Substitutes

[David J.]

I'm confused by the substitution rule. If a team has a roster of 22 players, they need 5 players to be STE for the front row. Can a team start all 5 of those players (say with an STE hooker at flank and an STE prop at lock) and then in the course of the match replace/substitute 7 players on the field?

The two laws that seem to conflict are:

3.4
...
"A team can substitute up to two front row players and up to five
other players. Substitutions may only be made when the ball is
dead and with the permission of the referee. "

3.5 (d) "The replacement of a front row forward must come from suitably
trained and experienced players who started the match or from the
nominated replacements."

 

[Dickie E]

basically what we do here is verify that 5 players are marked on the team sheet pre-game as STE iirespective of whether they in the starting line-up or not. If so, 22 in the sqaud is allowed.

 

[OB..]

Yes, it is the same here.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Dickie - same here in England - teams must mark their 5 (or 4 for 18 man squad) FR players on team sheet, usually flanker (but I have seen centres and wings marked as FR replacements in the past).

 

[nealed]

so how come in internationals we end up with non contested scrums?
is it because of substitutions which are not for injury but tactical?
in that case i would have thought that tactically substituted front row should come back on
does that happen?
what was the cause of the uncontested scrum between E v Scot because i missed the game

 

[Simon Thomas]

tactically substituted FR can be brought back on in case of blood injury, sin bin (with another player going off temporarily) or injury to FR and all FR replacements being used already (eg two substitutions / replacements have been made).

a replaced (injured) FR cannot be used to come back on.

that is why as 4th official we have to make sure we have FR changes noted as substitute or replacement on our logging sheet.

 

[FlipFlop]

the England game UC's were brought about by injuries.

Vickery left the field obviously concussed - in the First Half.
Julian white then left a few minutes from teh end, with a leg injury.

 

[Brian Ravenhill]

But with a squad of 22 on both the first and second request for a replacement a STE must be found. The only excuse I can think of is that he is not STE at prop but hooker.

 

[nealed]

Hmm
so 2 hookers = only 3 props
therein lies the problem
?need to define "prop" rather than hooker
other option is to have less emphasis on scrum = RL

actually i reffed a game on sat which was all NC as teams were light on numbers
good game 25 24
we all enjoyed ourselves
no crooked feeds
no collapsed scrums
fast and open (L13)
no injuries
Hmmmm

 

[David J.]

Again, just to clarify...A team has 22 players on their roster sheet. 5 starting players are marked STE, none of the 7 replacements are. Can all 7 replacements come on the field due to tactical changes?

I guess I'm asking if there's a difference between the number on the roster and the number that can play (a distinction made in 7s) and there seems to be some mixing of the terms replacements and substitutes in Law 3.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Yes all 7 can come on (subject to any local competition regulations). By definition, if all seven are used the nominated FR replacements have to step up to FR and leave their starting positions.

 

[Dixie]

So let's crystallise this a bit.

England assert that Mark Cueto and Ugo Monye are STE front-row players as well as starting wingers. The bench includes a mass of fast, flanker-type players and no STE FR players.

Scenario 1: Three quarters of the way through the match, Vickery is concussed, so Cueto takes his place at prop, and a fast flanker-type takes up his station on the wing. So far, so good. However, Cueto is nt quite so strong as he's been made out to be and has to come off with a neck injury due to all that scrummaging. He's replaced by Ugo Monye, with another fast flanker-type taking station on the other wing. All is good.

Scenario 2: as above, but England not going so well. At half time, all seven replacements are made - including replacing the two wingers (the STE FR replacements). Three quarters of the way through, Vickery is concussed. Cueto can be allowed back to replace him. After Cueto is damaged, Monye can come back to replace him. All is good.

Scenario 3: Half-time, Cueto is substituted due to injury, and the other 6 replacements are also made - including Monye. When Vickery is concussed, Monye can return to replace him. When Monye is damaged, there are no STE FR replacements available, so England are unable to meet the requirement that they should be able to suffer at least 2 FR injuries without going uncontested. I don't know whether that is viewed as a problem (it would seem so from the wording of the law), and if so what sanction might be applied. Can anyone elucidate?

 

[ex-lucy]

be careful
regs state (in England anyway) that at first instance of asking you must have a repl fit and ready.
So, if your FR repl is playing and gets injured and replaced, then your prop gets injured.. you dont now have a FR repl fit and ready so you will forfeit the match - according to RFU rules and regs.
so, yes you can have 22 with 7 non FR repls on bench if your FR repls are starting players but read the regs first ...

 

[David J.]

I agree that in Scenarios 1 & 2 all is good. I also think Scenario 3 is fine as well.

I assume the wording at issue is:

3.5 (c)
"When 19, 20, 21 or 22 players are nominated in a team there must
be five players who can play in the front row to ensure that on the
first occasion that a replacement hooker is required and, on the
first occasion that a replacement prop forward is required, the
team can continue to play safely with contested scrums. "

The "ensure" bit in the law is a bit awkward.

What if a team starts with 1 replacement prop and 1 replacement hooker on the bench and the replacement hooker trips over his laces and breaks an ankle? The team can't replace the starting hooker if he gets injured.

Local unions may rule differently of course.

Thanks all for the input.

 

[Simon Thomas]

Dixie - I have no idea what you are drinking today, but can you send some over to me !

In answer to your question - if I read it right through the purple haze.

One of the FR replacements (Cueto) has been injured whilst not playing in FR - he can't come back on as he is replaced (not substituted). Therefore they haven't been able to provide a FR replacement on secondoccasion and so are in contravention of regs. One for the Comps Committee me thinks !

 

[backrow]

similar situation happened at N1 level this weekend.

22 man squad, starting front row consisted of 3 recognised props, 2 named front row replacements 1 prop, 1 hooker, who has also played this season as tight head.

So 5 nominated front row players in match squad, 3 on field and 2 replacements and with the experience of the starting players and replacements normal requirments for laws were met.

I wasn't involved in the game but saw the teams sheets on Sunday morning when in 1st team changing room as coach to U21 develpment squad, nearly c****ed myself when I first saw the sheet thinking this can't be right.

So was interested to read the thread in the forum.

By the way not all replacements were used in this game

 

[Brian Ravenhill]

Backrow

Tell us what happened in the game!!!!!!!

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Had a league match last year with 3 replacements each, the designated front row replacements were both starting fly halfs but that's Cumbria for you!!!

 

[Dixie]

Had a league match last year with 3 replacements each, the designated front row replacements were both starting fly halfs but that's Cumbria for you!!!

Looks like Andy Goode may have been trying out for the Brive front row this year!

 

[backrow]

Backrow

Tell us what happened in the game!!!!!!!

Sorry for late reply, not on forum before now.

Dont really know as I wasn't at the game, assessing a ref at another game, only saw the team sheets the day after in 1st team dressing room, but I do know not all replacements were used, including the recognised hooker in the replacements.

Home side who only had 2 FR replacements lost heavily 0-64.

I now know the reason for "lack" of front row cover is injury and retirement of players 3 FR injured and one retired that week due to long term injury.

This stretched the Fr resources as normal Fr replacemnts inuse and those stepping up from 2nd team could be considered not suitable for this level of game.