[Scrum] Standing up in the scrum

[Thunderhorse1986]

This post on SA refs interested me - the third point made here: http://www.sareferees.com/laws/view/2831088/

We routinely seem to see penalties for standing up in the scrum. What are these actually being given for at elite level as standing up is not a punishable offense? Losing binding may be one option?

Would like to hear people's thoughts about this at both elite level and lower down - how would you deal with this kind of development at a scrum?

 

[crossref]

[LAWS]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[/LAWS]

?

 

[talbazar]

One of my favorite...
I would use 20.2.(a) Players being in a position to shove.
But it is not enough, because the sanction for that is a free kick, not a PK.

The trick to me is that the ref that penalise this (and potentially give a PT or even a YC at times) will have to consider that the team / FR / Player is standing up on purpose.

Once that is "accepted" make your pick:
10.2.(a) intentionally offending 20.2.(a)
Or
10.4.(m) Acts contrary to good sportsmanship

I prefer using 10.2.(a) in a report (if I have to write one).

Cheers,
Pierre.

PS: Now I can click on the link and read SA Ref

 

[Thunderhorse1986]

[LAWS]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[/LAWS]

?

So if the hooker's head pops out but he's still fully bound to both his props then we do not penalise? That seems fair but it feels like the expectation is for a penalty, especially given the kind of things we see at elite level...

Can a player be stood up and still bound? Might be hard for a prop but still feasible?

 

[Ian_Cook]

One thing that really annoys me is that very often, a front row player will stand up because he is being driven upwards; and driving upwards IS a PK infringement.......

[LAWS]Law 20.8 (i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]


... but often, referees will PK the player who stood up and have missed seeing what caused him to do so. This happens at lot at elite level too.

If a prop stands up and you see his opponent's head is in the middle of his chest, above the sternum, its almost a sure fire certainty that the opponent has driven the prop upwards. Its quite obvious when a LHP does this because he has to turn inwards (also illegal), but not so easy to spot a THP infringing in this way.

 

[Rushforth]

One thing that really annoys me is that very often, a front row player will stand up because he is being driven upwards; and driving upwards IS a PK infringement....

... but often, referees will PK the player who stood up and have missed seeing what caused him to do so. This happens at lot at elite level too.

In the amateur game, the job of a prop used to be to make it difficult for their opponent. That is still the case to some degree, at least at grassroots, but clearly not at the top level.

I'm glad to see that in games I've refereed that there is no appeal for a penalty from either side when the scrum pops up, but I can't say the same for what pro matches I am aware of.

You are correct in how difficult it can be how to spot the first offender, and sometimes there isn't even one (this more likely when scrum collapses though, with muddy ground).

 

[Paule23]

Difficult one to judge. He is either coming up and popping out as he is being driven up (as per Iain's post) therefore penalty to him, or he is popping up as he can't take the pressure (from the opposition and his own locks/back row). The latter is where the issue is, but I'd be happy to penalise on the grounds of binding.

It is not something you see too often at my level. More issues from scrums collapsing as people lose their footing under pressure.

 

[The Fat]

This post on SA refs interested me - the third point made here: http://www.sareferees.com/laws/view/2831088/

We routinely seem to see penalties for standing up in the scrum. What are these actually being given for at elite level as standing up is not a punishable offense? Losing binding may be one option?

Would like to hear people's thoughts about this at both elite level and lower down - how would you deal with this kind of development at a scrum?

I have previously sought clarification from the ARU on this one and have been told that the PK is for not maintaining the bind by FR players.
I am yet to see a referee not blow and allow the scrum to continue going backwards as per this year's law amendments.
I think most refs will continue to penalise as per current convention to avoid a nasty collapse of a scrum going backwards at a rate of knots

 

[damo]

One thing that really annoys me is that very often, a front row player will stand up because he is being driven upwards; and driving upwards IS a PK infringement.......

[LAWS]Law 20.8 (i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or afterwards. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]


... but often, referees will PK the player who stood up and have missed seeing what caused him to do so. This happens at lot at elite level too.

If a prop stands up and you see his opponent's head is in the middle of his chest, above the sternum, its almost a sure fire certainty that the opponent has driven the prop upwards. Its quite obvious when a LHP does this because he has to turn inwards (also illegal), but not so easy to spot a THP infringing in this way.

I agree with this, in fact I would replace the "often" with "invariably". Elite referees for some reason are not concerned about props (almost always the LH) driving upwards and inwards. Most of the time they award the PK against the TH or hooker for standing up, in my view they are very often plain wrong.

But I am prepared to admit I am no scrum expert, so there you go.

 

[Pegleg]

I have previously sought clarification from the ARU on this one and have been told that the PK is for not maintaining the bind by FR players.

If this really is the case, could we not see senior referees give the correct secondary signal? I suspect that this is a smokescreen.

You can push when standing. Yes I agree you will be less effective but you can push. So "being in a position to push" is a red herring.

Standing up under pressure is a safety valve. No prop wants to stand up. It is not in the psych of a prop to "admit defeat". Propping is about disruption of their ball and protecting our ball. No matter what you level that's what you are trying to do. It's the bid physical battle of the game.

If a prop stands up it is very rare for that scrum to actually collapse. So unless there is real illegality involved (and if there is it is more likely the other prop that is at fault) just play on or reset.

