Man off protocol

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,778
Post Likes
842
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Yes but 3.17 says

3?17 in a squad of 23 players or at the discretion of the match organiser, a player whose departure has caused the referee to order uncontested scrums cannot be replaced.

It's on that basis I vote for A
But, as stated in 3.16. "the referee enquires at the next scrum..." only at thispoint do you know theat we are going uncontested. So the point at which man off applies can only be once you know U/C scrums are now an issue. Read 3.17 in the context of the timeframe set out in 3.16.
 

Flish


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,520
Post Likes
351
Location
Durham
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
I don't see any reason why I, as the ref, need to get involved in who does or doesn't come off, if they have a FR replacement then they come on at the time (or not it's their interchange count not mine), if no FR replacement and they bring someone else on, and then have to drop one at the next scrum then again it's their call who. If this was a scenario of concern and it *must* be the replacement that goes off then I would expect that to be specifically documented, it's not as far as I can see so coached choice at my level.
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
478
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
Firstly, the original question is posed when a lineout has been awarded... this is not a scrum, therefore there is no need yet to worry about uncontested scrums and this is a straight substitution... play on.
So when here it says Player Is Not Replaced ..
Actually he is replaced and then later when there is a scrum .. does the replacement go off? Or do they get to choose ?

That flow chart has left me with several questions... what on earth do they mean by "first time of asking?" Does this mean, "is this the first time the ref has needed to consider an uncontested scrum?"... if yes, why does it instantly go to player not replaced (down to 14)... what if it's the result of foul play or head injury? How do you even get to the second asking scenarios below if you've already gone uncontested and reduced to 14?

Regarding the multiple scenarios, I thought uncontested scrums as a result of a blood injury was allowed without losing a man... that flow chart does not mention blood injury.
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,778
Post Likes
842
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I don't see any reason why I, as the ref, need to get involved in who does or doesn't come off, if they have a FR replacement then they come on at the time (or not it's their interchange count not mine), if no FR replacement and they bring someone else on, and then have to drop one at the next scrum then again it's their call who. If this was a scenario of concern and it *must* be the replacement that goes off then I would expect that to be specifically documented, it's not as far as I can see so coached choice at my level.
You have to get involved. You are the referee and therefore in charge of the game and it's laws.
 

Flish


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,520
Post Likes
351
Location
Durham
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
You have to get involved. You are the referee and therefore in charge of the game and it's laws.

That's my point, there is no Law that says which player comes off in a 'man off' scenario so not on me to decide who, only arguably then that someone should, which is my only obligation as ref as I see it.

It's also been explained to me that (in terms of RFU leagues) that this is a competition regulation not a Law so arguably the onus is on team managers to be compliant - however that's a blurred line that doesn't exist in my games.
 

Flish


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 2, 2013
Messages
1,520
Post Likes
351
Location
Durham
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Firstly, the original question is posed when a lineout has been awarded... this is not a scrum, therefore there is no need yet to worry about uncontested scrums and this is a straight substitution... play on.


That flow chart has left me with several questions... what on earth do they mean by "first time of asking?" Does this mean, "is this the first time the ref has needed to consider an uncontested scrum?"... if yes, why does it instantly go to player not replaced (down to 14)... what if it's the result of foul play or head injury? How do you even get to the second asking scenarios below if you've already gone uncontested and reduced to 14?

Regarding the multiple scenarios, I thought uncontested scrums as a result of a blood injury was allowed without losing a man... that flow chart does not mention blood injury.
It's a badly worded replacement for an even worstly worded predecessor - unless things have changed it's also almost impossible to find it referenced anywhere - that flowchart fro memory did the rounds in some social media posts when we were told to stop using the phrase 'man off' and other than my own copy I haven't seen it since - maybe that's changed
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
But, as stated in 3.16. "the referee enquires at the next scrum..." only at thispoint do you know theat we are going uncontested. So the point at which man off applies can only be once you know U/C scrums are now an issue. Read 3.17 in the context of the timeframe set out in 3.16.
the trouble is (of course) that 3.17 and 3.16 - when read together, don't make sense.

3.17 says that the player whose departure has caused the referee to order uncontested scrums cannot be replaced.

but if the ref follows the sequence laid out in 3.16 he already has been replaced. Oops.

Hence my question really
- the two Laws, when read together, are contradictory
- has anyone published an official protocol that makes sense of that and lays out the process to be followed?

(IMO The RFU flow chart doesn't help)
 

Volun-selected


Referees in America
Joined
Jun 11, 2018
Messages
548
Post Likes
302
Location
United States
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Maybe the delay between 3.16 and 3.17 is due to the issue when a suspension is involved and you may be taking the team down to 13?

