[Scrum] Front row player forced up

[ChrisR]

On three occasions in two recent international matches penalties were given to front row players who had been forced up out of the scrum. The referee signal was similar to an opening drawbridge and clearly indicated that the penalty was against the player standing up.

From the Laws of the Game 2017:
20.8 (i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards.
This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick

There appears to be no prohibition in the Laws against a player standing up given that he doesn’t break his bind.
Sanctioning a player who has been forced up out of the scrum, instead of the player who forced him up, is a serious misapplication of law. Is there an explanation that I’m missing?

 

[Pegleg]

Taking the caveat that it is very hard to stand up without breaking the bind. I agree.

However, I am in the minority:

The, oft, cited law is

20.2 FRONT-ROW PLAYERS’ POSITIONS
(a) All players in a position to shove. When a scrum has formed , the body and feet of each
front row player must be in a normal position to make a forward shove.
Sanction: Free Kick
(b) This means that the front row players must have both feet on the ground , with their weight
firmly on at least one foot. Players must not cross their feet , although the foot of one player
may cross a team-mate’s foot. Each player’s shoulders must be no lower than the hips.
Sanction: Free Kick

Thie bit in bold being critical. However, the reast of (a) and (b) expand on that and there is no reference to the position of the shoulders other than the underlined bit.

The argument put forward also says that you "can't" push when stood up. Now whilst it may be less effective you certainly can push. Of course, the law does not require you to actually push at all. Again the argument goes that 20.2 (a) requires you to be in a position to shove therefor it is tacitly implied that you must push (see also debated on wheeling where LH drives whilst TH hold his position [not pulling back of course!]).

I ping it because that is the directive from my society. I am not in agreement with that action.

 

[ChrisR]

The problem that I have with that train of thought is it applies a technical law that really addresses pre-feed requirements and ignores a serious and potentially dangerous violation.

At its worst it encourages the practice of front row players driving up and earning a PK. I simply don't get it.

 

[VM75]

ChrisR,

Standing up is merely the only legal pressure release that a prop who is unable to cope can use safely. He can't go down, or force his opponent down as these are both 'unsafe'.

FWIW, IMO, Elite ref's seem to only ever reward the team who's got the 'go forward' , personally I think that they take this option because there are so many offences happening that they often don't really know or understand [likely only x-FR would claim to know some!] so it's simply an easilier sell to all watchers & participants i.e....if you're going backwards then it mustve been you !

 

[ChrisR]

ChrisR,

Standing up is merely the only legal pressure release that a prop who is unable to cope can use safely. He can't go down, or force his opponent down as these are both 'unsafe'.

FWIW, IMO, Elite ref's seem to only ever reward the team who's got the 'go forward' , personally I think that they take this option because there are so many offences happening that they often don't really know or understand [likely only x-FR would claim to know some!] so it's simply an easilier sell to all watchers & participants i.e....if you're going backwards then it mustve been you !

VM75, these are two crucial points.

Standing up, in and of itself, is not prohibited.

Why do teams, well into their own half, get the 'push' on? They're not driving 70m. It's because the 'push' certifies that any scrum failure must be laid at the feet of the team under pressure.

 

[didds]

There appears to be no prohibition in the Laws against a player standing up given that he doesn’t break his bind.

I understand penalising a player that stands up is done on the grounds of him not now being in a pushing position

However..

20.2 Front-row players’ positions
(a) All players in a position to shove. When a scrum has formed, the body and feet of each front row player must be in a normal position to make a forward shove.
Sanction: Free Kick

... which suggests that the sanction is a FK not a PK. I would also accept there is much debate over what constitutes "a normal position to make a forward shove.". eg one could shove with my belly or chest


didds

 

[didds]

It seems others agree with me that its 20.2... but the ssanction theer is "only" a PK.

but as ChrisR said...

"On three occasions in two recent international matches penalties were given to front row players who had been forced up out of the scrum".

which doesn't match...

so what were they being penalised with PKs for?

didds

 

[Pegleg]

They are being pingged for "standing up". The question is: "It that in keeping with law?"

 

[didds]

They are being pingged for "standing up". The question is: "It that in keeping with law?"

indeed - so what law are they being pinged for?

It can't be 20.2 if a PK is awarded.


didds

 

[Pegleg]

It is. As we all know. That's the signal used. So they are in some way wrong. Either it should be a FK OR are they using either of:

20.8 FRONT-ROW PLAYERS

Sanction: Penalty kick
(g) Twisting , dipping or collapsing. Front row players must not twist or lower their bodies , or
pull opponents , or do anything that is likely to collapse the scrum , either when the ball is
being thrown in or afterwards.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air ,
or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum , either when the ball is being thrown in or
afterwards. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Claiming that by standing up they are either destabalising the scum , thus making a collapse likely or lifiting / forcing the other side up?