 

[TheBFG]

20.3 (a) seems to cover it, I guess you could argue they're not "binding" correctly as their shoulder may not be in contact? :chin:

Agree with Ian on the "driving up" and when reffing a dominant scrum, I always ensure they don't take the p!$$

 

[ChrisR]

If a player just stands up I see no reason to stop play. I don't see it as a penalty offense. If he is forced up then his opponent is at fault.

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.

20.8 (i) Lifting or forcing an opponent up. A front row player must not lift an opponent in the air, or force an opponent upwards out of the scrum, either when the ball is being thrown in or
afterwards. This is dangerous play.

The 2016 law mod to Law 8 Advantage removed the requirement for the referee to whistle if a front row pops up. Also if the front row goes down. Thus allowing the scrums to finish successfully.

However, the scrum laws were not modified to reflect the change:

20.3 (h) Scrum collapse. If a scrum collapses, the referee must blow the whistle immediately so that players stop pushing.

I emailed Laws@rfu.com regards the inconsistency and the reply was:

"The RFU has written to world rugby stating it is a serious omission in law 8 to leave out collapsed scrum when advantage should not be played. Northern Hemisphere Referee Societies have been instructed not to make reference to the 2016 Law book until the commencement of next season. There are many 'discrepancies' where clarification is sought."

No advantage can be played if a front row player is forced up so that he is bound in but his feet are off the ground, ie. 'stapled'. That is a clear infringement by his opponent and should be PKd immediately, yet I saw in Canada vs. New Zealand 2011 WC the entire Canadian front row were lifted from the ground but no penalty was called.

 

[The Fat]

20.3 (a) seems to cover it, I guess you could argue they're not "binding" correctly as their shoulder may not be in contact? :chin:

Agree with Ian on the "driving up" and when reffing a dominant scrum, I always ensure they don't take the p!$$

20.3(a) was the law reference I got from the ARU.

 

[Dickie E]

No advantage can be played if a front row player is forced up so that he is bound in but his feet are off the ground, ie. 'stapled'. That is a clear infringement by his opponent and should be PKd immediately, yet I saw in Canada vs. New Zealand 2011 WC the entire Canadian front row were lifted from the ground but no penalty was called.

Maybe it's not the clear infringement you think it is

 

[Pegleg]

No advantage can be played if a front row player is forced up so that he is bound in but his feet are off the ground, ie. 'stapled'. That is a clear infringement by his opponent and should be PKd immediately, yet I saw in Canada vs. New Zealand 2011 WC the entire Canadian front row were lifted from the ground but no penalty was called.

The referee must blow the whistle he does not have to penalise. Who do you think caused it? The opposition or his own second /back row combined with his own poor body position? Or a bit of both?

 

[Ian_Cook]

... if a front row player is forced up so that he is bound in but his feet are off the ground, ie. 'stapled'. That is a clear infringement by his opponent and should be PKd immediately, yet I saw in Canada vs. New Zealand 2011 WC the entire Canadian front row were lifted from the ground but no penalty was called.

I strongly disagree with this.

A prop being stapled is not likely to be a "clear a infringement by his opponent". It is more likely to happen when the prop is allowed to bind with his head lower than his hips (i.e., not crouching low enough). leading to his own locks binding too low on his thighs. The result is that his arse is driven upwards by the pressure.

I would say it is near impossible for one prop to lift an opponent up so that the opponent's arse is pointing upwards. Only props wearing a red cape and a blue bodysuit with a big red & yellow "S" on the front could do that!

 

[ChrisR]

I strongly disagree with this. A prop being stapled is not likely to be a "clear a infringement by his opponent". It is more likely to happen when the prop is allowed to bind with his head lower than his hips (i.e., not crouching low enough). leading to his own locks binding too low on his thighs. The result is that his arse is driven upwards by the pressure.I would say it is near impossible for one prop to lift an opponent up so that the opponent's arse is pointing upwards. Only props wearing a red cape and a blue bodysuit with a big red & yellow "S" on the front could do that!

I should not have said "clear infringement" and I agree that there is more than one way to get stapled. "Head below hips" will get a prop staring at his kneecaps but not necessarily with his feet off the ground. Dangerous situation but not the fault of his opponent and not a PK either way. Call for a reset. In the days of CTPE if one side got a substantial hit and the props got rocked back on their heels then when the pressure came on they could get stapled. If their ops got under them then their butts get driven straight up with no escape.Next time I get some WiFi I'll look for the classic example. Current engagement protocol should pretty much eliminate that scenario.

 

[Dickie E]

I sometimes see a prop kind of stand up and push with his chest, particularly a LH who is trying to dominate beyond his ability to do so. Bind hasn't been broken and no-one is being lifted. Is this legal?

 

[Rushforth]

I sometimes see a prop kind of stand up and push with his chest, particularly a LH who is trying to dominate beyond his ability to do so. Bind hasn't been broken and no-one is being lifted. Is this legal?

From the way you describe it, it is incredibly poor technique, but the LH is the one who can "kind of" pop without it being particularly deliberate from either side.

At my level, I often have to coach both props involved on correct and straight binding, after a sharp whistle, of course. It doesn't sound particularly dangerous, but having been a hooker, I don't want that kind of thing going on.