[Maul] Forming a Maul - Or not?

[didds]

So - summarising:

Red are defending, blue throwing.
Blue jumps and catches, all legit, then lands. Blue players form around blue catcher in a quasi maul like structure, henceforth known as the "blob"

1) Ball at front of blob.
Red options = form maul / tackle blue BC / do nothing, force blue to do something (presumably march upfield!)

2) Ball moved to middle of blob
Red option = "bounce" into front of blob, earn scrum, for accidental offside

3) Ball moved to rear of blob, irrespective of blob moving or not
Red option = run around back, tackle rear BC / "bounce" into front of blob, earn scrum, for accidental offside

anything I've missed?

didds

 

[beckett50]

If the ball is with the catcher then its presumably at the front so a tackle can take place. LoT is ireelevant. its when the ball gets transferred to the rear of the non-maul, but the non-maul doens;t move the the offside oline is LoT and defenders cannot cross it to tackle the now BC didds

D'oh! Thanks for putting me straight Didds.

 

[The Fat]

D'oh! Thanks for putting me straight Didds.

You need to re read the last few posts of mine re offside line

 

[talbazar]

So - summarising:

Red are defending, blue throwing.
Blue jumps and catches, all legit, then lands. Blue players form around blue catcher in a quasi maul like structure, henceforth known as the "blob"

1) Ball at front of blob.
Red options = form maul / tackle blue BC / do nothing, force blue to do something (presumably march upfield!)

2) Ball moved to middle of blob
Red option = "bounce" into front of blob, earn scrum, for accidental offside

3) Ball moved to rear of blob, irrespective of blob moving or not
Red option = run around back, tackle rear BC / "bounce" into front of blob, earn scrum, for accidental offside

anything I've missed?

didds

I think you got it all here, but the one question I really have:

Take 1) above and one of the red players (say Red #2) chooses to tackle the BC.
But
Tackle fails and Red #2 ends up on the ground alone.

What do we have?
a) still a blob
b) a maul
c) a blob or a maul depending on where the contact was made by Red #2 onto BC
d) a blob or a maul depending on either we believe it looked like Red #2 was attempting to tackle or attempting to create a maul (with the same outcome of him on the deck)

Drum roll....

 

[didds]

D'oh! Thanks for putting me straight Didds.

from what others have said I am wrong on that point - so I summarised it all later for confirmation.

didds

 

[DocY]

I think you got it all here, but the one question I really have:

Take 1) above and one of the red players (say Red #2) chooses to tackle the BC.
But
Tackle fails and Red #2 ends up on the ground alone.

What do we have?
a) still a blob
b) a maul
c) a blob or a maul depending on where the contact was made by Red #2 onto BC
d) a blob or a maul depending on either we believe it looked like Red #2 was attempting to tackle or attempting to create a maul (with the same outcome of him on the deck)

Drum roll....

Still a blob for me - no opposition player bound = no maul.

 

[OB..]

I think you got it all here, but the one question I really have:

Take 1) above and one of the red players (say Red #2) chooses to tackle the BC.
But
Tackle fails and Red #2 ends up on the ground alone.

In previous discussions I think we have agreed that
(1) if #2 tackles below the hips, that does not constitute a bind, so therefore no maul.
(2) if #2 grabs the shoulders to pull the player over, that does not constitute a bind either, so again no maul.
(3) if #2 grabs around the torso, that is a bind and we have a maul, not a tackle.

 

[didds]

so what if red definitely binds to BC at front of blob and tries to drive them back (solo!) - that's a maul surely.

If that solo red defender then falls down and disengages the maul AIUI is not over.

So when does talbazar's scenario meet mine... is the question he is asking I guess

didds

 

[DocY]

so what if red definitely binds to BC at front of blob and tries to drive them back (solo!) - that's a maul surely.

If that solo red defender then falls down and disengages the maul AIUI is not over.

