Saints v Newcastle RC

[The Fat]

I take it Andrew Jackson is "Our Jacko"?
If so, he was in charge of this game and I though he did a pretty good job.
One question however, regarding the RC incident late in the 1st half.
We have a ruck with Orange in possession.
Orange #2 clears out a Green player.
Green player "counter rucks" with an illegal high hit on Orange #2 and gets a RC for his effort. No problem with all that.
My question is, did anyone else see this game or have a video of the initial clear out by Orange #2? They kept replaying the RC counter ruck but not the 1st "hit" by Orange #2. My memory tells me it may have been similar to the hit that earned the RC.

Anyone else see it?

 

[Ian_Cook]

I take it Andrew Jackson is "Our Jacko"?

Correct

If so, he was in charge of this game and I though he did a pretty good job.
One question however, regarding the RC incident late in the 1st half.
We have a ruck with Orange in possession.
Orange #2 clears out a Green player.
Green player "counter rucks" with an illegal high hit on Orange #2 and gets a RC for his effort. No problem with all that.
My question is, did anyone else see this game or have a video of the initial clear out by Orange #2? They kept replaying the RC counter ruck but not the 1st "hit" by Orange #2. My memory tells me it may have been similar to the hit that earned the RC.

Anyone else see it?

I thought Orange #2 (David Wilson) was OK at first glance. It was a pretty hard hit but I thought he did comply with he "bind must precede or be simultaneous" mantra. I haven't looked at it again. I've booked it on MySky for later today, so I'll have a look.

However, Green #3 (?) deserved to go. That was a definite "Bakkies"!

 

[SimonSmith]

My Fbook update ws simply "great call Jacko"

I was impressed by how he handled it - both the game, and that call.

It wasn't high quality rugby, but that was down to the team. He was trying to engineer a game, and did the best with what he had. The big decisions he took his time on, and delivered very calmly.

I'm with Ian. On first viewing, Orange 2 was OK. By any reading of the game, pre or post memo, that was a stonewall red.

The one thing I liked about Jacko's performance was that he seemed to have time; never seemed rushed.

 

[Ian_Cook]

There was only one call I found a bit odd, and what Jacko did caused me to look up the Law, and the answer surprised me.

There was a scrum late the second half (about 60-70min). Green threw in and won it, then got a bit mullered by Orange but seemed to get it back to the No 8. Jacko called use it, the scrum swung around and he blew it up and set another scrum......and gave the feed back to Green.

"What?" says I, so I looked up the Law because I was sure the feed should have gone to Orange. Imagine my surprise when I found that the Law doesn't say who gets the feed!!!

[LAWS]20.10 ENDING THE SCRUM
(d) When a team has the ball at the number 8’s feet , and is trying to move forward but is not
succeeding in doing so , the referee will call “use-it” once the ball has been at the number 8’s
feet for a reasonable amount of time (3-5 seconds). The team must then use the ball
immediately.[/LAWS]

"Use it" at a ruck or maul is a turnover, but it not specified at a scrum! WTF?

 

[The Fat]

There was only one call I found a bit odd, and what Jacko did caused me to look up the Law, and the answer surprised me.

There was a scrum late the second half (about 60-70min). Green threw in and won it, then got a bit mullered by Orange but seemed to get it back to the No 8. Jacko called use it, the scrum swung around and he blew it up and set another scrum......and gave the feed back to Green.

"What?" says I, so I looked up the Law because I was sure the feed should have gone to Orange. Imagine my surprise when I found that the Law doesn't say who gets the feed!!!

[LAWS]20.10 ENDING THE SCRUM
(d) When a team has the ball at the number 8’s feet , and is trying to move forward but is not
succeeding in doing so , the referee will call “use-it” once the ball has been at the number 8’s
feet for a reasonable amount of time (3-5 seconds). The team must then use the ball
immediately.[/LAWS]

"Use it" at a ruck or maul is a turnover, but it not specified at a scrum! WTF?

Well that's interesting.

Here is what was written in the ARU mem re Law Changes for 2016.

Law 20.10 When a team has the ball at the #8’s feet but the scrum is not moving forward, the referee will call “Use it!” The team must use the ball immediately (turnover scrum).


So then I checked the RFU PowerPoint presentation and the last part in brackets is not there. They even make the comment that no sanction is noted by WR.

I wonder where the ARU got the turn over scrum bit from and whether the NZRU has the same in their GMGs?

 

[beckett50]

ARU going it alone (again), hoping the rest of the world will follow?

Thought that Jacko had an assured game, bearing in mind it is his 2nd at the Premiership. Red card was nailed all day long and it was handed well, as was the high tackle by Orange #19 later in the game when he got the TMO to look whilst game was proceeding.

Good communication between all 4 officials on the field IMO in what was a fairly turgid game.

 

[The Fat]

ARU going it alone (again), hoping the rest of the world will follow?
.

Well it makes sense for it to be a turn over scrum if the scrum half fails to use it when told, as is required when the "Use it" call is made at a ruck etc.
If Ian hadn't mentioned it I'd have been none the wiser.

Looks like another question for our friends in Sydney before next season.

 

[AntonyGoodman]

The guidance notes for the RFU presentation on this helpfully notes:

The expectation is that the player will use the ball, no sanction has been provided by World Rugby.

Thanks,

Antony

 

[Pegleg]

So we have the question: Do we follow The general scrum law that after a wheel, collapse or standing up (where there is no fault attributed) we have no turnover or do we follow "breakdown" law and have a turnover?

Once again WR, "helpfuly" allows for two possibly interpretations both having merit / validity. refer to your society again!

 

[ChrisR]

From Ian's post #4: Jacko called use it, the scrum swung around and he blew it up and set another scrum......and gave the feed back to Green.

Is it possible that he blew it up for going past 90? That is no longer a turnover.

 

[The Fat]

From Ian's post #4: Jacko called use it, the scrum swung around and he blew it up and set another scrum......and gave the feed back to Green.

Is it possible that he blew it up for going past 90? That is no longer a turnover.

That could explain Jacko's decision in the game but it doesn't explain (a) Why Ian was under the impression failing to "Use it" should have been a turn over scrum & (b) Why the ARU have added (turn over scrum) to the original memo from WR

 

[Ian_Cook]

Just going back to incident mentioned in Fat's OP

I've had a look at it, and I'm happy that what Orange 2 did was fine. His entry wasn't parallel, but it was right over top of the ball so through the gate.. He wrapped his left arm around Green 3's right shoulder & torso, then pushed against his side with his right forearm. That meets the "preceding bind" part of the Law.

It was really interesting to listen to the commentators starting off by saying that Green three was "entitled to clean out like that", then as the various replay angles were shown, they went to PK then to YC and finally at arrived RC before Nigel and Jacko did.

I also note that Jacko asked for a replay in real time before making his decision. Well done that man.

 

[The Fat]

Just going back to incident mentioned in Fat's OP

I've had a look at it, and I'm happy that what Orange 2 did was fine. His entry wasn't parallel, but it was right over top of the ball so through the gate.. He wrapped his left arm around Green 3's right shoulder & torso, then pushed against his side with his right forearm. That meets the "preceding bind" part of the Law.

It was really interesting to listen to the commentators starting off by saying that Green three was "entitled to clean out like that", then as the various replay angles were shown, they went to PK then to YC and finally at arrived RC before Nigel and Jacko did.

I also note that Jacko asked for a replay in real time before making his decision. Well done that man.

I like the bit in bold. Always gives best context of events