That’s going to have a major impact so delaying the inevitable - especially if this happens with a minute or two left in a close game - and playing out with 14 until a scrum as called is better than the ref going “ok, player off and you guys will be down to 13 at scrum time, may as well get it sorted now..”
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
Maybe the delay between 3.16 and 3.17 is due to the issue when a suspension is involved and you may be taking the team down to 13?

That’s going to have a major impact so delaying the inevitable - especially if this happens with a minute or two left in a close game - and playing out with 14 until a scrum as called is better than the ref going “ok, player off and you guys will be down to 13 at scrum time, may as well get it sorted now..”
possibly.
so in the scenario given - do you think A or B ?
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,778
Post Likes
842
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
the trouble is (of course) that 3.17 and 3.16 - when read together, don't make sense.

3.17 says that the player whose departure has caused the referee to order uncontested scrums cannot be replaced.

but if the ref follows the sequence laid out in 3.16 he already has been replaced. Oops.

Hence my question really
- the two Laws, when read together, are contradictory
- has anyone published an official protocol that makes sense of that and lays out the process to be followed?

(IMO The RFU flow chart doesn't help)
Not really. It is about reading in context. Until the next scrum you do not know that it will need to be uncontested, unless the information is offered, so you don't know. When you do know you make the call. It really is that simple. Unless, of course, you want to make difficulties for yourself.
 
Last edited:

tim White


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 14, 2005
Messages
1,996
Post Likes
254
3.19 and 3.20 are compulsory man-off when a team 'caused' the lack of a front row player at the first time of asking (their Red or yellow card, no front row replacement). An injured player does not mean you play one short unless it is the first time of asking..
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
478
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
3.19 and 3.20 are compulsory man-off when a team 'caused' the lack of a front row player at the first time of asking (their Red or yellow card, no front row replacement). An injured player does not mean you play one short unless it is the first time of asking..
It was my understanding that going uncontested after losing a player due to foul play, blood or head injury should never result in forced reduction to 14 players whether first, second or any time of asking... am I wrong?
 
Last edited:

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
3.19 and 3.20 are compulsory man-off when a team 'caused' the lack of a front row player at the first time of asking (their Red or yellow card, no front row replacement). An injured player does not mean you play one short unless it is the first time of asking..
that depends on the competition in fact, but let's say the it IS , first time of asking, pst #1 : then do you go A or B ?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
It was my understanding that going uncontested after losing a player due to foul play, blood or head injury should never result in forced reduction to 14 players whether first, second or any time of asking... am I wrong?
depends whether it was the first player or second player.
hamstring followed by foul play = stay at 15
foul play followed by hamstring = drop to 14
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
Not really. It is a bout reading in context. Until the next scrum you do not know that it will need to be uncontested, unless the information is offered, so you don't know. When you do know you make the call. It really is that simple. Unless, of course, you want to make difficulties for yourself.
let's say that at PMB they only have 3 STE front row.
So when the hooker is injured you know there is no replacement, and they'll therefore be going uncontested.

In that case are you saying it would be A ? No replacement?
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
478
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
let's say that at PMB they only have 3 STE front row.
So when the hooker is injured you know there is no replacement, and they'll therefore be going uncontested.

In that case are you saying it would be A ? No replacement?

I believe the "man off" protocol only applies with a match day squad of 23 players, which should include 3 STE front row players on the bench.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
I believe the "man off" protocol only applies with a match day squad of 23 players, which should include 3 STE front row players on the bench.
no it applies in RFU Leagues (for instance) and some merit table leagues
They may turn up without the full complement of subs.
 

Marc Wakeham


Referees in Wales
Joined
Jan 5, 2018
Messages
2,778
Post Likes
842
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
let's say that at PMB they only have 3 STE front row.
So when the hooker is injured you know there is no replacement, and they'll therefore be going uncontested.

In that case are you saying it would be A ? No replacement?
I don't ask at the PMB so I would not know. Nor to I read the team sheets beyond checking they have sufficuent FR for subs named. I don't read who they are. After checking team and subs are right I go no further. When any FR is subbed I check at the next scrum whether or not we are contested ant that point I would deal as per the law book.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
Thanks to all who answered

Well, so far as I can tell, you have unanimously chosen B , so I guess B is the safest approach

It's not clear to me from your answers whether (at the next scrum) you make the replacement leave the pitch, or whether red get to choose any player they like to leave?

For me I think that when man off came in, A would have been the intended answer. (It was always emphasized to me that it's not about making someone leave the pitch, it's that the player leaving the pitch cannot be replaced )

But B is certainly closer to the approach used when YC a front row , so at least that makes sense.

Thanks all
 
Last edited:
Top