Scrum Move to the No 7?

[Iron_Lung]

Ok, possibly a topical question, but it may be sour grapes as the Wallabies just lost

The AB's second last try, AB scrum gets a great push on. McCaw unbinds and goes lateral, receiving a pass from the No 8 to run in and score. My question, if the No 8 unbinds to take the ball out of the scum, does that make the ball out, and therefore can the No 7 unbind?

Was McCaw offside for releasing his bind early because the No 8 hadn't picked up the ball, or would he have only been offside if the No 8 hadn't already unbound.

Conversely, whoever the Wallabies flanker was, the instant he saw McCaw unbind, would he have been within his rights to attack the No 8/Ball, assuming that if the No 7 has unbound the ball must be out?

Last question. If the No 8 unbinds, can you consider the ball out? Or can it be trapped at the feet of the second row and not be out, despite the fact that the No 8 is unbound?

 

[tim White]

No. 8 must release bind AND pick up the ball for the scrum to end, as described McCaw broke early and gained an advantage from it. :bday:

 

[Iron_Lung]

No. 8 must release bind AND pick up the ball for the scrum to end, as described McCaw broke early and gained an advantage from it. :bday:

Maybe it was a bad call then? It was right on the limit though so I think you'd be hard pressed to say Lawrence made a mistake... these things happen... the AB's dominated the last 10 minutes (dammit!) so who's to say what would have happened. Just an interesting one... :chin: :chin:

 

[Jenko]

I was just having that very conversation! Felt Macaw broke before the ball was out.

 

[Toby Warren]

My mind was PK gold at the time he went a good few seconds early and received the scoring pass. Critical error. (mind you the gold winger was at fault too for following the 8.)

 

[OB..]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEbnZjGDXVg

Yes, agree that McCaw broke too early.

 

[OB..]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nr3dU3GzwQ
This clip starts earlier. It looks as if McCaw partially unbinds, then perhaps rebinds, so Elsom partly unbinds to have a look, and then McCaw detaches completely.

I don't know what O'Connor thought he was doing.

[Corrected to put in the right link]

 

[L'irlandais]

Hullo,
While the post of flanker requires a player to push the limits of the LotG, this is just silly.
(Reminds me, a little of Zinédine Zidane in French football, people talk so much about his skill, yet the guy was mostly a loutish cheat, just ask Marco Materazzi.)
Yes McCaw can run rings around other players, but it's mostly because most other players are hampered by their respect of the rules of the game ; while frankly he couldn't give a flying f*@k about bending the rules 'til they break. By his version of the rules the aussies winger (14) could as easily have tackled him without the ball in anticipation of his receiving it. (At about the instant the opposing flanker stopped the No. 8.)

Let's put an end to the myth of how good this guy is, please.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

:wow: RMC not sticking to the rules - I don't believe it!

 

[L'irlandais]

Cheers Lee, (I'm sure.)
I don't wish to be critical of the ref ; even if it did happen right in front of him, without the benefit of freeze frame on the video replay. Perhaps sometimes in the thick of the action there are just too many things going on. He sees the fault but waits a bit before blowing it up, only by then it's too late, the play has moved on to greater things.

Looking at the clip, at 0:00 seconds McCaw is already slipping his bind, before the scrum has ended. By 1 and a half second the number 8 has started to slip his bind, but only picks up just shy of 3 seconds. So yes our hero Richie has broken from the scrum a full 3 seconds before it ended. (Read a report today, suggesting that referees reaction time was just 30milliseconds, or somesuch nonsense. How wrong was that study?) Had Mr Superflanker waited until the scrum ended, it would have taken him at least a further 2 seconds to get a couple of yards clear of the scrum, and he would easily have been stopped by the defenders.

 

[Phil E]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEbnZjGDXVg

Yes, agree that McCaw broke too early.

I second that emotion :hap:

 

[Adam]

I second that emotion :hap:

Karma I think!

 

[Ian_Cook]

Actually, the ball was out before No. 8 unbound.

Law 20.10 Ending the scrum

(a) The ball comes out. When the ball comes out of the scrum in any direction except the tunnel, the scrum ends.

(c) Hindmost player unbinds. The hindmost player in a scrum is the player whose feet are nearest the team’s own goal line. If the hindmost player unbinds from the scrum with the ball at that player’s feet and picks up the ball, the scrum ends.

Looking at the video frame by frame its marginal. Reid bends to his left and picks up the ball beside him, NOT under his feet (as described in Law 20.10 (c). Since ball is beside him, it is already out and the scrum is over. Whether or not McCaw unbinds before the ball is out is marginal and would be nearly impossible for the referee to tell at normal speed.

