It's in the Six Nations talking points thread. The consensus seems to be that the TMO should have ruled offside since he moved forward after Biggar's kick before being played onside.
Personally I can see why the referee didn't give that penalty (and he should have been able to see it without the TMO). If we penalised every scrum half who started following up a kick before being put onside (assuming they have no material effect on the game) that'd be a lot of penalties!
I never thought I'd say this, but I think Clancy did quite well, apart from a bit of trouble at the scrums he couldn't fix.
I agree - and I liked his approach of NOT penalising the scrums unless he was sure of an offence, rather than just guessing - I think it made it harder for the front rows to con the ref, and kept them honest.
And he was at least consistent re the offside: later in the game there the entire Scottish team were clearly advancing ahead of the kicker, and there was no penalty for offside.
Having thought about it, and now watched it again - thanks for the link BTW - I think the 10m rule is confusing and complicated - you have to keep several different things in your head at the same time: was he ahead of the kicker, was he within 10m of the landing zone, did someone put him onside, did he retire immediately or stay still, erm erm erm... and you've got to make a split-second call. Do people find it easy to ref this in real time, or are there typically lots of mistakes and missed calls?
And in any case, what's the point of it - surely the rule preventing an offside attacker from tackling the catcher before he'd run 5m was (is?) sufficient... or am I out of date?
Help!!
On another note, is it just me or has there been less time being spent in scrums and resets over these first two weekends of the six nations - compared to say the RWC or previous six nations? It certainly does seem to be moving along quicker.
