[Scrum] When is the No8 fair game?

[didds]

Of course he'll be a bit slower if digging further into the scrum, but the further in the ball is, the further the SH has to come around to tackle him, so surely it should offset?

But if the scrum is over once he has picked the ball up - its even "easier " for the SH to get an obstruction call presumably?

Whatever the answers to all of this it seems yet another law change/variation/trial that had less than half a nano second's thought put into it...

didds

 

[ChuckieB]

As soon as he's picked the ball off the floor the scrum is over so if he tries to stay bound to players infront of him we have an offside/obstruction scenario anyway - so he won't want to stay bound and in reality he will want to get away quickly from the base whether he is picking it up from 2nd row or his own feet? Of course he'll be a bit slower if digging further into the scrum, but the further in the ball is, the further the SH has to come around to tackle him, so surely it should offset? I really don't see how this will be a problem.

For me, no digging allowed. The scrum is still very much in play. It must be a clear pick up opportunity.

Should the scrum go to ground and the ball is looking to be at risk of becoming unavailable, then in line with the acceptance that if it is there and a bit of digging might just get it away quickly and safely then I should be ok to give it a moment.

 

[crossref]

For me, no digging allowed. The scrum is still very much in play. It must be a clear pick up opportunity..

That seems like last season Law
The Law change, it seems to me, is a license to go digging. As far as the second row anyway

 

[ChrisR]

The key for me is to require the 8 to unbind before he picks up the ball. The ball is accessible if it is between the lock's feet, no digging required.

 

[VM75]

VM75 see post 2 !

Seen it, & don't like it.

It seems to suggest that if the ball [in the 2nd rows feet area] is lifted 1cm from the ground by the 8 then the 9 can immediately pounce on the 8 & effectively clog up the release from the scrum, expedited removal is IMO exactly what this law trial [alligns with the recent 'not stepping over the 7's legs to disrupt the 8' ] is seeking to achieve rather than v.v.

IMO it makes far more sense to give 8 a full uncontested opportunity to extract it fully, without 9 clambering all over him.

I want to see Clear removal.

 

[crossref]

Yes that view was popular in the society meeting discussion.
The issue boils down to : is scrum over when he unbinds , or scrum over when he lifts it.
No consensus was reached hence the follow up email I quoted

Personally I think the #8 should only be able to pick it up when it's at his feet, but obviously that boat has sailed

 

[chbg]

As the Law Trial is placed against Handling in the Scrum (20.9(b)), rather than Ending the Scrum (20.10), I see the error of my ways. And it is specifically the No 8, rather than the hindmost player.

Pandora's Box if a team want to exploit it (clearing the interpretation with the referee before the match).