[Maul] Does breakaway end the maul?

[ChrisR]

This is a new thread taken from the "Question" forum.

Looking at clip 2a from a working group on mauls from WR: http://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=9...=1&language=EN

In the clip a maul briefly forms then three Gold players break away. At this point it seems clear that the maul had ended. The BC is the middle player. The player in front of him appears to be obstructing.

The caption for the clip reads: "A player may have both hands on the ball and may be bound into the maul by other players involved in the maul".

This would be true if there was an opponent there to form a maul, but there isn't. :shrug:

 

[ChuckieB]

To set the context

............. which effectively came into that thread arising from this incident from this not being even considered as a possible infringement prior to a try being awarded.



A splinter from the original maul with W7 in front of his ball carrier just before r9 tries make an attempt on the bc and r11 attempts to take out W7.

http://video.rugbyrama.fr/rugby/pro...e-narbonne-vannes-16-24_vid966163/video.shtml

 

[ChrisR]

Thanx ChuckieB, I started this thread as a debate of law so it wasn't confused with the other thread.

Plus we can't see this clip in the US. http://video.rugbyrama.fr/rugby/pro-...63/video.shtml

 

[beckett50]

In the clip to which you refer, the Gold player at the front of the trio clearly has both hands on the ball and so is the ball carrier. This means that the opposition (France) can legally tackle the ball carrier and there is no obstruction.

 

[The Fat]

In the clip to which you refer, the Gold player at the front of the trio clearly has both hands on the ball and so is the ball carrier. This means that the opposition (France) can legally tackle the ball carrier and there is no obstruction.

Unfortunately, the guys who find the videos to use to illustrate the Laws or Law Application Guidelines, don't always find the best video available. How many times have you been at a Society/Association/RFU/ARU etc etc etc presentation and after they show a video you think, "That was a shit video example"?

I do agree with you that the front man still has hands on the ball however, the arrow and note that momentarily appears on the screen identifies the middle player as the ball carrier and not the front man. The video is intended to show how a player can be "caught in" the maul without binding to another player.

As to the OP's question,
In the clip a maul briefly forms then three Gold players break away. At this point it seems clear that the maul had ended. The BC is the middle player. The player in front of him appears to be obstructing.

A maul forms and players almost immediately fall off leaving the 3 gold players. The maul has not ended and is still active. The 3 players continue straight ahead and do not "change lanes" or "break off" the back of a maul.
Any gold players wanting to join the group of 3 must do so from behind and/or alongside the back player, whilst any blue player wanting to join will do so by binding to the front player of the 3 gold players. You must remember that if blue rejoin the maul, they are joining an existing maul and are not creating a new maul.

 

[ChuckieB]

So we are to interpret:

A maul ends successfully when :

• the ball or a player with the ball leaves the maul

As meaning, he can leave but if still bound with a minimum of one of his own players, it is still active.

In these 2 clips that is the case. The opponent joins back in after the splinter off.

we would clearly not have an issue if it had been just him bound with a defender.

i can certainly live with that if you are confirming that is the accepted interpretation.

 

[Dickie E]

So we are to interpret:

A maul ends successfully when :

• the ball or a player with the ball leaves the maul

As meaning, he can leave but if still bound with a minimum of one of his own players, it is still active.

In these 2 clips that is the case. The opponent joins back in after the splinter off.

we would clearly not have an issue if it had been just him bound with a defender.

i can certainly live with that if you are confirming that is the accepted interpretation.

As per Fat's post, "changing lanes" is the key. If the pod stays on the same path it is the same maul and the maul hasn't ended.

If the pod "changes lanes" (ie deviates in a different direction) then maul has ended and something new has begun.

 

[The Fat]

So we are to interpret:

A maul ends successfully when :

• the ball or a player with the ball leaves the maul

As meaning, he can leave but if still bound with a minimum of one of his own players, it is still active.

In these 2 clips that is the case. The opponent joins back in after the splinter off.

we would clearly not have an issue if it had been just him bound with a defender.

i can certainly live with that if you are confirming that is the accepted interpretation.

From one of the PowerPoint presentations I have on Mauls regarding "Changing Lanes". Some may find it helpful.

Attack ‘changing lanes’
• What’s legal?
• If all the defending players unbind and leave the maul, or shear off due to the dynamics of the maul (Law 17.4f)
• Attack continues to drive forward using players in front of the ball carrier
• Defenders must join from their side of the maul
• i.e. attack stays in the ‘SAME LANE’

• What’s illegal?
• Attack shifts the point of the maul by moving left or right
• Using players in front of the ball carrier
• No defenders
• i.e. attack is ‘CHANGING LANES’
– (also called ‘truck and trailer’)
• Trigger for referees is when the maul’s momentum is stopped
• Very hard to get this moving again through the same ‘lane’
• Teams can ‘roll’ the maul and change direction if defenders are still engaged

 

[Ian_Cook]

As per Fat's post, "changing lanes" is the key. If the pod stays on the same path it is the same maul and the maul hasn't ended.

If the pod "changes lanes" (ie deviates in a different direction) then maul has ended and something new has begun.

And if the pod with the ball changes lanes with the player carrying the ball behind a team-mate, that is a PK for obstruction.