award for player knowing the laws

[The umpire]

should go this week to Tony Buckley of Sale.
Exeter scrum 5m from their line, gets pushed back so that 8's feet and the ball are in goal. While Exeter scrum half does the usual, these days, stand and ponder. Buckley moves in and exerts downwards pressure on the ball for the score!
Well done to him, and back to the law book for the scrum half.

 

[Dickie E]

what position does Buckley play?

 

[Ricardowensleydale]

what position does Buckley play?

I think he's a prop

Guardian "The Chiefs held the ball at the back of a ruck over their own line and the referee Dean Richards deemed the ball was out, allowing the replacement prop Tony Buckley to claim the touchdown"

Back to school for everyone

 

[Drift]

Any footage of it?

 

[didds]

If Buckley was a prop presumably he would have had to endanger the stability of the scrum in order to disengage and dive on the ball?

didds

 

[Ricardowensleydale]

If Buckley was a prop presumably he would have had to endanger the stability of the scrum in order to disengage and dive on the ball?

I suspected that was going to be the reason you asked. The Guardian report did have it as a ruck not a scrum and another report had him "sneaking" round the side of a ruck.

Also, if it was in goal it can't be a scrum can it? "A scrum, ruck or maul can take place only in the field of play.As soon as a scrum, ruck or maul is pushed across the goal line, a player may legally ground the ball"

Can the part of the scrum which is in the field of play be endangered when part of the scrum is not allowed to exist?

 

[The umpire]

I thought I still had it recorded, but I don't. It's on the ITV highlights show which will on ITV something later tonight.
It may well have been a ruck, I wasn't giving it my full attention until the slo-mo replay.

 

[didds]

I suspected that was going to be the reason you asked. The Guardian report did have it as a ruck not a scrum and another report had him "sneaking" round the side of a ruck.

thanks for that Richard.

Also, if it was in goal it can't be a scrum can it? "A scrum, ruck or maul can take place only in the field of play.As soon as a scrum, ruck or maul is pushed across the goal line, a player may legally ground the ball"

Can the part of the scrum which is in the field of play be endangered when part of the scrum is not allowed to exist?

And that's why I asked really. Its not a scrum any longer. But should the player have a "duty of care" not to enact "dangerous play". Given it is clearly considered so when in the middle of the pitch one could hardl;y argue it isn;t so just because legally the scrum is over?

I appreciate this is somewhat angels on pinheads...

didds

 

[Taff]

... Also, if it was in goal it can't be a scrum can it? "A scrum, ruck or maul can take place only in the field of play.As soon as a scrum, ruck or maul is pushed across the goal line, a player may legally ground the ball" Can the part of the scrum which is in the field of play be endangered when part of the scrum is not allowed to exist?

A scrum can't start in-goal, but can certainly be pushed into in-goal.

So with a push-over try, the scrum isn't over till the ball touches the goal line - so all the participating players (with the exception of the No 8 with the ball at his feet) will be in-goal. It's still a scrum, so scrum offside lines and scrum binding laws still apply.

 

[Davet]

But when pushed in goal that part which is in goal ceases to be a scrum; which is why if the ball is in that bit a player can stick his hands into the ex-scrum and score without being penalised for putting his hands in the scrum, because that bit wasn't a scrum.

it also means that if say the No8 is pushed in goal he can break off and take up defensive duties at the side, on the GL - and not be penalised for breaking early.

EDIT - actually thinking about it the scrum only ends if the BALL is over the Line, so a defending No 8 can't break if the ball is at the attacking 8s feet - the scrum still exists.

 

[OB..]

But should the player have a "duty of care" not to enact "dangerous play". Given it is clearly considered so when in the middle of the pitch one could hardl;y argue it isn;t so just because legally the scrum is over?

I appreciate this is somewhat angels on pinheads...

didds

I think it is more important than that. I don't see that dangerous play ceases to be dangerous just because the ball reaches the goal line, though of course the situation may change as players react to the ending of the scrum.

 

[The umpire]

Just watched it again at http://www.exeterchiefs.co.uk/
It was a ruck.
Still sharp work, though, and a very embarrassed scrum-half. Oh dear, how sad, never mind, eh, lovely boy!

 

[Davet]

I liked the 9's expression and the way he threw up his arms in protest as the prop apparently came from the side and went offside... except of course the ball was about 2 or 3 feet in in-goal - so ruck over...