any thoughts on this passage of play?

[Dickie E]

 

[SimonSmith]

I have a question about onside/offside, but that's offset by the sheer stupidity of Joe Marler, and doubly so by Danny Care jusr flinging his arms in the air instead of, I dunno, trying to tackle Etzebeth.

My understanding is Etzebeth had already tried it once before in the game and got penalized for it. Quins can't say they weren't warned.

 

[Locke]

What is the assumed justification for Etzebeth being permitted to do this? Is the claim that Marler isn’t properly bound so the ball is out?

 

[Dickie E]

here it is with better audio. The critical error by the referee is that he calls "use it" which is universally recognised as the SH has 5 seconds to do his thing. To then pull this out of his bottom is appalling. If he wanted to indicate that Marler wasn't bound he should have called "ball's out". Zero star rating

 

[crossref]

It seems like a gotcha to me.. it's not the way the pro game is normally reffed

It's a good way to ref it, perhaps this will be the case going forward

 

[didds]

wierd.
Its either in so Etzebeth is offside, or Marler isnt bound (which he isnt frankly) so the ball is out
But "use it" implies the ball is in.
That is surely a "critical error". a HUGE one at that.

Last time I said something like this i got called out for disrespect - but that's a woeful call.

 

[belladonna]

First thought: Nick Mullins is a muppet. "It's been intercepted by Etzebeth"??

Re the call itself, doesn't Marler's bind change to just hand/forearm after the call of "use it", when the player he's bound to moves forward?

Strange things sometimes happen when Nika Amashukeli is refereeing.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

here it is with better audio. The critical error by the referee is that he calls "use it" which is universally recognised as the SH has 5 seconds to do his thing. To then pull this out of his bottom is appalling. If he wanted to indicate that Marler wasn't bound he should have called "use it". Zero star rating

I think you need to edit one of these.

 

[Phil E]

Re the call itself, doesn't Marler's bind change to just hand/forearm after the call of "use it", when the player he's bound to moves forward?

This Ref calls use it, then everyone shuffles forward (except Marler), ball is now out, ruck is now over, play on.

And if Danny Care had played rugby instead of flapping his arms like a seagull he could possibly have prevented that try.

 

[Balones]

I’ve got no problem with a player knowing and understanding the laws better than some other players.

 

[crossref]

I’ve got no problem with a player knowing and understanding the laws better than some other players.

Of course, but this game was reffed differently from other pro games. If you are going to do that you need to make it clear to both teams in advance (perhaps he did, and Quins didn't pay enough attention)

 

[DocP]

Very clever from the Sharks. Obviously analysed the Quins caterpillar ruck in the week. If you watch carefully you can see another player engage with the ruck which makes the Quins players in the ruck forward to brace themselves where Marler stays still and his shoulder comes disconnected. Smart play. Etzebeth hedges his bets and it plays off as I think it did earlier in the match.
Care should have picked up the ball and milked the pen that way, then if he doesn't get awarded it at least he is still in possession surrounded by forwards.
I also don't have a problem with the ref on this decision. Played as the law dictates. No need to mention it before the match as, although rare, perfectly acceptable in law.

 

[crossref]

I don't think that sort of binding is rare at all. What is rare is for the ref to consider the ruck over

 

[didds]

Ill happily go with the use it - shuffle forward - marler left unbound... ball out explanation. So I'll withdraw my accusation of "woeful" if that is the case.
But then maybe - just maybe - given there's been a "use it " call with all that implies, with players now focussed on their next action eg Care and the box clearance, maybe refs now have to in such circumstances shout "balls out"?

Its a mess for sure.

 

[Harry]

The authorities said they wanted to speed up the game. Etzebeth did just that. Good for him.

 

[Stu10]

This potentially poses some difficulties for the ref and is possibly a question of game management and expectations from players.

I do agree that Marler's arm comes away and he is no longer fully bound, therefore the ball is out. If he had moved forward with everyone else he would have had to move his back foot forward, which would very clearly be "ball out". Was it managed in a consistent fashion compared to other occasions? Does this matter (technically), providing the current decision aligns with the laws?

I suspect Care was not aware that Marler's bind had changed since he was focused on the ball and the defender. I'm not convinced the ref was fully aware (in real time) that Marler's bind had changed, and decided to let play continue and the rely on the TMO to check what had happened.

How would we have managed this at grass roots, without the benefit of a TMO? Typically the ref will decide the ball is out and will call it, or the defender will ask the question, forcing the ref to say yes or no, then everyone is aware (I put this down as game management).

 

[shebeen]

Anything that stops these caterpillar rucks with scrumhalves taking forever to set is a good thing.
Player at the back of ruck not bound, the ball is out.

(Counts for a #8 at a scrum too.)

Sort of related, I saw a ref enforce the 5 second rule after shouting "use it" for the first time recently. both scrummies were much quicker for the rest of the game!

 

[shebeen]

, and doubly so by Danny Care jusr flinging his arms in the air instead of,.....

.....picking up the ball. he just left it behind instead of playing to the whistle.

 

[Dickie E]

so wonder what would happen (not related to OP):
Ref hangs arm and calls "knock on Blue, advantage"
Everyone relaxes, Blue swoop on ball and score try.
TMO review shows no knock-on actually occurred.
Try awarded?

 

[crossref]

so wonder what would happen (not related to OP):
Ref hangs arm and calls "knock on Blue, advantage"
Everyone relaxes, Blue swoop on ball and score try.
TMO review shows no knock-on actually occurred.
Try awarded?

there wouldn't be a TMO review