Note: both McCaw and Elsom unbind at the same time (holding on with a hand is NOT binding)


Of greater concern to me is Mark Lawrence's failure to award a PT to NZ in the 9th minute of the first half.


Israel Dagg made a centring kick and Turner tackled Muliaina.

LAW 15.7 FORBIDDEN PRACTICES
(b) No player may prevent the tackled player from releasing the ball and getting up or moving away from it.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Turner, lying on the ground, didn't release Muliaina, tried to stop him from pushing the ball back, and then pushed the ball away. Also, James O'Connor tackled Cory Jane without the ball as Jane was about to pick it up. If either of those offences were taken away, the All Blacks would probably have scored a try, so that is a dead-set, text-book penalty try IMO.

 

[Phil E]

Of greater concern to me is Mark Lawrence's failure to award a PT to NZ in the 9th minute of the first half.

But you would say that wouldn't you :chin:

 

[SimonSmith]

(Reminds me, a little of Zinédine Zidane in French football, people talk so much about his skill, yet the guy was mostly a loutish cheat, just ask Marco Materazzi.)
Yes McCaw can run rings around other players, but it's mostly because most other players are hampered by their respect of the rules of the game ; while frankly he couldn't give a flying f*@k about bending the rules 'til they break. By his version of the rules the aussies winger (14) could as easily have tackled him without the ball in anticipation of his receiving it. (At about the instant the opposing flanker stopped the No. 8.)

Let's put an end to the myth of how good this guy is, please.

Two points:
That's the harshest, and wrongest, assessment of Zidane I've read. Congratulations.

And as for your assessment of McCaw - of course he bends the rules, and pushes them every game to see where the breaking point is that week. That's his job.

But really, to claim he isn't that good is just, well, wrong. He is good. he's super super good. Christ, even Australians admit he's good.

 

[Dickie E]

Also, James O'Connor tackled Cory Jane without the ball as Jane was about to pick it up. If either of those offences were taken away, the All Blacks would probably have scored a try, so that is a dead-set, text-book penalty try IMO.

Bananas! O'Connor was legitimately trying to get back on-side and Corey Jane (what kind of name is that for a bloke?) steps across his path and causes the contact. PK to Oz.

 

[Iron_Lung]

Sorry Dickie but I have to go with Ian on this one, O'Conner takes him without the ball in a fit of eagerness. However the ruling at the time is fairly consistent in terms of what Mark Lawrence had been letting go all night, so while I thought it was a penalty, based on his performance to that point I would have been pretty upset with him if he'd penalised Australia in that instance. :chin:

However Ian, I'm going to disagree with you that the ball was out. The legs of the lock are clearly over the ball when McCaw breaks and Ried subsequently unbinds. Most refs would not allow the defending team to attack the ball if it was similarly positioned at the back of a ruck for example. McCaw is off the scrum before Reid takes his shoulders off the lock, he's well off by the time Ried collects the ball from the feet of the lock, therefore he has to have been off before the scrum ended.

That all being said, this is with the benefit of 20-20 hindsight and instant replay. At the time I felt like "something doesn't look right" but I wouldn't have blown for a penalty, as I wasn't sure what had happened until I saw the 4th replay. Such is life...

 

[OB..]

It seems to me that McCaw is very good at two essentials: pushing the limits, and adapting to the laws/referees.

You only see what you are looking at, so unless something lasts long enough for your scan to pick it up, you will not see it.

Reaction time is quite different - it is the time from stimulus to reaction.

 

[OB..]

Actually, the ball was out before No. 8 unbound.

Two stills from the link (as now corrected) posted at #7.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Two stills from the link (as now corrected) posted at #7.

So lets have a look from the other side... its far more revealing

McCaw is not bound but he his holding onto the scrum, like Elsom, who is
also not bound. You can argue McCaw should have been penalised at this
point, and I will argue that Elsom should also have been penalised. Since
you cannot PK both of them, you manage it; either by allowing it to continue
or telling them both to bind up properly. If you argue that unbinding gave
McCaw sufficient advantage to score the try, I will argue that because
Elsom was also not bound, that advantage was negated, and the try
would probably have been scored anyway had they both been legal.

McCaw has detached and the ball appears to be out. It is definitely not
under Reid's feet, because if it were, Reid would have to bend straight
down to pick it up. But if you look at this frame...

...you can see that Reid turns and bends to his left, to pick it up, therefore the ball wasn't
under his feet, therefore it could have been out under 20.10 (a). It was hard
to say for sure whether it was out. If you watch the video, the scrum
moves to the right just before McCaw detached and Reid bends down to
his left to pick up the ball.

There are 18 frames of video between the first and last frame, which is .72 of a second. I challenge any referee to judge that while moving, at ground level and normal speed with no replay.