Scrumhalf Questions

[Donal1988]

I was refereeing a 3rds XV game at the weekend. During the coin toss I said to both captains that if they had questions ask them now. One captain says "I assume you'll be penalising scrumhalves who are stepping between the flanker and number 8 at scrumtime" Other captain says "oh yes actually referees never pick up on that" :drool:

My response was "Guys, what I need is the scrumhalf to stay behind the ball and not interfere with his opposite number or any of the backrows". Both captains seemed satisfied with the answer. Is stepping between backrow and #8 an offense in itself.

Also just making sure I was right. Red #9 had a tactic when defensive scrum in his own 22. He would not join the scrum and instead stay 5m back with his backs. Other team captain complained several times. I adv him that it was fine - number 9 has remained with the backs the entire time.

 

[ckuxmann]

Also just making sure I was right. Red #9 had a tactic when defensive scrum in his own 22. He would not join the scrum and instead stay 5m back with his backs. Other team captain complained several times. I adv him that it was fine - number 9 has remained with the backs the entire time.

Correct, he either is at the scrum or he is back five. After the ball is thrown in assuming he is at the scrum at that time, he may then go to the back foot of his side, and then may go sideline to sideline if he so chooses.

 

[stuart3826]

I was refereeing a 3rds XV game at the weekend. During the coin toss I said to both captains that if they had questions ask them now. One captain says "I assume you'll be penalising scrumhalves who are stepping between the flanker and number 8 at scrumtime" Other captain says "oh yes actually referees never pick up on that" :drool:

My response was "Guys, what I need is the scrumhalf to stay behind the ball and not interfere with his opposite number or any of the backrows". Both captains seemed satisfied with the answer. Is stepping between backrow and #8 an offense in itself.

Also just making sure I was right. Red #9 had a tactic when defensive scrum in his own 22. He would not join the scrum and instead stay 5m back with his backs. Other team captain complained several times. I adv him that it was fine - number 9 has remained with the backs the entire time.

I've heard an elite ref (Chris White IIRC) say "If you can legally get into the pocket between flanker & 8 that's fine, but I'm not sure how you plan to do it without going offside!"

 

[Taff]

I've heard an elite ref (Chris White IIRC) say "If you can legally get into the pocket between flanker & 8 that's fine, but I'm not sure how you plan to do it without going offside!"

I've heard that mentioned several times, but TBH I've never understood it.

AFAIK the defending SH has to stay within 1m of the scrum, so the area he is allowed to be in is the same shape as the scrum but in effect he has a 1m wide path around it. As long as he keeps both feet behind the ball (ie he stays onside) what's stopping him just walking round the Flanker in the 1m path?

 

[crossref]

because the flanker's back foot will be behind the line of the ball, so he can't get round?

 

[Taff]

because the flanker's back foot will be behind the line of the ball, so he can't get round?

Fair point while the ball is deep in the scrum, but unlikely when the ball is at the No8s feet though. :wink:

 

[Deeps]

I've heard an elite ref (Chris White IIRC) say "If you can legally get into the pocket between flanker & 8 that's fine, but I'm not sure how you plan to do it without going offside!"

That is exactly what I brief beforehand.

 

[Dixie]

I've heard an elite ref (Chris White IIRC) say "If you can legally get into the pocket between flanker & 8 that's fine, but I'm not sure how you plan to do it without going offside!"

That is exactly what I brief beforehand.

Me too - though adding "... offside or manhandling the flanker". It makes life a lot easier if you've planted the seed of doubt there - even if the SH does htink he can do it.

Taff, you are right about the ball beign at 8's feet, but theSH will usually try earlier, so as to be there when the ball ARRIVES at 8's feet. If the ball is already there, the oppo SH can distribute unhindered and/or the #8 can unbind and go.

 

[Tryer]

AFAIK the defending SH has to stay within 1m of the scrum, so the area he is allowed to be in is the same shape as the scrum but in effect he has a 1m wide path around it. As long as he keeps both feet behind the ball (ie he stays onside) what's stopping him just walking round the Flanker in the 1m path?

My understanding is the SH either stays at the putting in side and stays behind the ball. If the SH chooses to go to the other side, after the ball has been put in, his offside line is the backfoot of his players in the scrum.

I also coach an U15's team and SH's can not follow the ball, the tunnel is the OS line. However, we defend our blinside with the SH moving around to the backfoot. Our SH was penalised for this yesterday and he was told not allowed. I asked him to approach the ref and ask about it at HT. Ref explained it in more detail, which I could overhear. I wasn't going to mention it to ref until afterwards in the bar but approached me and explained it again and that he was certain as it had been discussed etc with other refs and he had read the law. I said I was fine with that but would speak to him afterwards. He had to get away quickly.

Not a big issue for me from the game perspective but I allow this when I reffing. So he was "right" yesterday But who is wrong?

 

[Dixie]

Not a big issue for me from the game perspective but I allow this when I reffing. So he was "right" yesterday But who is wrong?

