[Scrum] Scrum collapses on #8 pick

[ChrisR]

Yes, read the sequence in post 17.

In the 2016 laws they removed the advantage law bit but overlooked the scrum law bit. RFU sent a note (as per David Broadwell of the RFU) saying they didn't agree with that.

Then the next year they took out the scrum law bit. To me that indicates that they ignored (or didn't agree with) the RFU position.

So now in 2017 law, if the scrum collapses the referee is not required to blow it up and may let the ball be played away.

The referee can still blow it up if he thinks it dangerous and clearly that is how the RFU and WRU see it.

Furthermore, note these changes:

2015 Advantage law 8.3(e) Player lifted in the air. Advantage must not be applied when a player in a scrum is lifted in the air or forced upwards out of the scrum. The referee must blow the whistle immediately.
2015 Scrum law 20.3(i) Player forced upwards. If a player in a scrum is lifted in the air, or is forced upwards out of the scrum, the referee must blow the whistle immediately so that players stop pushing.

2017 Advantage law 8.3(d) Player lifted in the air. Advantage must not be applied when a player in a scrum is lifted in the air or forced upwards and has no support on the ground. The referee must blow the whistle immediately.
2017 Scrum law 20.3(h) Player forced upwards. If a player in a scrum is lifted in the air , or is forced upwards out of the scrum , the referee must blow the whistle immediately so that players stop pushing.

It was WR's intent to stop requiring referees to halt a scrum if a front row popped up if he had his feet on the ground. So they changed the Advantage law (done in 2016) but overlooked the scrum law again.

Again, the intent of the change was to remove the requirement for a whistle.

One more thing: There is NO sanction attached to 20.3(h) because it is not an offence (in and of itself) to stand up.

 

[Pegleg]

I am glad you have seen the point. I fully see what WR wanted but the WRU havr said not at Amateur Level. So the discussion is pointless.

What is crucial is that people remember that different unions have different practices / rulings and people must be careful not to badly advise based on their own countries practice. Unions can be stricter than WR's requirements but they can not ease up on the Laws.

 

[Dickie E]

That said. If one team has clearly won the ball before the collapse I think it's equitable to give them the put in, though I don't think that's supported in law.

What is supported in law is that the team moving forward gets the put in

 

[Pegleg]

What is supported in law is that the team moving forward gets the put in

For us it is either a penalty OR a reset. So, the same side gets the put in.

It is one of the dangers of forums like this, that referees might not refer to their own union / society for detail that is, possibly specific to them. For me to apply Aussie protocol or for you to adopt that of the WRU would be potentially dangerous and at least inconsistent with fellow referees.

 

[Dickie E]

For us it is either a penalty OR a reset. So, the same side gets the put in.

It is one of the dangers of forums like this, that referees might not refer to their own union / society for detail that is, possibly specific to them. For me to apply Aussie protocol or for you to adopt that of the WRU would be potentially dangerous and at least inconsistent with fellow referees.

Yes, of course.