Crucial
Rugby Expert
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2014
- Messages
- 278
- Post Likes
- 79
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
Here's the replay on 'Ask the Ref' from Stuart Berry
I think the key to this interpretation is "with your original bind". As I mentioned earlier I can see some consistency with the way mauls are adjudicated although I always took the 'swimming up the side' ruling to imply deliberate changes of bind which would probably mean that bind was broken at some point.
In the examples used at ruck time it is usually a dynamic change of bind as the player you originally bind onto moves away even though you remain bound due to other joining in eg in the McCaw case he binds with the left arm, then the right and the player on the left arm peels off.
Although there is some consistency here the Laws themselves only refer to initial bind and remaining bound. They appear to be being interpreted in a particular way to remove an action that, to the ref, looks wrong such as a player binding to a maul legally then being swung around to the opposition side by the movement of the maul. The player (as with the use of the foot) then looks offside even though he isn't.
The use of 'original bind' certainly isn't always used to all binding situations. Every ruck would have dynamic bind changes.
I think the key to this interpretation is "with your original bind". As I mentioned earlier I can see some consistency with the way mauls are adjudicated although I always took the 'swimming up the side' ruling to imply deliberate changes of bind which would probably mean that bind was broken at some point.
In the examples used at ruck time it is usually a dynamic change of bind as the player you originally bind onto moves away even though you remain bound due to other joining in eg in the McCaw case he binds with the left arm, then the right and the player on the left arm peels off.
Although there is some consistency here the Laws themselves only refer to initial bind and remaining bound. They appear to be being interpreted in a particular way to remove an action that, to the ref, looks wrong such as a player binding to a maul legally then being swung around to the opposition side by the movement of the maul. The player (as with the use of the foot) then looks offside even though he isn't.
The use of 'original bind' certainly isn't always used to all binding situations. Every ruck would have dynamic bind changes.
