No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

[crossref]

the normal reason for not engaging in a maul is that you are hoping the oppo will mess up and you'll get a scrum. Otherwise there is no advatage in it.

so it's not something you'd do if time has expired but you want to keep the game alive. It's a silly question

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Or you do it to make the other side move the ball away from their driving maul (possibly their main attacking weapon). Agreed, it is not a tactic that makes a lot of sense unless you are within 7 and would rather the LBP than risk the other side scoring again to take that BP away from you. So you encourage them away from the driving maul to risk a back move or encourage the kick to touch to end the game.

 

[Christy]

The only reason , i have seen opposition not engage in a maul . From a normal line out ( not penalty line out )
Is in anticipating the ball carrying side will now march forward with ball at back .
And bag them selves a penalty .

 

[Nigib]

The only reason , i have seen opposition not engage in a maul . From a normal line out ( not penalty line out )
Is in anticipating the ball carrying side will now march forward with ball at back .
And bag them selves a penalty .

It was a penalty, it's now a scrum for if there's no engagement and the oppo lineout slides out of the way without a backward step. Oh, and you've shouted Use It and they've ignored you.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

The only reason , i have seen opposition not engage in a maul . From a normal line out ( not penalty line out )
Is in anticipating the ball carrying side will now march forward with ball at back .
And bag them selves a penalty .

I accept some will try to get themselves a scrum in this way. This would surely include a lineout from a penalty as well. I'm interested why you say, "( not penalty line out )".

 

[Christy]

It was a penalty, it's now a scrum for if there's no engagement and the oppo lineout slides out of the way without a backward step. Oh, and you've shouted Use It and they've ignored you.

i didnt know the laws had changed . {{ maybe im reading post wrong }}
if ball at back & ball carrying team march forward ,,this is obstruction = penalty opposition

if ball at back & ball carrying team dont use it = scrum opposition .

if ball at front & ball carrying team march forward & opposition still dont engage = play on .

heres an add on question ,,
would you consider the call {{ USE IT }} meaning .
it has to be passed away ????..
or would you let guy at back of 1 sided maul peel off with ball & score a try

any views

 

[Marc Wakeham]

"Use it" means just that. The ball has to leave the maul how that is done is up to the team involved so a player can peel away or pass the ball away.

 

[Christy]

I accept some will try to get themselves a scrum in this way. This would surely include a lineout from a penalty as well. I'm interested why you say, "( not penalty line out )".

hi marc
i only say not from a penalty line out .
because it was deemed earlier , if team wanted to end game ,,they would tap to them selves & kick ball off field .
no other reason . { ive probably complicated matter ,,no complication intended }}

 

[Jolly Roger]

"Use it" means just that. The ball has to meave the maul how that is done is up to the team involved so a player can peel away or pass the ball away.

So long as players in front of peeling player are not obstructing. I would envisage that with a peel and dash close to the maul that the team mates in front would be likely to have had obstructed access to tackle. If ball carrier peels and then links with the backs then perhaps any potential obstruction may not be material. We should try and allow the game to flow so long as the opposition is not being disadvantaged.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Well yes whatever option a player take has be be legal. By the same token he should not use a forward pass. Sorry but I took that as understood.