[Maul] Failed maul

[mugsey]

[FONT=fs_blakeregular]DEFINITIONS[/FONT]
[FONT=fs_blakeregular]1 [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular]2 [/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular][/FONT][FONT=fs_blakeregular][/FONT]
[FONT=fs_blakeregular]A maul begins when a player carrying the ball is held by one or more opponents, and one or more of the ball carrier’s team mates bind on the ball carrier. A maul therefore consists, when it begins, of at least three players, all on their feet; the ball carrier and one player from each team. All the players involved must be caught in or bound to the maul and must be on their feet and moving towards a goal line. Open play has ended.[/FONT]

When one has called a maul, I understand that if it collapses (or is held up), and it is not immediately available, then there is a change of possession. Having watched quite a lot of European cup games recently, it seems that some top referees delay calling maul if the play is still moving forward. I try to give some seconds after the maul has formed before calling it, but is the fact that it is moving forward mean that I should delay longer?

 

[Pinky]

Mugsey, welcome to the forum. Once you are sure it is a maul, then there is no point in delaying a call (if you think telling players how you see it is important). Whether you have called it a maul or not, if it is a maul, then if the maul does not end successfully, there will be a turnover. So if it stops for long enough, or stops twice, the team in possession gets 5 seconds to play the ball away from the maul, or it is turnover. Similarly if the ball carrier goes to ground or the maul collapses without being dragged down, then the ball has to be available to be played immediately or it is turn-over too. The ball being available immediately is important, but you would probably give the s/h the normal time to "use it".

 

[beckett50]

Welcome Mugsey, and a great question.

Sometimes the referee will delay calling "Maul!" as he/she may be looking to see if the defenders are looking to 'double tackle' the ball carrier rather than hold them up. Also a bit of time is allowed to see if the ball carrier is '...brought to ground...' thereby making it a TACKLE situation.

If it is the latter then the TACKLE law comes into force, the defenders have to release the ball carrier and said ball carrier has to present the ball.

At the end of the day, what and how you call is a judgement that comes with experience and understanding of the game at the level at which you are officiating.

Hope this helps.

 

[DocY]

Welcome to the forums!

It's something all top flight refs do, but some more than others - I find Wayne Barnes very frustrating with his delays. But they're refereeing a different game where players usually have a small amount of competence.

It took me quite a while to get mauls right (or at least acceptable) as I'd either wait too long or not long enough. Obviously if the players fall over very quickly, you want the ball released so play can continue and if you've called 'maul' you're more likely to end up with a mess.
Likewise if you delay calling maul, you'll get players coming in from every which angle and you'll end up with a failed maul (and it'll just look wrong, which will get the crowed on your back).

My rule of thumb is as soon as it starts moving, I'll call maul. Doesn't always work, but maybe 90% of the time, if the proto-maul starts to move, it ain't collapsing any time soon so you're safe to call it.

 

[TheBFG]

maybe the delay in calling "maul" is to stop "defenders" dropping it; as they then know there is no requirement to release when the ball carrier hits the deck or the "maul" hits the floor. :shrug:

 

[Christy]

Hi mugsey .
Dont forget , its not always turn over ball .
If from kick in open play from opposition & other team catch ball & get held up and maul forms ,,its NOT turn over ball.

And if from a kick off to srart game or restart game after a try is scored ,,also a 22 kick off .
If opposition catch ball & then held up ..it is turn over ..

 

[Taff]

maybe the delay in calling "maul" is to stop "defenders" dropping it; as they then know there is no requirement to release when the ball carrier hits the deck or the "maul" hits the floor. :shrug:

That would be counter-productive surely.

Players know they're not allowed to collapse a maul, so I assume the earlier we call "Maul" the better. If they still think it's open play (because we haven't called it a maul - even though technically it is) then opposition players will think they can tackle the ball carrier with impunity.

I must admit, I find the time lag between a maul forming and a lot of Refs calling it a bit odd. After all, we have have to decide in our mind with a split second if a ball carrier has been tackled, whether a player on his feet is a Jackler or an illegal handler. Why give one phase of play more time than another? It's a mystery to me.

 

[Wedgie]

I must admit, I find the time lag between a maul forming and a lot of Refs calling it a bit odd. ............. It's a mystery to me.

Me too. I kind of assumed that there was one of those secret emails that redefined a maul as "...the ball a carrier held by one four or more opponents and one or more three or so of the ball carrier's team mates...."

 

[DocY]

That would be counter-productive surely.

Players know they're not allowed to collapse a maul, so I assume the earlier we call "Maul" the better. If they still think it's open play (because we haven't called it a maul - even though technically it is) then opposition players will think they can tackle the ball carrier with impunity.

I must admit, I find the time lag between a maul forming and a lot of Refs calling it a bit odd. After all, we have have to decide in our mind with a split second if a ball carrier has been tackled, whether a player on his feet is a Jackler or an illegal handler. Why give one phase of play more time than another? It's a mystery to me.

Players aren't allowed to deliberately collapse a maul, but the BC is allowed to try to get to ground and I think it's safe to say that in the situations we're all thinking about, he's going to be trying to do just that.

If there are only three players in the 'maul', it's going to be easier for the BC to get to ground than if there are more and he's going to take them down with him, so there is a higher chance of the maul collapsing and, most likely, failing.

Therefore I think a short delay to allow it to turn into a tackle, where players have to roll away, is prudent.

 

[Decorily]

Therefore I think a short delay to allow it to turn into a tackle, where players have to roll away, is prudent.

