[Scrum] Law check - scrum turnover

[Zebra1922]

I've had several incidents recently when if the ball is turned over in the scrum (i.e. won by the non putting in team) the now defending team immediately rush up beyond the 5m offside line prior to the ball emerging from the scrum. TO me they are all offside as the ball has not exited the scrum yet, and BOTH sides should be back 5m until the ball emerges.

I can't find anything in the law that says otherwise but I've penalised at least 3 teams for this offence this season, several on multiple occasions as they just don't like to listen to me!

Am I right?

 

[Phil E]

Scrum offside law says all non participating players must stay 5m behind their own back foot until the scrum is over.

So you are correct to penalise the backs creeping up.

 

[Rich_NL]

You are, and if it's multiple occasions you might find a card sharpens their attention somewhat...

 

[Decorily]

Am I right?

Yes.

But maybe it's something that you need to be prepared for and to manage better.
Be alert and ready to change your position to focus (manage) the new defending back line.

 

[Camquin]

Sounds to me if he is picking it up - which suggests nothing wrong with his position.
He does not say if he warns first - but it seems the players are not listening and are repeatedly offending.
Players can be their own worst enemies.

 

[crossref]

This situation isn't one where you warn the first time

They are supposed to be 5m back
They ALL come up the back foot, so they are ALL of them a whole 5m offside

Thats a clear PK

And of course a word of explanation to make sure they understand

 

[Zebra1922]

I tend to find that a lot with offsides at LO or scrum time. It’s usually the whole back line (well, 10, 12, 13 at least) who offend, either egregiously as in the case of scrum turnover, or just all creeping up a yard or two at LO before the ball is out.

You never catch them all the time as there are so many things to look out for in the game, but I keep an eye out where I can!

 

[Camquin]

Perhaps I was not clear. I was thinking more of calling "Hold Red" as soon as Blue win the ball and red are still 5m back.
Of course if they don't listen and still come up it is a penalty.
If they keep doing it, especially if they are also offside on Blue put ins, then it could even become a card.

 

[didds]

I TJd a few weeks ago at a junior age grade game, where the players are old enough to know what they are doing on the whole

The ref asked me to mark 10m and 5m at LO and scrums (which I'd do anyway FWTW - but it meant the ref was on the ball as well and it gave credence to me doing so etc).

Both sets of backs would set up fine - on the whole! - but as son as the ball was live (especially at scrums) both sets would encroach. I gave some verbals ("stay onside guys" etc) although I apprecisate this was really beyond my remit I appreciate, but done in the "i'm trying to help you not get PKd" or whatever). To his credit the ref did chat to me at half time and say he wasn't pinging anything as he didn't think it was material, which is fair enough.

My point here is that it seems endemic. I know WE don't coach our squad to creep. The oppo literally crept rather than rushed up together and ate ALL the space so if they are coached to do it (and FTR I don;t think they are/werte) it was a very suvbtle coaching to cheat

I just think its natural for backs to do it.

didds

 

[crossref]

Losing possession in a scrum is quite unusual.. I think they partly go into ruck mode, where on a turnover you all rush up to the back foot.

Or perhaps they are cheating, to see if they can get away with it

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

The offence I typically expereince often is where the scrum is pushed back a metre or two. The backs tend to forget that they must step back to keep 5m back from the hind-most foot. However, I now mention it in my pre-match as it happens quite often.
Backs tend to think its like a lineout, where the offside-line doesnt move i.e. it is set 10m and remains 10 for the duration of the lineout.
I've had a couple of backs query why I pinged them, saying , "But we asked you if we were 5metres, Sir. And you said OK".
I hope this helps anyway.

 

[Zebra1922]

I TJd a few weeks ago at a junior age grade game, where the players are old enough to know what they are doing on the whole

The ref asked me to mark 10m and 5m at LO and scrums (which I'd do anyway FWTW - but it meant the ref was on the ball as well and it gave credence to me doing so etc).

Both sets of backs would set up fine - on the whole! - but as son as the ball was live (especially at scrums) both sets would encroach. I gave some verbals ("stay onside guys" etc) although I apprecisate this was really beyond my remit I appreciate, but done in the "i'm trying to help you not get PKd" or whatever). To his credit the ref did chat to me at half time and say he wasn't pinging anything as he didn't think it was material, which is fair enough.

My point here is that it seems endemic. I know WE don't coach our squad to creep. The oppo literally crept rather than rushed up together and ate ALL the space so if they are coached to do it (and FTR I don;t think they are/werte) it was a very suvbtle coaching to cheat

I just think its natural for backs to do it.

didds

It may not be coached, but it should be coached out. Coaches need to take responsibility to ensure their players play to the spirit as well as the laws of the game, and too often they go the other way (coaching to roll at the tackle being a good example).

 

[crossref]

It may not be coached, but it should be coached out. Coaches need to take responsibility to ensure their players play to the spirit as well as the laws of the game, and too often they go the other way (coaching to roll at the tackle being a good example).

i am not sure : everyone has different ideas as to what the spirit of the game is - as well as different ideas of what the Laws mean. Why coach your team to one particular understanding.... which may or may not be widely shared.

[As an example : I thought that what Italy did to England two years ago (refraining from forming a ruck) was completely in the spirit and laws of the game. But many people didn't ]


Better to coach your team to pay a lot of attention to the ref, and the play the game according to his/her understanding of the Laws and spirit.

