Red catch ball at a lineout. A maul is formed. Red drive forward. The maul partially turns. Three Blue players end up on the Red side of the maul. Always bound in/on. The ball is popped out to the Red S/H. The nearest blue player on the opposite side of the maul releases his bind and tackles the Red S/H. Decision?
[Maul] Turning maul
- Thread starter Balones
- Start date
Pablo
Referees in England
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,413
- Post Likes
- 112
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 6
Agreed. And shout as much too, so there's no doubt - while it's legal, it looked odd, so a bit of proactive communication can work wonders.
Perhaps OB could confirm if this changed.
In my school days (back in the late 70s) I seem to remember being told that players in a Maul could push but couldn't pull. Ie if you weren't pushing, you had to make an effort to leave the Maul and either move back to the general offside line or re-enter the Maul again legally.
In my school days (back in the late 70s) I seem to remember being told that players in a Maul could push but couldn't pull. Ie if you weren't pushing, you had to make an effort to leave the Maul and either move back to the general offside line or re-enter the Maul again legally.
The maul was first defined in 1967. In 1979 it was made illegal to wilfully collapse a maul, or to try and pull an opponent out of a maul. It may be this last one you are remembering.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 16,084
- Post Likes
- 2,350
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 8
Another thing that we see all the time at the top level. Doesn't even warrant a preventive shout, let alone a penalty.
I think we are in agreement here. I posted the situation because it is one of those that looks wrong and just wondered if anyone did think it should be penalised - just like the opposition and a sizable crowd watching on who all made their opinions known! Fortunately the referee was more knowledgeable than all of them and play was allowed to continue.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2008
- Messages
- 16,084
- Post Likes
- 2,350
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 8
To be greeted by shouts of "how did he get there" and the defence trying to pull him out of the maul! :biggrin:
didds
Resident Club Coach
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Messages
- 12,053
- Post Likes
- 1,785
mcroker
Rugby Expert
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2018
- Messages
- 362
- Post Likes
- 113
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 10
I though going through the middle was fine, as in that scenario the 'swimmer' is caught in to the maul.
[LAWS]All players in a maul must be caught in or bound to it and not just alongside it.[/LAWS]
[LAWS]All players in a maul must be caught in or bound to it and not just alongside it.[/LAWS]
Decorily
Coach/Referee
- Joined
- May 3, 2013
- Messages
- 1,563
- Post Likes
- 425
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
Well if he is going through the centre and is caught in then he is not a 'swimmer' as I understand it.
'Swimmers' move up the side by having 1 arm bound at all times but change the bind/arm as they go.
Arabcheif
Player or Coach
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2018
- Messages
- 680
- Post Likes
- 74
- Current Referee grade:
- Level 1
I played in a game with there was a line out (to the opposition). They caught the ball and we all bound on and formed a Maul. We went backwards for a few meters then we stopped the momentum. The ref then told me I was offside and needed to leave the Maul. I had been bound on legally from the start and remained bound throughout. I didn't understand, but obeyed. Ended up losing a try as they were able to get the Maul going another 15 - 20m. Was that a right call?
How can we tell? I presume the referee saw it differently.