binding by flankers on props arse to me.
Law says they must bind on a lock's body - it makes no requirement for them even to touch a prop.
binding by flankers on props arse to me.
I am now even more convinced that Crossref's approach - whilst done for the best of reasons - is not in accordance with Law. There are, I now think, two perfectly legal ways for here to be a hindmost player in a U19 scrum which is lacking #8s
Do good intentions on the part of the ref allow him to create Law? Even if this avoids difficulties that may otherwise arise?
If such a scrum starts to wheel should we simply assume a deliberate wheel and ping it before the pick up happens?
Strictly speaking the only requirement is to bind on a lock's body.If 7 man then 3-4-0 still implies binding by flankers on props arse to me.
The grey area was a reference to the debate about wheeling etc (it all but got delayed in posting and so ended up missing a chunk of context).OB - why is it grey?
Bind on a lock's body- could not be more clear.
OB - why is it grey?
Bind on a lock's body- could not be more clear.
It is only grey if you seek to infer additional requirements - If the flanker is bound on a locks body then he is legally bound. We must not infer additional requirements that are not there.
http://vicrefs.rugbynet.com.au/verve/_resources/Grade_Law_Variations_2011.pdf
this is a useful document put together by an enterprising colleague