I think the best teams do this

 

[didds]

It may not be coached, but it should be coached out. Coaches need to take responsibility to ensure their players play to the spirit as well as the laws of the game, and too often they go the other way (coaching to roll at the tackle being a good example).

I agree entirely.

Thius of course all depends if the coach even notices! Especially if his backs NEVER get pinged for it and he is concentrating on anothera spect of polay eg his front row , or back row defence lines etc.

I typically spoend the first half of a game at least behind the posts to watch the lateral movement of boith side's backlines - I won;t see trhe linear movement very well fropm there. Though then again I have colleagues on the sidelines and i'll be there typically in the second half myself - but typically watching the FRs and BRs!

didds

That doesn;t make sebra's excellent point "wrong" though.

 

[didds]

Better to coach your team to pay a lot of attention to the ref, and the play the game according to his/her understanding of the Laws and spirit.

I think the best teams do this

CR as evrer bringn an exzcellent dimension to the discussion... in act I agree with you both.

so

* coach your squad what the laws are and how to play to them
* but also coach them to play to a ref - within certain caveats eg foupl play.

didds

 

[Zebra1922]

I say play to the Code of Conduct. The more teams who choose to do this the less problems we as referees will have.

 

[crossref]

I say play to the Code of Conduct. The more teams who choose to do this the less problems we as referees will have.

Do you mean the Playing Charter ?

https://laws.worldrugby.org/?charter=all&language=EN

I think it is all great. But again it means different things to different people

I note that the very first thing it mentions is William Webb Ellis who saw a loophole in the law and exploited it

.The legend of William Webb Ellis, who is credited with first picking up the football and running with it, has doggedly survived the countless revisionist theories since that day at Rugby School in 1823. That the game should have its origins in an act of spirited defiance is somehow appropriate.

Yet when Italy performed their act of spirited defiance (and that's what it was) World Rugby went mad and were so disapproving they put through and ill thought through knee jerk Law Change to make sure it never happened again.

For me, a part of rugby has always been clever thinking , misdirection and deception. That is part of spirited defiance , and clever ways to exploit the laws is part of that. I think it's a shame that is often frowned upon at the moment


I do believe in this bit

It is through discipline, control and mutual respect that the spirit of the game flourishes

and it's the mutual respect bit that I think of when I am critical of NO's antics for not being respectful (in my eyes)

The thing is : the spirit of rugby means different things to different people

 

[OB..]

I note that the very first thing it mentions is William Webb Ellis who saw a loophole in the law and exploited it

No he didn't. He broke the law.

The story first appeared, heard from an unspecified source, in 1876, 53 years after the event. We have a letter from two people confirming that in 1828 (3 years after WWE left the school) it was still illegal to run with the ball, but making the point that all their laws were customary, and not written down.

In a letter from Thomas Hughes (author of Tom Brown's Schooldays) he wrote

In my first year, 1834, running with the ball to get a try by touching down within goal was not absolutely forbidden, but a jury of Rugby boys of that day would almost certainly have found a verdict of 'justifiable homicide' if a boy had been killed in running in. The practice grew, and was tolerated more and more, and indeed became rather popular in 1838-39 from the prowess of Jem Mackie, the great 'runner in'.
[...]The question remained debateable when I was Captain of Big Side in 1841-42 when we settled it (as we believed) for all time. 'Running in' was made lawful with these limitations, that the ball must be caught on the bound, that the catcher was not 'off his side,' that there should be no 'handing on,' but the catcher must carry the ball in and 'touch down' himself. Picking up off the ground was made absolutely illegal

I don't think any serious historian of the game accepts the WWE myth any longer.

 

[crossref]

I don't think any serious historian of the game accepts the WWE myth any longer.

of course not - but by emphasising this fable in their charter WE are saying that in some way it represents the ethos of rugby.

And in some way, it does. I understand the fable as being set in an era when the Laws were not formally written down, and were not universally agreed, but were governed by convention.
By picking the ball up (mythically) W-E pushed the boundary of what was conventionally accepted - and in the end he extended it.

I think that's the attitude that WR are getting at, and praising. (Until it happens when they are in charge, of course, and then they are definitely against it !)

 

[frencie851]

I TJd a few weeks ago at a junior age grade game, where the players are old enough to know what they are doing on the whole

The ref asked me to mark 10m and 5m at LO and scrums (which I'd do anyway FWTW - but it meant the ref was on the ball as well and it gave credence to me doing so etc).

Both sets of backs would set up fine - on the whole! - but as son as the ball was live (especially at scrums) both sets would encroach. I gave some verbals ("stay onside guys" etc) although I apprecisate this was really beyond my remit I appreciate, but done in the "i'm trying to help you not get PKd" or whatever). To his credit the ref did chat to me at half time and say he wasn't pinging anything as he didn't think it was material, which is fair enough.

My point here is that it seems endemic. I know WE don't coach our squad to creep. The oppo literally crept rather than rushed up together and ate ALL the space so if they are coached to do it (and FTR I don;t think they are/werte) it was a very suvbtle coaching to cheat

I just think its natural for backs to do it.

didds

Well I disagree with that ref, how can being offside at a scrum or line out 'not be material'? Anyone who is offside gets an unfair advantage and cut down the options available to the attacking team.

This is one of my pet hates and I reff this very strictly.