How to stop a maul without a card

[Phil E]

were Fiji on a warning does anybody know at the time it happened to them v Wales? (2nd half)

No they weren't on a warning, and I am fairly sure they had successfully stopped all previous Welsh Mauls legally.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Was it cynical, or did the player genuinely think the ball was out?

so intent is a consideration?

Was it just bad timing?

something here about nothing happens at these levels that is accidental ? ;-)
.

Could you not apply Your answer to Phil's second point to the first as well? As Tony Spreadbury was fond of saying "He knows!"

 

[Volun-selected]

so intent is a consideration?

A lot of the wording around mauls does seem to be aspirational - players in a maul must endeavour to stay on their feet, players must not intentionally collapse a maul and so on (emphasis mine) so intent does seem to be important - and now we have to be mind readers.

 

[crossref]

A lot of the wording around mauls does seem to be aspirational - players in a maul must endeavour to stay on their feet, players must not intentionally collapse a maul and so on (emphasis mine) so intent does seem to be important - and now we have to be mind readers.

intent/intention is mentioned over 50 times in the Law - all over the place.

we have always reffed on intent.

the idea that refs don't ref on intention just as much an urban myth as having to let em up.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

A lot of the wording around mauls does seem to be aspirational - players in a maul must endeavour to stay on their feet, players must not intentionally collapse a maul and so on (emphasis mine) so intent does seem to be important - and now we have to be mind readers.

Intentional knock on?
The area of confusion is Lack of intent does not stop it being an offence. bUT it may colour our actions. So a "reaction" high tackle is till a high tackle even wit hno intent but it may result in PK only depending on the circumstanses / mitigation etc.

A scrum collapses "accidentaly" we will look to reset, but not if intentional.

 

[didds]

A scrum collapses "accidentaly" we will look to reset, but not if intentional.

but loosing footing isnt intentional - but does get pinged at times/often, at least at elite level

 

[Stu10]

but loosing footing isnt intentional - but does get pinged at times/often, at least at elite level

However, props that unintentionally lose their footing during a scrum have typically made a conscious decision to be in a long body position with feet too far back.

 

[Phil E]

but loosing footing isnt intentional - but does get pinged at times/often, at least at elite level

Because usually at the top level they lose their footing due to trying to get too low and having their feet too far back.
That's not accidental.

SNAP Stu10

 

[tim White]

For 'Intentional' insert 'Deliberate' or Cynically'. If you see it happen you can usually tell but stick to clear and obvious.

 

[didds]

can you point me to the alws that say having feet too far back is illegal though? because up until losing their footoing it wasnt.
and while their actions may be a factor in losing their footing - its is STILL accidental.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

can you point me to the alws that say having feet too far back is illegal though? because up until losing their footoing it wasnt.
and while their actions may be a factor in losing their footing - its is STILL accidental.

If the player is not stable he is making the scrum unsafe and liable to collapse. If you can't support your weight and PROP up the scrum you are not doing your job. Substitute reckless for accidental. The prop knows that he is likely to lose his footing therefore he's reckless and fair game to be pingged for me.
19. 10 /11/12/15 all require the FR to be Square, STABLE and stationary
19.19 require a push to be parallell to the ground. Not easy when a prope has a long sloping body position.

Nothing wrong (as such) with an elbow pointing to the floor but as soon as a scrum goes down where does our atention focus?

 

[BikingBud]

can you point me to the alws that say having feet too far back is illegal though? because up until losing their footoing it wasnt.
and while their actions may be a factor in losing their footing - its is STILL accidental.

Loosing your footing or being too far back does not appear to be listed as an offence but under 19.37.e the videos: the referee says

"over extended, feet too far back"

Seems contrary as getting you feet back and hips below your head was always seen as the the optimum stable and powerful approach, also the best position from which to hook.

Slipping or loosing footing on a poor surface is not intentional it is accidental, whereas hinging is clearly conceding a weak position normally when the opponent has you pegged with your chin on your chest and with nowhere to go.