 

[didds]

I can't recall a scrum ever collapsing when soembody stands up. And ive seen plenty of scrums where soebody stands and the oppo stay "down".

wierd.

didds

 

[Pegleg]

I'm not saying it makes sense. I'm just trying to second guess possible reasons.

 

[VM75]

It is. As we all know. That's the signal used. So they are in some way wrong. Either it should be a FK OR are they using either of:

20.8 FRONT-ROW PLAYERS

(g) Twisting , dipping or collapsing.

Front row players must not twist or lower their bodies , or
pull opponents , or do anything that is likely to collapse the scrum , either when the ball is
being thrown in or afterwards.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up.

A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air ,
or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum , either when the ball is being thrown in or
afterwards. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Claiming that by standing up they are either destabalising the scum , thus making a collapse likely or lifiting / forcing the other side up?

Neither of 20.8 [g] or apply IMO.

 

[Pegleg]

And I've seen plenty of scrums where somebody stands and the oppo stay "down".

wierd.

didds

And then the bind will almost certainly break.

Perhaps some one who does think it is a PK offence to stand up can tells us why they think so?

 

[winchesterref]

And then the bind will almost certainly break.

Perhaps some one who does think it is a PK offence to stand up can tells us why they think so?

Ok. I will.

It is in the law that players must maintain the normal position to make a forward shove. It comes under the scrum section. The normal position to make a forward shove in a scrum is not standing up.

If someone stands up deliberately they have a) not maintained their normal shoving position in a scrum, and b) deliberately offended. I can forsee a time when this law is clarified and the FK sanction removed.

That has the caveat that my first look is always at the team driving forwards, or not standing, to check for illegality there. If they force someone out by driving anything apart from forwards legally, I will aim to pick out the offence and penalise them.

 

[Pegleg]

Ok. I will.

It is in the law that players must maintain the normal position to make a forward shove. It comes under the scrum section. The normal position to make a forward shove in a scrum is not standing up.

If someone stands up deliberately they have a) not maintained their normal shoving position in a scrum, and b) deliberately offended. I can forsee a time when this law is clarified and the FK sanction removed for clarity.

That has the caveat that my first look is always at the team driving forwards, or not standing, to check for illegality there. If they force someone out by driving anything apart from forwards legally, I will aim to penalise them.

Can you put that law up here please? To support your stand point.

 

[Pegleg]

Or do you mean this one?

20.2 FRONT-ROW PLAYERS’ POSITIONS
(a) All players in a position to shove. When a scrum has formed , the body and feet of each
front row player must be in a normal position to make a forward shove.
Sanction: Free Kick
(b) This means that the front row players must have both feet on the ground , with their weight
firmly on at least one foot. Players must not cross their feet , although the foot of one player
may cross a team-mate’s foot. Each player’s shoulders must be no lower than the hips.
Sanction: Free Kick

Two points:

1: the sanction for that law is not a PK - There can be no clarification the sanction IS a FK and NOT a PK, It's simply a law error.

2: section b explains what a position to shove means and there is no reference to standing up in there. (that of course can be "clarified" by a change in the law.

As it stands this paticular law does not prohibit standing up.

 

[winchesterref]

It's from my reading of 20.2 alongside other areas of the scrum law.

Whilst b) gives some indication of a position, we ask players to go into a "crouch" and we have a definition of what a crouch should be, and we have a picture of what the scrum should be - which is an umbrella over the whole law.

[LAWS]A scrum is formed in the field of play when eight players from each team, bound together in three rows for each team, close up with their opponents so that the heads of the front rows are interlocked. This creates a tunnel into which a scrum half throws the ball so that front row players can compete for possession by hooking the ball with either of their feet.[/LAWS]

I think this clearly describes what is expected of a scrum and the position players are expected to be in (when they push).

Edit to reply:
It isn't a law error if the referee feels it is a deliberate offence, or that they have played "unfairly".

 

[Pegleg]

Since I have never seen a FK for it and nor have the other posters expressign the same question, it does not seem that referees are seeing anything other than a PK and not a deliberate offence and thus upgraded. That suggests it is an error and not a decision to upgrade.

The tunnel still exists.

The side standing can still push.

 

[winchesterref]

Standing, but close up and heads interlocked. In the position that we put them in for a scrum.

Why do we bother with crouch? Why not just stand together then lads, off we go?