It is not a tackle and cannot 'turn into a tackle ' no matter how long you wait!

 

[DocY]

It is not a tackle and cannot 'turn into a tackle ' no matter how long you wait!

I think that misses the point - if it's likely to collapse quickly, treating it as a tackle rather than a collapsed maul means the ball is more likely to come out.

 

[The Fat]

The norm is to "let it breathe" a little when player's first come into contact to see if a tackle occurs. If we call "maul" the instant we have a ball carrier in contact with an opponent and a ball carrier's team mate, you are going to end up with a lot of stoppages and scrums. Instead, give the initial contact a few seconds to see what happens and I guarantee you'll have a much more enjoyable game .......... for everyone

 

[TheBFG]

Players know they're not allowed to collapse a maul,

Agree, but it doesn't stop them from doing it and is something that is not called often enough in my opinion. Maybe teams prefer the "choke" as there's less chance of a ref calling a "tackle" and then a requirement to release on the floor.

 

[ChrisR]

Agree with "let it breathe" sentiment. Technically, in law, the maul has formed the instant the teammate of the BC binds on but this can be a transitional phase of a tackle with the support player intending to be over the BC as he hits the ground.

 

[mugsey]

Thanks for this. I feel that there is quite a safety issue here. 8 blokes in a moving maul, falling on top of each other. I am sure there have been some broken bones in this situation. If a maul is moving forward by the attacking team fast, there are at least 3 from each team in, I have sometimes blown before it hits the ground. This is as I believe that the ball has no chance of becoming available 'immediately', and for safety reasons I blow before. I am sure this will be pulled apart (constructively!) by you fine fellows, but thought I would air this.

 

[Phil E]

Thanks for this. I feel that there is quite a safety issue here. 8 blokes in a moving maul, falling on top of each other. I am sure there have been some broken bones in this situation. If a maul is moving forward by the attacking team fast, there are at least 3 from each team in, I have sometimes blown before it hits the ground. This is as I believe that the ball has no chance of becoming available 'immediately', and for safety reasons I blow before. I am sure this will be pulled apart (constructively!) by you fine fellows, but thought I would air this.

If it's moving forward at speed and you blow because you think it might go down, you could be denying a try scoring opportunity.
I have had broken limbs at tackles and rucks, but not as far as I recall from a maul going down. They tend to make their way rather sedately to the ground with no one bent over in an awkward position.

You don't blow because the ball won't come out, you blow because it's not moving forward.

 

[Nigib]

Thanks for this. I feel that there is quite a safety issue here. 8 blokes in a moving maul, falling on top of each other. I am sure there have been some broken bones in this situation. If a maul is moving forward by the attacking team fast, there are at least 3 from each team in, I have sometimes blown before it hits the ground. This is as I believe that the ball has no chance of becoming available 'immediately', and for safety reasons I blow before. I am sure this will be pulled apart (constructively!) by you fine fellows, but thought I would air this.

I've never seen a break from a maul going down. If it does go over, it's likely that someone's taken it down. You have to be watchful of two things particularly as you approach the goal line.

Firstly, where's the ball? Keep moving around the maul to check you can see it. You can blow for unplayable 17.6 (b) (player from each side both holding it, for example), but that's an unlikely outcome if the maul is moving toward either goal line and you can see the ball.

Secondly, who's at the back of the maul or in a position to take it down? Deliberately collapsed mauls are more likely to cause injury (as they are unexpected) than a 'natural' collapse that players can anticipate or feel happening. And if the maul is moving fast towards the goal line, expect a defender to do it. PK or PT with card likely, so more reason to keep moving around the body of players.

 

[JonT]

Reading all of this I think a penny has just dropped for me.

One thing I have struggled with is what to do when a maul collapses (not through foul play) and the ball is clearly available to a player from the side who took the ball in to the maul. I am never sure whether to allow time for the ball to be used, but re-reading the maul laws I'm now pretty sure that if the maul collapses then it has ended unsuccessfully and the associated laws apply. Correct?

 

[Taff]

.. One thing I have struggled with is what to do when a maul collapses (not through foul play) and the ball is clearly available to a player from the side who took the ball in to the maul. I am never sure whether to allow time for the ball to be used, but re-reading the maul laws I'm now pretty sure that if the maul collapses then it has ended unsuccessfully and the associated laws apply. Correct?

Not quite. One of the best advice I picked up from RR.com was:

1. If the maul collapses because it was brought down deliberately - "Call it" ie PK
2. If the maul collapses accidentally and ball is "available" call "Use It"
3. If the maul collapses accidentally and ball is not "available" - Turnover ball.

So in your case even a collapsed maul is still "playable" if the ball is available. I find the trick is to spot the deliberately collapsed mauls (there are some devious sods out there) because if you reckon it was an accidental collapse, it's fairly easy to see if the ball is available or not. If it's not available, it's essentially just a pile up.

 

[Nigib]

Reading all of this I think a penny has just dropped for me.

One thing I have struggled with is what to do when a maul collapses (not through foul play) and the ball is clearly available to a player from the side who took the ball in to the maul. I am never sure whether to allow time for the ball to be used, but re-reading the maul laws I'm now pretty sure that if the maul collapses then it has ended unsuccessfully and the associated laws apply. Correct?

As others have said, don't look to whistle as fast as you can. If the ball is available after a scrum collapses, follow 17.6 (g) rather than (b): you are trying to keep the ball in play if it is sensible to do so, simply call Use It - if it's not picked out after 5 secs, then blow for a scrum.