Man off ruling - Sorry to dig this one up again

[TheBFG]

I hope you can sort this one for me. A situation that cropped up last year and one that I believe needs clarification?

Let’s assume this is at L6 or below (so normal county appointment). Team have a prop binned so they go down to 14 players, after a minute a scrum is awarded so they take off a flanker and bring on their sub prop (still at 14 players). A minute later another prop (on the side with 14 players) gets injured, so they have to go uncontested for the remaining duration of the YC.

Question, can that second injured prop be replaced with another sub - not a prop (so still 14 players on the pitch), or do they go down to 13 players?

Please can I have a law reference for the answer (the coaches always ask!)

Many thanks

 

[Jacko]

I hope you can sort this one for me. A situation that cropped up last year and one that I believe needs clarification?

Let’s assume this is at L6 or below (so normal county appointment). Team have a prop binned so they go down to 14 players, after a minute a scrum is awarded so they take off a flanker and bring on their sub prop (still at 14 players). A minute later another prop (on the side with 14 players) gets injured, so they have to go uncontested for the remaining duration of the YC.

Question, can that second injured prop be replaced with another sub - not a prop (so still 14 players on the pitch), or do they go down to 13 players?

Please can I have a law reference for the answer (the coaches always ask!)

Many thanks

Down to 13.
Not sure on law ref.

 

[Dixie]

Of course, it doesn't help that the relevant provisions are now in Appendix 2 of Regulation 13 - a provision that is not available on the RFU's website! It is paragraph 13.b of those regulations:

Effective from 1 August 2014
In League Matches at Levels 3 and below, Cup Matches and Play-Off Matches if on any occasion uncontested scrums are ordered by the Referee, in accordance with (a)(i) above, due to injury (including a temporary blood injury) or consequent to a Player being temporarily suspended or ordered off or for any other reason, the team concerned shall not be entitled to replace the Player whose departure caused the uncontested scrum. On the return to the field of a front row Player who has been temporarily excluded the Match shall continue with contested scrums provided it is safe to do so.
Subject to paragraph 15 below the result of the match shall stand.

 

[Phil E]

Down to 13.
Not sure on law ref.

That's what I thought initially.

But this means that when the YC prop comes back on and they go back to contested, another player comes back on as well,which just doesn't seem to fit?

If you had no spare FR and YC a prop they are down to 14 uncontested for the period of the YC, and then back to 15 contested when he comes back. You don't send another player off with him, so why would you do it in the OP scenario which is no different, just in a different order.

 

[Rushforth]

I don't think that kind of thing (in the detail you are asking for) is in the Laws of the Game, but rather is subject to "regulations".

http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?law=3.5 for full details, I see no reason to make it 15v13 there.

 

[Dixie]

Some confusion here I think.

The injured player going off cannot be replaced. That means that from that point, 14 is the maximum the team can field. They are down to 13 during the bin, after which the binned player returns to make it back up to 14.

 

[Phil E]

Some confusion here I think.

The injured player going off cannot be replaced. That means that from that point, 14 is the maximum the team can field. They are down to 13 during the bin, after which the binned player returns to make it back up to 14.

But that means after the YC they are playing with 14 men but are back to contested scrums (YC prop comes back on). That can't be right.

 

[TheBFG]

glad it's not just me :wink:

 

[big fish]

Having had a quick look at the front row logic tree, it says reduced numbers for the duration of the sinbin therefore I would say:
YC - down to 14
Injury - uncontested and 13.
YC returns - back to 15 as no longer uncontested.

 

[Jacko]

That's what I thought initially.

But this means that when the YC prop comes back on and they go back to contested, another player comes back on as well,which just doesn't seem to fit?

If you had no spare FR and YC a prop they are down to 14 uncontested for the period of the YC, and then back to 15 contested when he comes back. You don't send another player off with him, so why would you do it in the OP scenario which is no different, just in a different order.

The different order is key.
The man off regs are there to prevent sides faking injuries to get uncontested scrums. If the reason they go uncontested is a YC (or RC) then that is referee led (obviously based on player behaviour but that's a side issue) so they are not penalised further.

 

[TheBFG]

but they could fake an injury to go uncontested with 14 on the field which I why I think down to 13 would make sense?

 

[Camquin]

So to test the regulation.

Hypothetically if I were to punch an opposition player and render him so injured he cannot come back on I should ensure it was a front row player as if his going off causes scrums to go uncontested they will be down to 14. And if the ref does not get my number I might not get a red card.

Camquin

 

[Jacko]

So to test the regulation.

Hypothetically if I were to punch an opposition player and render him so injured he cannot come back on I should ensure it was a front row player as if his going off causes scrums to go uncontested they will be down to 14. And if the ref does not get my number I might not get a red card.

