Ire v Italy - Am I miscounting

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,734
Post Likes
2,248
It does if you add in the Card. If it is an injury it is down to 14 if there is a Red or Yellow as well that remove a further player, for the duration of the card.

But Law 3 alone doesn't say that, if this had happened before Clarification 1/2018 Italy would have stayed at 14.

I remember we had a lot of discussion about it at the time...
 

Stu10

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
194
Post Likes
60
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
I agree, I don't think anything in Law 3 clearly describes this situation. I had to read the associated guidelines to get it all clear in my head:

 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,426
Post Likes
601
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
The clarification was a clarification of 3.17, among others, (introduced in 2017 as 3.6 (d)) Clarifying WR's wishes. Those who understood what wR wanted would have reduced the offenders team from the introduction of 3.6(d).
 
Last edited:

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,734
Post Likes
2,248
THe clarification was a clarification of 3.17, among others, (introduced in 2017) Clarifying WR's wishes. Those who understood what wR wanted would have reduced the offenders team from the introduction of 3.6(d).
here we all are discussing this back in 2018

then we believed that the Clarification 1/2018 changed things, and applied only to 23 player squads.
Outside of elite rugby - Italy scenario would result in 14 players.

QUESTION - if the Italy scenario happened next week in the RFU leagues level 6 and down, how many players would they be left with?
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
15,492
Post Likes
1,789
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
QUESTION - if the Italy scenario happened next week in the RFU leagues level 6 and down, how many players would they be left with?

14 because the extra man off doesn't apply at that level. RFU Regulation 13 appendix 2.
 

Mipper


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
51
Post Likes
31
Current Referee grade:
Level 10
What I am saying and the actions of my club indicate it. A prop is not STE to play hooker at the higher levels. I'm not missunderstanding you either. You are claiming that a prop is STE to play hooker. I'm saying that is nonsense. Some will be others not.
No. That is not what I am claiming, though I can see how you have inferred that.

I don’t think this is going anywhere, so after quoting me and editing it, patronising me, and now posting that my view is nonsense, this has all the signs of a Twitter-like spat.

But that’s for anonymous halfwits on Twitter, not here, so we should draw a line under this.
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
15,492
Post Likes
1,789
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
i agree. What about in the Guiness Premiership? ?? 13 I think

Correct. It nearly happened to Bristol last season against Leicester, until they "suddenly discovered" the first prop went off as tactical, not an injury and they had filled the card out wrong. Of course they only discovered this when informed they would have to go down to 13. And yes they were getting mullered in the scrums by Leicester at the time on their own goal line. I thought Steve Borthwick was going to punch Pat Lam. He did call him a Liar. It makes interesting watching if you can find the footage. I think Bristol pulled a fast one and got away with it.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
19,734
Post Likes
2,248
I remember that now.

anyway the point here is that the answer to all these scenarios is found not in the Law Book but in the LAG and competition regs
 

Stu10

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
194
Post Likes
60
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
Correct. It nearly happened to Bristol last season against Leicester, until they "suddenly discovered" the first prop went off as tactical, not an injury and they had filled the card out wrong. Of course they only discovered this when informed they would have to go down to 13. And yes they were getting mullered in the scrums by Leicester at the time on their own goal line. I thought Steve Borthwick was going to punch Pat Lam. He did call him a Liar. It makes interesting watching if you can find the footage. I think Bristol pulled a fast one and got away with it.
If I remember correctly, the Leicester scrum had clear ascendancy and had a scrum close to the Bristol line... John Afoa finally came back on, had the scrum of his life and won a penalty, then the game was over... I think Bristol won by a very tight score line.
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,426
Post Likes
601
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
here we all are discussing this back in 2018

then we believed that the Clarification 1/2018 changed things, and applied only to 23 player squads.
Outside of elite rugby - Italy scenario would result in 14 players.

QUESTION - if the Italy scenario happened next week in the RFU leagues level 6 and down, how many players would they be left with?
Clarifications explain what we should be doing they don't change law. Are you squads of 23 L6 and below?
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,952
Post Likes
1,816
The Gloucester rugby historian has provided this example:-
On 1 March 2003, in the semi-final of the Powergen Cup played at Northampton, we played Leicester. At the very end of the game Leicester were storming our line and were awarded a scrum. Andy Deacon and Rodrigo Roncero had already gone off injured. Chris Fortey had come on to replace Ollie Azam at hooker, and Azam claimed he could not play at prop. Uncontested scrums followed, and Gloucester won. Leicester were not impressed and protested. The enquiry exonerated Glaws, and Leicester did not appeal.

(Azam had actually played prop after arriving at Gloucester, but not recently.)
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,809
Post Likes
1,220
I recalled that Azam incident indeed, without any specifics. Tx OB
 

buff


Referees in Canada
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
374
Post Likes
42
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Would it be fair to say that based on Phil's no. 46 above that man off can only be applied to squads of 23, but does not have to apply if the constituent body/competition organizer below the elite level chooses not to apply it?
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
15,492
Post Likes
1,789
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Would it be fair to say that based on Phil's no. 46 above that man off can only be applied to squads of 23, but does not have to apply if the constituent body/competition organizer below the elite level chooses not to apply it?

If by man off you mean another man on top of the one causing uncontested scrums (i.e. down to 13) then yes, that is how I read it.
 

buff


Referees in Canada
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
374
Post Likes
42
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Yes, I meant losing the extra player.
 
Top