I fear I may be opening up a slightly debatable point, but with my inability to find my copy of the Continuum strewn around my room, and my debate with a coach today, I feel I need to ask my fellow referees.
Was refereeing a game this morning, which was a re-run of the county final from a month or two ago. It was a competitive game, especially so in the scrums, with both sides often pushing each other off the ball. Now because there was a lot of pushing, scrums often got wheeled. However, on more than three occasions, the scrum was taken against the head, and then it went on to wheeled. I then awarded the scrum to the side in possesson after the wheel, believing that the so called "turnover law" was not applicable, and that therefore it was side in possession.
However, come post-game and as I walked off the pitch, the coach of the home side (The County champions who incidentally lost the game comfortably) asked me how far the scrum was allowed to wheel, to which I told him 45 degrees. He then went on to ear bash me as to the fact that the side who put it in, put it in again after a wheel! Being slightly unsure, but taken aback by this, I defended my point, saying that it was the opposite to adult rugby, with no turnover, to which he cut in saying this wasn't adult rugby. After trying to draw comparisons to adult rugby, and the fact that a side putting in can actually put in again if the ball is taken against the head and then wheeled, but to no avail as he kept cutting me off, I was told that I should read the Laws before I come out on a Sunday!
So the question is, am I misinterpreting it? On reading the laws I think I am still right, though it is not explicitly there to say I am. Or do I need to re-read the laws before coming out on a Sunday?
Your views please.
Peter
Was refereeing a game this morning, which was a re-run of the county final from a month or two ago. It was a competitive game, especially so in the scrums, with both sides often pushing each other off the ball. Now because there was a lot of pushing, scrums often got wheeled. However, on more than three occasions, the scrum was taken against the head, and then it went on to wheeled. I then awarded the scrum to the side in possesson after the wheel, believing that the so called "turnover law" was not applicable, and that therefore it was side in possession.
However, come post-game and as I walked off the pitch, the coach of the home side (The County champions who incidentally lost the game comfortably) asked me how far the scrum was allowed to wheel, to which I told him 45 degrees. He then went on to ear bash me as to the fact that the side who put it in, put it in again after a wheel! Being slightly unsure, but taken aback by this, I defended my point, saying that it was the opposite to adult rugby, with no turnover, to which he cut in saying this wasn't adult rugby. After trying to draw comparisons to adult rugby, and the fact that a side putting in can actually put in again if the ball is taken against the head and then wheeled, but to no avail as he kept cutting me off, I was told that I should read the Laws before I come out on a Sunday!
So the question is, am I misinterpreting it? On reading the laws I think I am still right, though it is not explicitly there to say I am. Or do I need to re-read the laws before coming out on a Sunday?
Your views please.
Peter