[Scrum] Law 20 - Under 19 Variation

[crossref]

Seems perfectly clear to me.
The exception is to avoid uncontested scrums where possible.

no it's not!

 

[Phil E]

no it's not!

er, yes it is.

It is strictly for when a FR goes off and they want to bring on a replacement to remain contested.
If its a none FR who goes off the exception isn't required.
If they don't have a replacement FR the exception isn't required, but they will be uncontested.

 

[Staffs_Ref]

er, yes it is.

It is strictly for when a FR goes off and they want to bring on a replacement to remain contested.
If its a none FR who goes off the exception isn't required.
If they don't have a replacement FR the exception isn't required, but they will be uncontested.

But the whole thing is an unnecessary complication / reinterpretation of the law variation. The law (as I read it as opposed to how some others read it) already allows a replacement to be brought on to replace the binned player, so that scrums can remain both contested (providing there is a replacement STE for front 5) and as complete as possible.

 

[DocY]

Yes it would be confusing.
I can imagine the coach would tell one of the flankers to drop out into the line
and they'd go down to bind 3-3-1 and then you'd tell them, no - you can't have a #8 you have to bind 3-4-0
so the #8 would drop out and beckon the #6 to come back
and the coach would shout - no, no, you idiots, get back - #6 to drop out #8 get back in there
and #8 would say 'but we're not allowed a #8'
and the cach would say 'get back in there'
and you'd say 'look, #8 it's OK, no, you can have whoever you like, but you can't bind as a #8' ..
and he'd look at you as if you were speaking greek..

and your assessor would be thinking bloody hell what a mess, just get on with it...

Speaking from experience?

 

[crossref]

er, yes it is.

It is strictly for when a FR goes off and they want to bring on a replacement to remain contested.
If its a none FR who goes off the exception isn't required.
If they don't have a replacement FR the exception isn't required, but they will be uncontested.

No, no, your missing the poiint

At a Rugby Europe Event (U18 European tournament) with WR ref manager,

The only time there might be a choice was if a FR was binned, and at the scrum, the replacement (to bring on a prop) was made. Take off a back, and play 8 in scrum, or take off a forward and play 7.

So when it's a prop who goes off, and is replaced with an STE prop -- and then they can choose -- 7 or 8 in the scrum.

why do they get the choice in this specific scenario ? ( either way the scrum will be contested)

 

[FlipFlop]

It isn't that difficult. You play 7 in the scrum if there are not 8 forwards on the field.

If a FR is carded, at the first scrum, you let them make the REQUIRED IN LAW change, to take of any player, and bring on a STE FR. Then you see how many forwards are on the park. And if the team choose to make 8 forwards by taking off a back, then you have 8 forwards on the field, and play 8 in the scrum. If they choose to remain at 7 forwards, you play 7 in the scrum. You do not allow a back to come up and play in the scrum.

This means a team does have the option to play 1 man short in the backs, or in the forwards, but they have this at every carding of a FR.

Basically - get to contested scrums. Then work out (Based on what has happened) how many forwards are on the field.

And the reason the team will very rarely take it to 8 forwards - you lose a back for the entire duration of the card, rather than just being 1 man down for 1 phase of play that won't happen much.

In essence, 99.9% of the time, if you card a forward, the result is 7 in the scrum.

 

[crossref]

It isn't that difficult. You play 7 in the scrum if there are not 8 forwards on the field.

If a FR is carded, at the first scrum, you let them make the REQUIRED IN LAW change, to take of any player, and bring on a STE FR. Then you see how many forwards are on the park. And if the team choose to make 8 forwards by taking off a back, then you have 8 forwards on the field, and play 8 in the scrum. If they choose to remain at 7 forwards, you play 7 in the scrum. You do not allow a back to come up and play in the scrum.

This means a team does have the option to play 1 man short in the backs, or in the forwards, but they have this at every carding of a FR.

Basically - get to contested scrums. Then work out (Based on what has happened) how many forwards are on the field.

And the reason the team will very rarely take it to 8 forwards - you lose a back for the entire duration of the card, rather than just being 1 man down for 1 phase of play that won't happen much.

In essence, 99.9% of the time, if you card a forward, the result is 7 in the scrum.

I agree with all of that, and it's exactly how I ref it.

It's NOT in line with the opening statement

At a Rugby Europe Event (U18 European tournament) with WR ref manager, the message was clear:
Forward goes off, you play with 7 in the scrum. (and in 3,4,0 formation)
Back goes off, you play with 8 in the scrum.
No options, no choices.