Camquin

Correct.

 

[Jacko]

but they could fake an injury to go uncontested with 14 on the field which I why I think down to 13 would make sense?

Yep - as per my post #2.

 

[crossref]

this is a great scenario because it has the wholly unexpected consequence of the team with 13 then being restored to 15 when YC prop comes back on.

 

[TheBFG]

Some confusion here I think.

The injured player going off cannot be replaced. That means that from that point, 14 is the maximum the team can field. They are down to 13 during the bin, after which the binned player returns to make it back up to 14.

Surely they are back to 15 as they can bring a player on for the injured player as we're now having contested scrums?

 

[Dixie]

Surely they are back to 15 as they can bring a player on for the injured player as we're now having contested scrums?

Let's look again at the regulation.

Effective from 1 August 2014
In League Matches at Levels 3 and below, Cup Matches and Play-Off Matches if on any occasion uncontested scrums are ordered by the Referee, in accordance with (a)(i) above, due to injury (including a temporary blood injury) or consequent to a Player being temporarily suspended or ordered off or for any other reason, the team concerned shall not be entitled to replace the Player whose departure caused the uncontested scrum. On the return to the field of a front row Player who has been temporarily excluded the Match shall continue with contested scrums provided it is safe to do so.
Subject to paragraph 15 below the result of the match shall stand.

As ever, the regulation clearly does not say what it intends. The orange text implies that we can have a return to contested scrums only when a YC player returns - but the return of a blood-injury player would obviously also result in a return to contested scrums. We need to ask why that provision about not replacing the player is in there - is it solely to achieve the limitation on numbers during periods of uncontested scrums, or is it wider - including a disincentive to "manufacture" the highly undesirable uncontested scenario? I don't know the intent of the RFU in that regard, but if the former was intended the regulation could be much better worded. However, we've already seen that it doesn't say what it means, so perhaps a question to the Powers That Be is in order.

I suspect that this is an wholly anomalous scenario in which the RFU would be horrified at the outcome of its regulations. I suspect they would not want the team to go down to 13 in the OP scenario, in which case the return to 15 from 14 on the end of the bin would be unremarkable. But then the thinking would also apply when a prop is lost to a side after being concussed in a tackle -why does the RFU want that player's team mates to have to play a man down thereafter? Again, I think we have to ask them. This is not something that referees can sort out for themselves. Far too many variables and uncertainties.

 

[Browner]

Does anyone have tip/s on how referees ( devoid of assistants) can best track FR replacement usage, to avoid embarrassing errors?

 

[Browner]

Let's look again at the regulation.

Effective from 1 August 2014
In League Matches at Levels 3 and below, Cup Matches and Play-Off Matches if on any occasion uncontested scrums are ordered by the Referee, in accordance with (a)(i) above, due to injury (including a temporary blood injury) or consequent to a Player being temporarily suspended or ordered off or for any other reason, the team concerned shall not be entitled to replace the Player whose departure caused the uncontested scrum. On the return to the field of a front row Player who has been temporarily excluded the Match shall continue with contested scrums provided it is safe to do so.
Subject to paragraph 15 below the result of the match shall stand.

As ever, the regulation clearly does not say what it intends.The orange text implies that we can have a return to contested scrums only when a YC player returns - but the return of a blood-injury player would obviously also result in a return to contested scrums. We need to ask why that provision about not replacing the player is in there - is it solely to achieve the limitation on numbers during periods of uncontested scrums, or is it wider - including a disincentive to "manufacture" the highly undesirable uncontested scenario? I don't know the intent of the RFU in that regard, but if the former was intended the regulation could be much better worded. However, we've already seen that it doesn't say what it means, so perhaps a question to the Powers That Be is in order.

I suspect that this is an wholly anomalous scenario in which the RFU would be horrified at the outcome of its regulations. I suspect they would not want the team to go down to 13 in the OP scenario, in which case the return to 15 from 14 on the end of the bin would be unremarkable. But then the thinking would also apply when a prop is lost to a side after being concussed in a tackle -why does the RFU want that player's team mates to have to play a man down thereafter? Again, I think we have to ask them. This is not something that referees can sort out for themselves. Far too many variables and uncertainties.

Re: bold above

I don't read it in the same way as you Dixie.
I'm reading, "any occassion​" and for " any other reason" as not having the limitation you suggest , any FR (STE) player returning can rectify.

The additional consequence of YC/RC disciplinary action 'beyond' the man off provision, must be expected, it makes sense.

 

[crossref]

so browner you would take them down to 13, and then when the YC prop comes back on you'd resume contested scrums, but leave them at 14.
and the reason they are at 14 being - because they had an injury that caused uncontested scrums.

hmmm. given scrums are now contested - I'm not sure about that.