[Maul] uncontested maul

[ChuckieB]

Surely could be called obstruction even if it wasn't a long arm transfer! Could be seen as a pk offence even if most would perhaps call it accidental offside.

 

[OB..]

Surely could be called obstruction even if it wasn't a long arm transfer! Could be seen as a pk offence even if most would perhaps call it accidental offside.

AIUI WorldRugby deliberately designated it as NOT being a PK offence because of the uncertainty involved with teams trying to read their opponent's intentions.

 

[smeagol]

Surely could be called obstruction even if it wasn't a long arm transfer! Could be seen as a pk offence even if most would perhaps call it accidental offside.

Allowing the non-throwing team to bait a PK is not good for the game. Allowing the throwing team (that is trying to actually play rugby) to respond to the tactic by using the ball immediately seems the most equitable solution.

 

[crossref]

IRB (as it was then) issues a law clarfication 2014 covering non engagement in a maul following a lineout. Can't find it on the WR site, but this is what we have on our soc. website.

[laws]IRB clarification for teams choosing not to engage at the lineout
• if the defenders in the line out choose to not engage the line out drive by leaving the line out as a group, PK to attacking team;
• if the defenders in the line out choose to not engage the line out drive by simply opening up a gap and creating space and not leaving the line out, the following process would be followed:

• attackers would need to keep the ball with the front player, if they were to drive down-field (therefore play on, general play - defenders could either engage to form a maul, or tackle the ball carrier only);
• if they had immediately passed it back to the player at the rear of the group, the referee would tell them to use it which they must do immediately...
• if they drove forward with the ball at the back (did not release the ball), the referee would award a scrum for accidental offside rather than PK for obstruction.[/laws]

So the OP scenario is ... Play on

 

[Decorily]

So the OP scenario is ... Play on

Can't determine that since we don't have enough information...we need to know what happened next in the OP scenario!

 

[thepercy]

Does the attempted sack of the jumper create a maul?

 

[Decorily]

Does the attempted sack of the jumper create a maul?

No.
It also needs to happen immediately.