Number 8 changing position

Waspsfan


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
504
Post Likes
32
Current Referee grade:
Level 5
Can a number 8 who starts a scrum packed between the two second rows, move his position to be between second row and flanker during the scrum, providing at all times he maintains a bind with a least one arm?
 

Rushforth


Referees in Holland
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
1,300
Post Likes
92
I'd say in theory yes, but in practice no. But look forward to the discussion.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
11,134
Post Likes
1,331
the law requires a full biund on a 2nd row throughout the scrum. IF he can maintain that - why not.



didds
 

Dixie


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
12,772
Post Likes
338
the law requires a full biund on a 2nd row throughout the scrum.
I'd go further. It is almost impossible for a #8 to bind onto his 2nd row, and that law is honoured far, far more in the breach than in the observance. Any #8 of any team in any country at any level from international to Extra Extra B vets binds below his 2nd row's waist, and thus illegally - and we are all, without exception, perfectly happy with this.

Given the latitude we all universally afford both #8's in our games in allowing illegal binds, it is inconsistent and unwarranted to start getting picky if he slips his "bind" from one lock to another.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
11,134
Post Likes
1,331
totally with you dixie!

diddss
 

buff


Referees in Canada
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
392
Post Likes
47
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Was there not some form of guidance/clarification etc issued in the last few months that required the 8 to stay in the same position throughout a scrum?
 

RobLev

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
I'd go further. It is almost impossible for a #8 to bind onto his 2nd row, and that law is honoured far, far more in the breach than in the observance. Any #8 of any team in any country at any level from international to Extra Extra B vets binds below his 2nd row's waist, and thus illegally - and we are all, without exception, perfectly happy with this.

Given the latitude we all universally afford both #8's in our games in allowing illegal binds, it is inconsistent and unwarranted to start getting picky if he slips his "bind" from one lock to another.

Sorry Dixie, but I'm not following the logic here.

#8 can't bind according to the letter of the law (ie full arm bind on the lock's body), so he's allowed to "bind" to the locks' backsides. That's all sensible, and makes sense of the Law. How does preventing him from letting him go of the scrum completely count as "inconsistent and unwarranted", or "getting picky"? I'm not seeing it.
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,980
Post Likes
1,836
Sorry Dixie, but I'm not following the logic here.

#8 can't bind according to the letter of the law (ie full arm bind on the lock's body), so he's allowed to "bind" to the locks' backsides. That's all sensible, and makes sense of the Law. How does preventing him from letting him go of the scrum completely count as "inconsistent and unwarranted", or "getting picky"? I'm not seeing it.
He usually sort of slides his bindings by moving, say, the left arm to the flanker and then the right arm, maintaining contact with the scrum throughout.

If he released completely and rebound I would expect a referee to deal with that as appropriate.
 

TheBFG


Referees in England
Joined
Apr 14, 2008
Messages
4,392
Post Likes
237
Current Referee grade:
Level 6
Ive seen some prem refs give it (Matt Carly) and other ignore it, always thought it was a bit of a "gatcha" type call, that makes the ref look a bit of a jobsworth!

Personally I think it can be dealt with by a simple, "don't do it again" at the next break in play.
 

RobLev

Rugby Club Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
He usually sort of slides his bindings by moving, say, the left arm to the flanker and then the right arm, maintaining contact with the scrum throughout.

If he released completely and rebound I would expect a referee to deal with that as appropriate.

That's what I understood didds to be describing at #3; but Dixie said he'd "go further", which I took to mean he'd allow moving without maintaining a bind.
 

Dixie


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
12,772
Post Likes
338
Sorry Dixie, but I'm not following the logic here.

#8 can't bind according to the letter of the law (ie full arm bind on the lock's body), so he's allowed to "bind" to the locks' backsides. That's all sensible, and makes sense of the Law. How does preventing him from letting him go of the scrum completely count as "inconsistent and unwarranted", or "getting picky"? I'm not seeing it.
I see where you are coming from, RobLev, but it was not my intent to condone a total unbind with subsequent rebind - a clear penalty. But sliding across is fine IMO, even if there are times when the pedant in me could argue that the "armpit to wrist" requirement was not fully met.

Zaphod Beeblebrox can do it.
Count the heads, Baby!
 
Top