbies are masters at this. On every occasion last weekend they seemed to have a bumbling forward play the dummy runner just enough to take one defensive player out. Fortunately great defence from the Highlanders ensured these negative and quite clearly coaches tactics failed miserably.
CUW
Guest
@ PeterK : Justin Marshall keeps on talking about the new LAW at scrums, where the scrum half not feeding the ball has to be on his side and not go behind the opposite sh. he was saying this gives more freedeom for 8-9 plays . do u think this has been enforced. ?? i saw this weekend Joubert enforcing it very dilligently , but not many other refs seems to care.
CUW
Guest
ditto that :) MUMM and DENNIS are mirror images of each other :P makes u wonder why on earth both are playiong in the same team at the same time !!!
CUW
Guest
also the statement gives a wrong impression. " You could see why Mumm broke so early, he was just following the Sevens tactics where regaining possession from the kick-off invariably leads to a try, It’s a bit more difficult with 15 players to deal with than just seven, but the principles are the same – it’s become a priceless asset in Sevens. " people shud know , even in sevens the players have to be behind the ball at kick off. and particularly in 7s it is easy for the ref to see becoz it is more or less just 2-3 guys running after the ball (unlike in xvs). however u will rarely see this happen in7s ( particularly with the more experienced teams ) becoz they are so very well drilled in that aspect.