Changing Binds

[crossref]

Scarletts v Ulster - JP Doyle just penalised a player for 'changing binds' in a maul.

discuss.

 

[winchesterref]

Did he leave and re-enter from the side or in front of the ball carrier?

 

[matty1194]

Did he leave and re-enter from the side or in front of the ball carrier?

JP penalized the player for changing his bind at the driving maul, however the player in question in my mind started in at the side and infront of his own hindmost foot of the maul and was then "swimming " his arms and body further around the side of the maul to get to the ball carrier at the rear of the maul.

Kingsley Jones was one of the commentators, and a pretty decent job he did aswell, stated the same thing, the player was swimming around the side of the maul, not from the hindmost foot.

And in reply to Crossref in the OP, good call for me, should of hit it harder earlier to stop the good maul being formed and then when your going back at a rate of knots not try and cheat your way around the outside to stop it.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Not seen this specific match incident, but I have noticed increased incidents of this maul swimming technique this season and pleased to say being penalised by the refs. Well done chaps & chapesses.

 

[crossref]

Hmm perhaps I should be paying more attention to this myself then, but 'changinf your bind' is that the offence? It's not, the offence must be, having left the mail, the not joining from behind the back foot.

 

[Daftmedic]

Let's not get caught up with "what offence". When questioned just say which one. Soon sorts it out.

 

[Browner]

I see this offence as the player not maintaining a continuous bind.

If a player is binding legally with one arm, but then reaches out and binds legally with his other, then he may alternate repeat this action to move himself along a maul & remain within Maul Law continuously bound. Kind of slow swimming. - if he can't then show me the Law breach.

I guess the technique has similarities to distance walkers, in that the bind/foot must always be legally in contact with the maul/ road ......hopefully you get the picture.

Unless the elites are being instructed to create some other interpretation?????

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

Unless the elites are being instructed to create some other interpretation?????

Surely not!?

 

[crossref]

I am basically with Browner on this, if a player remains bound with at least one arm at all times then where is the offence?

 

[OB..]

if a player remains bound with at least one arm at all times then where is the offence?

True, but how realistic is that? I remember seeing Neil Back do it, very carefully and cautiously. However if the player only uses one arm, for example, he must surely be releasing and rejoining illegally. If he moves up fast the odds are heavily that he is not continuously bound.

 

[Browner]

True, but how realistic is that?
I remember seeing Neil Back do it, very carefully and cautiously. However if the player only uses one arm, for example, he must surely be releasing and rejoining illegally.
If he moves up fast the odds are heavily that he is not continuously bound.

Yep you'd think so,
Definition suggests its more difficult than you'd imagine IF the definition is still in vogue?

[LAWS]Binding: Grasping firmly another player’s body between the shoulders and the hips with the whole arm in contact from hand to shoulder.[/LAWS]

 

[Accylad]

The OP and subsequent comments seem focused on the defending side and their attempts by changing binds to get to the BC.

I have seen much more this season (and penalised with pretty much universal lack of apparent understanding by players) the situation where the BC - usually the person handed the ball at line out and therefore only one player back from the defending team releases from his bind and slides to the back of the maul. As this is normally happening at the same time as players join in front of the BC to prevent him being got at by defenders I tend to explain by saying to players "joining in front of the ball carrier - must joint at back foot" which is easier to sell I find than when there are no joiners and the offence is explained as "ball carrier did not bind continuously".

Several sides have said that they are coached to do this to which - shrug.....

 

[didds]

they are accylad.

as a coach, if it helps, it bothers me too.

especially when i see packs being coached it when they can't even bloody throw the ball in straight and then catch it first!

I'll add that this is a direct hand-me-down/learned technique from the elite game that has filtered down the levels.

didds

 

[Browner]

The OP and subsequent comments seem focused on the defending side and their attempts by changing binds to get to the BC.

I have seen much more this season (and penalised with pretty much universal lack of apparent understanding by players) the situation where the BC - usually the person handed the ball at line out and therefore only one player back from the defending team releases from his bind and slides to the back of the maul. As this is normally happening at the same time as players join in front of the BC to prevent him being got at by defenders I tend to explain by saying to players "joining in front of the ball carrier - must joint at back foot" which is easier to sell I find than when there are no joiners and the offence is explained as "ball carrier did not bind continuously".

Several sides have said that they are coached to do this to which - shrug.....

Yep, bind slipping/ sliding is indeed rife, and if its permitted (as invented by the elite as Didds says) then it becomes very difficult to defend against, and in that context you surely have to allow the defenders equal latitude to reposition their binds to negate the obvious advantage the BC team has , that's only equitable isn't it?

Personally, the moment I see the BC without a 'full bind' I quickly shout "Maul over" it certainly refocuses the players on what constitues a full bind. In the case of a swimmer then a preventative instruction helps him...

I saw a decent example of Botha executing this 'maul repositioning' in Toulon v Tigers, wasn't C&O illegal to my eye.