Question Reference Number: 33

FlipFlop


Referees in Switzerland
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
3,227
Post Likes
226
Just a point about the question below.

It's a scenario question. The question is what do you do? The answer given is "lecture the captain", but in reality your would play on with uncontested scrums (prime concern is safety, and without a full front row you have to go uncontested), and let Blue report the situation to the league. Options relating to allowing further subs obvious depends on the current state of subs used. Having answers a - c would make sense if this is reworded as a LAW question.

Or am I missing something?

Matt


Question 8 - Type: Scenario Question
Question Reference Number: 33
Blue is beating Gold consistently in the scrums. Eventually, the Gold hooker goes down with an injury and must be replaced. The Gold captain advises you that, of their eighteen player team, their only front row replacement can play prop, but not as hooker. What do you do?

The correct answer is: B.
3.5c & 3.5d [*1] : When 16, 17, or 18 players are nominated in a team there must be four players who can play in the front row to ensure that on the first occasion that a replacement hooker is required and, on the first occasion a replacement prop forward is required, the team can continue to play safely with contested scrums. The replacement of a front row forward may come from suitably trained and experienced players who started the match or from nominated replacements.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A. Advise Gold that, because of their number of players, they were required to have two front row replacements.
B. Advise Gold that they are required to have at least one suitably trained and experienced front row replacement who can play in either the hooker, tight-head prop, and loose-head prop positions.
C. Advise Gold that they are required to have at least two suitably trained and experienced front row replacements who can play in either the hooker, tight-head prop, and loose-head prop positions.
D. Continue with uncontested scrums.
 

SimonSmith


Referees in Australia
Staff member
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
8,894
Post Likes
989
Maybe I'm being dim, but I don't get your question.

Where does the "lecture the captain" bit come from?
 

ex-lucy


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
3,913
Post Likes
0
B. Advise Gold = 'lecture the captain' ... methinks ...

I agree with flipflop .... I would cont with uncontested scrums .. let the league sort it out ...
 

Davet

Referee Advisor / Assessor
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,731
Post Likes
3
Agreed. The correct answer, as far as it goes is D. The others are pointless - the team don't have a suitable player, so they ain't going to find one.

I think the full answer would be:-

E) Inform both captains that you will have to continue with Uncontested Scrums and, if it's a league or merit table game, that you will have to note the failure to provide a FR sub on the score card.
 

Simon Griffiths


Referees in England
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
1,914
Post Likes
0
I'll stand up for the answer (sort of anyway). Let's remember that LRL is a tool to help you learn the laws (as the title would indicate), the argument put forward here is an issue of management (not of law), in law, they are supposed to have a STE front row for all three in the first instance.

However, I agree that there is no way that the ref should lecture the captain and then proceed with contested scrums! I may well reword all of the answers.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
10,809
Post Likes
1,220
FlipFlop said:
The correct answer is: B.
B. Advise Gold that they are required to have at least one suitably trained and experienced front row replacement who can play in either the hooker, tight-head prop, and loose-head prop positions.


so having (in our virtual world) followed B, to which the skipper says "well, the normal hooker replacement got run over by an escaped elephant onthe way here so we don;t have such a replacement as you direct"...

... what the proverbial COULD happen next except the answer D (which i agree is the real answer anyway).

??

didds
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,952
Post Likes
1,816
There is no sanction in law for not having the required number of front row players. The game must continue with uncontested scrums. The question really is: should the referee be responsible for reporting the failure to the appropriate authorities?

The weakness of LRL is that each question focuses on one bit of law, whereas often there is more then one bit that applies. Either the questions should be better focused, or the answers should take a wider view.

However most of the time it does a pretty useful job of reminding(? teaching) us what the law actually says.
 
Top