The ref was wrong yesterday - and that's the only reason he was right on the day. As we all know, the ref is always right - especially when he's wrong.

 

[crossref]

My understanding is the SH either stays at the putting in side and stays behind the ball. If the SH chooses to go to the other side, after the ball has been put in, his offside line is the backfoot of his players in the scrum.

I also coach an U15's team and SH's can not follow the ball, the tunnel is the OS line. However, we defend our blinside with the SH moving around to the backfoot. Our SH was penalised for this yesterday and he was told not allowed. I asked him to approach the ref and ask about it at HT. Ref explained it in more detail, which I could overhear. I wasn't going to mention it to ref until afterwards in the bar but approached me and explained it again and that he was certain as it had been discussed etc with other refs and he had read the law. I said I was fine with that but would speak to him afterwards. He had to get away quickly.

Not a big issue for me from the game perspective but I allow this when I reffing. So he was "right" yesterday But who is wrong?

my understanding is that
- when the ball is put in he must be either be there at the middle (ie normal) or 5m back with the backs
- once the ball is in he can retire to the back-foot, but then he can't come forward again
- he can also retire all the way to 5m back, but can't come forward again.

I am surprised that SHs at his age group don't do this more often.
Given you can't follow the ball I would have thought a better defensive position than stranded at the mid-line is usually at the hindmost feet, either right behind the #8 covering both sides, or move 2m sideways and cover the blind side. But you rarely see it. I think it's becasue it doesn't occur to coaches.

 

[crossref]

I also coach an U15's team and SH's can not follow the ball, the tunnel is the OS line. However, we defend our blinside with the SH moving around to the backfoot. Our SH was penalised for this yesterday and he was told not allowed. ?

out of interest - did he actually give a PK? or just tell him not to?

 

[Casey Bee]

I've heard an elite ref (Chris White IIRC) say "If you can legally get into the pocket between flanker & 8 that's fine, but I'm not sure how you plan to do it without going offside!"

As a former scrum half I find this sort of sweeping statement out of order.

The SH needs to stay behind the ball, if he does this then fine. Too much presumption seems to be made on the ability of the 'put in' team. Who knows that their flankers are going to be bound effectively to impede (legally) SH? Who knows that the No. 8 and his SH are going to move the ball away quickly and effectively?

OK, the quote is probably valid for elite and high end games but still, it seems to me to be presumptious to give undue reference and warning against it. Let the SH do his defensive job as he's trained for. If he's offside ping him.

 

[OB..]

If the #8 realises and moves the ball forward, the s/h is in trouble.

As a former scrum half I find this sort of sweeping statement out of order.

The SH needs to stay behind the ball, if he does this then fine. Too much presumption seems to be made on the ability of the 'put in' team. Who knows that their flankers are going to be bound effectively to impede (legally) SH? Who knows that the No. 8 and his SH are going to move the ball away quickly and effectively?

OK, the quote is probably valid for elite and high end games but still, it seems to me to be presumptious to give undue reference and warning against it. Let the SH do his defensive job as he's trained for. If he's offside ping him.

I see nothing wrong with a preventative statement in response to a question. I prefer it to marginal offside decisions.

 

[Dixie]

my understanding is that
...
- once the ball is in he can retire to the back-foot, but then he can't come forward again.

crossref, I can't see why a 14 year-old #9 who retires to the back foot but stays on the put-in side close to the scrum can't return to the tunnel. But I agree that there's very little point staying at the tunnel - the oppo would be daft to break that way.

 

[Dixie]

Let the SH do his defensive job as he's trained for. If he's offside ping him.

Fair enough - but it comes down to playing "Gotcha!". If I know that my interpretation is different from many other refs, why not tell the teams how I am going to ref? Is it really fair to wait until the defensive SH infringes just in front of the posts and gives away 3 points that last week's ref may not have awarded? Those three points may be the difference between winning and losing at the end of the game - and by awarding them, you've given the opposing SH the free information about your interpretation that you denied the other fella - seems unfair and inequitable to me.

 

[SimonSmith]

USA Rugby to the rescue:

Defending scrumhalves are not to position themselves in the ‘pocket’ area between the flanker and #8, and should be managed by the referee before
penalizing. PK

 

[Phil E]

USA Rugby to the rescue:

Defending scrumhalves are not to position themselves in the ‘pocket’ area between the flanker and #8, and should be managed by the referee before
penalizing. PK

Law reference please?

Oh wait,.........USA rugby,..........they have their own laws don't they?

 

[stuart3826]

crossref, I can't see why a 14 year-old #9 who retires to the back foot but stays on the put-in side close to the scrum can't return to the tunnel. But I agree that there's very little point staying at the tunnel - the oppo would be daft to break that way.

Daft is as daft does. How many times have you seen a slight clockwise wheel so that the defence back row is taken out of harms way a little followed by a pick and go to the right, straight into the arms of the defence the engine room so carefully shifted?

 

[Tryer]

out of interest - did he actually give a PK? or just tell him not to?

A PK!!!