Yep, if he's bound as you describe, it's a maul, but if he disengages, leaving no opposition players, then the maul is over - the BC is no longer part of a maul, so it's a successful end.

 

[didds]

ah - mea culpa. I thought I recalled a law clarification that said if all the defneders disanegage and run away the maul as a legal entity continues?

didds

 

[Phil E]

ah - mea culpa. I thought I recalled a law clarification that said if all the defneders disanegage and run away the maul as a legal entity continues?

didds

You are correct.

It's still a maul.

 

[DocY]

ah - mea culpa. I thought I recalled a law clarification that said if all the defneders disanegage and run away the maul as a legal entity continues?

didds

Now you mention it, I do remember something, but I think it referred to voluntary en-masse disengagement (though I guess when you have one opponent who leaves it would be a masse of one player) - it was to stop the team not in possession disengaging, then claiming there was obstruction when they can't get to the BC, IIRC.

 

[DocY]

Here you go. Not quite as I remember

[LAWS]

Ruling in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
Ruling4-2008
Union / HP Ref ManagerRFU
Law Reference17
Date24 September 200

Request
A maul is formed with Team A pushing their opponents (Team B) back towards their own goal line with the ball being clearly visible at the rear of the maul, all the defending side (Team B) bound to the maul voluntarily exit the maul, has the maul successfully concluded or is the maul still active?


Law 17 Maul, Definition
A maul occurs 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 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.

Ruling in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee

The maul has not successfully concluded and it is not still active.

As the players of the team not in possession have all left the maul the maul ceases to exist and has not ended successfully or unsuccessfully as determined by the definition of a maul.


The maul has ceased to exist and the ball is now in open play and the relevant Laws apply.

[/LAWS]

 

[Phil E]

It's part of the law now, that clarification was superseded.

[LAWS]Law 17
(f) When players of the team who are not in possession of the ball in the maul voluntarily leave
the maul such that there are no players of that team left in the maul, the maul may
continue and there are two offside lines. The offside line for the team in possession runs
through the hindmost foot of the hindmost player in the maul and for the team not in
possession it is a line that runs through the foremost foot of the foremost player of the
team in possession at the maul.[/LAWS]

 

[DocY]

It's part of the law now, that clarification was superseded.

[LAWS]Law 17
(f) When players of the team who are not in possession of the ball in the maul voluntarily leave
the maul such that there are no players of that team left in the maul, the maul may
continue and there are two offside lines. The offside line for the team in possession runs
through the hindmost foot of the hindmost player in the maul and for the team not in
possession it is a line that runs through the foremost foot of the foremost player of the
team in possession at the maul.[/LAWS]

Do you have the sub-section? I can't find that bit in the 2016 lawbook.

 

[Phil E]

Do you have the sub-section? I can't find that bit in the 2016 lawbook.

17.4 (f)

 

[didds]

I guess we are just ijn the territory of what constitutes voluntary now!

So if a sole defending mauler accidentally falls over and disengages the maul is over?

didds

 

[Phil E]

I guess we are just ijn the territory of what constitutes voluntary now!

So if a sole defending mauler accidentally falls over and disengages the maul is over?

didds

Not in my book. Unless he gets dragged out by the opposition (which is an offence) he has taken the decision to leave himself. Still a maul.

 

[DocY]

Not in my book. Unless he gets dragged out by the opposition (which is an offence) he has taken the decision to leave himself. Still a maul.

Playing Devil's advocate a bit, but I'm thinking of this situation:

Red BC makes a break and runs into the blue fullback who grabs onto him and holds on long enough for a supporting red player to also bind on to the BC leading to a three-player maul moving towards the blue goal line.

If the blue holder on is shaken off and the red supporter stays bound, does this mean the remaining blue players can't try to tackle him from behind?

I suspect this falls into the pit of situations that weren't thought about when the laws were worded, along with a measure of not terribly good management from the referee.

 

[DarrenJones]

Back to the op wouldn't players prebound to the ball carrier and moving forward before contact with opposition not be considered flying wedge?