[Law] Scrum ends

[Phil E]

Most of the posts on the thread are focused on the situation where the 8 picks up the ball, and remain bound

I was more asking about the reverse .. he is not binding properly and the ball is at his feet

Shout "Use IT" and then have a word at the next scrum.

 

[crossref]

Yes.

I think the answer is that the scrum hasn't ended , but 8 is committing a PK for breaking bind , which you may or may not blow for

 

[Camquin]

If the other 7 have enough grunt to keep the scrum moving forward without him, is it material that the 8 is chariot riding?
If the scrum has stopped and the ball is available then they need to use the ball immediately.

 

[Dickie E]

Shout "Use IT"

do you also then give him the 5 seconds to do so?

 

[beckett50]

do you also then give him the 5 seconds to do so?

On the first occasion, then next time (after 'The Word") then no.

Although if were L7 and up I would be tempted to just call the ball out in that scenario.

 

[crossref]

If the other 7 have enough grunt to keep the scrum moving forward without him, is it material that the 8 is chariot riding?.

You can decide it's not material , as I did .. and then opposing scrum half comes round and takes the ball from under his feet , on the grounds that if the 8 wasn't binding properly the scrum is over .. which is what happened ...

So was the scrum over ???

I think not , but ..

 

[Pinky]

You can decide it's not material , as I did .. and then opposing scrum half comes round and takes the ball from under his feet , on the grounds that if the 8 wasn't binding properly the scrum is over .. which is what happened ...

So was the scrum over ???

I think not , but ..

So it became material and you have to decide who you will penalise - the SH for (presumably) being offside or handling in the scrum or the no8 for not being bound properly. I would need to see it to decide but I would be inclined to penalise the no8.

 

[didds]

Purely on the old fashioned "equity" concept it would seem harsh to PK the scrum half for "not understanding" something that the ref himself "doesn't understand" .

(that's not a dig at anybody!)

didds

 

[crossref]

The SH understood the issue all right !
(we had a chat after)

Yes, I penalised the SH

IMO the #8 binding poorly does not end the scrum
The scrum ends when/if the #8 picks up

So I think the SH was committing an offence by coming in for the ball before the scrum

Was the #8 committing a prior, material PK offence?:
I don't think he was .. in that situation it's not material.

 

[didds]

Fair enough CR, you were the guy there.

So how long would you allow the #8 to maintain that scenario while the oppo #9 has to just look on at a #8 that isn't bound but the scrum isn't over?

didds

 

[crossref]

As long as the scrum is moving , and when it stops call use it

 

[Pinky]

As long as the scrum is moving , and when it stops call use it

Think that is allowing the no8 too much of a tactical advantage. What would you do if the defending 8 was to pop up too?

 

[crossref]

But what material advantage is the attacking 8 getting, really ?

(If the defending back row break binds it's much more clearly material as it means they can defend more effectively)

 

[Pinky]

But what material advantage is the attacking 8 getting, really ?

(If the defending back row break binds it's much more clearly material as it means they can defend more effectively)

He is able to assess at a relatively leisurely pace the defense ranged against him and presumably on the basis of what he see decide when to pick up the ball and go.

 

[crossref]

How material is that really .. as with the posts above it feels like 'have a word in the downtime' rather than reaching for the whistle

 

[didds]

But what material advantage is the attacking 8 getting, really ?

(If the defending back row break binds it's much more clearly material as it means they can defend more effectively)

and if the #8 has all-but-broken early it gives that brief moment of advantage potentially. It permits the #8 a clear vsiion of what defnse is where in advance of picking the ball up.

The law makers obviously saw it as having an unfair advantage ?

didds

 

[Marc Wakeham]

A number 8 breaking his bind is more material than many other offences . A couple of milliseconds when breaking from a scrum can have a huge impact on play.

 

[ChrisR]

Can anyone point to where the Law requires players in a scrum to maintain their bind until the scrum ends?

 

[Flish]

Can anyone point to where the Law requires players in a scrum to maintain their bind until the scrum ends?

http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=19

New law numbers, but 19.11.d;

• All players’ binding is maintained for the duration of the scrum.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

2017 stated:
20.3 BINDING IN THE SCRUM
DEFINITIONS
When a player binds on a team-mate that player must use the whole arm from
Hand to shoulder to grasp the team-mate’s body at or below the level of the armpit. Placing only a hand on another player is not satisfactory binding.
(a) Binding by all front row players. All front row players must bind firmly and continuously from the start to the finish of the scrum.

Sanction: Penalty kick
(f) Binding by all other players. All players in a scrum , other than front-row players , must bind on a lock’s body with at least one arm prior to the scrum engagement. The locks must bind with the props in front of them. No other player other than a prop may hold an opponent.

Sanction: Penalty kick

If a ref / player / coach argued that 20.3 (f) - the bit underlined - means that non front row only had to bind "Prior" the clarification in the 2018 book make it clear that is not so.