Perhaps the more appropriate law to apply to regain control of scrums would be:

19.22 - The hooker from the team which threw in the ball must strike for the ball. Sanction: Free-kick

But what do I know after >30 years in the front row?

 

[BikingBud]

If the player is not stable he is making the scrum unsafe and liable to collapse. If you can't support your weight and PROP up the scrum you are not doing your job. Substitute reckless for accidental. The prop knows that he is likely to lose his footing therefore he's reckless and fair game to be pingged for me.
19. 10 /11/12/15 all require the FR to be Square, STABLE and stationary
19.19 require a push to be parallell to the ground. Not easy when a prope has a long sloping body position.

Nothing wrong (as such) with an elbow pointing to the floor but as soon as a scrum goes down where does our atention focus?

Some pitches are so poor that finding good footing can be extremely difficult. Your very own national stadium has been criticised for this many times.

Also pushing parallel to the ground is much easier the more aligned with the ground you are, otherwise you are relying on back muscles rather than leg muscles to do the work, some monsters can do this but for many the big leg muscles are where the power is.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Some pitches are so poor that finding good footing can be extremely difficult. Your very own national stadium has been criticised for this many times.

Also pushing parallel to the ground is much easier the more aligned with the ground you are, otherwise you are relying on back muscles rather than leg muscles to do the work, some monsters can do this but for many the big leg muscles are where the power is.

With your feet too far back you are not parallel.

 

[Phil E]

The ideal position is an extended tower of power, with legs bent at hip and knee.
If your feet are too far back then fewer of your studs are in contract with the ground, leading to a higher likelihood of losing your footing.
You also can't push if your legs are almost straight, so if the scrum moves forward even slightly, you only have one place to go....down.

 

[BikingBud]

With your feet too far back you are not parallel.

Sorry we have drifted away from collapsing the maul question but.......

With a long position you are closer to parallel than with your feet underneath you. Also if more upright you are setting up at right angles to your bigger muscle group so cannot push forward as effectively if at all, and will have a tendency to squat and lift driving up and through the opponent (illegal) or hinge and go down, (also illegal), especially when you oppo drives over on top of you, much more difficult when you have a long straight back to transfer the force.

Tower of Power, although very fashionable, seems contrary to any manual handling advice. If you were pushing the scrum machine or a rucking sled, or even a car for that instance, you would not set up a tower of power, your shoulders would be low and you feet would be back! Pointing upwards sufficiently to unweight the device a little but putting most of the effort parallel to the ground.

Additionally, when the front row set up square the hooker doesn't seem to have optional channels; 1, 2 and 3 into which they can hook and give a variety of attacking options, although with the number of squint throw ins nowadays hooking is not the skill it once was.

Perhaps the Tower of Power is the cause of and not the solution to scrums being a shambles.

 

[didds]

ToP was AIUI "invented" for safe, not efficient, scrummaging...

BB speaks a lot of sense above (35 years propping here)

 

[chbg]

But a scrum machine, rucking sled or car are inanimate objects and provide purely stationary resistance. That is not a full contest for possession of the ball. An opposing scrum of 8 living people involves very different, and varying, kinetic forces.

 

[BikingBud]

But a scrum machine, rucking sled or car are inanimate objects and provide purely stationary resistance. That is not a full contest for possession of the ball. An opposing scrum of 8 living people involves very different, and varying, kinetic forces.

Thanks, I hadn't realised that

So does that mean it's OK to take up a poor posture for doing the work?

And any thoughts about the other observations?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

With a long position you are closer to parallel than with your feet underneath you.

With your feet back you are forming a triangle.
One side is the floor. One is at right angle from the floor to the point of contact between the FRs and the third , made up of the prop's body is joining the othor two. The body is pointing From the floor to the sky. Never anywhere near parallel. Not any part of prop is. With your legs bent as Phil says, the resulting position allows you to drive forward OR lock out the scum depending on the situation.

But what do I know after I only started in the front row 45 years ago.