PDA

View Full Version : Wheeling. Will it make a comeback?



ChrisR
15-01-15, 13:01
From SA Rugby Referees video clip 7, wheeling the scrum.

http://www.sareferees.com/laws/view/2830740/

Watch the clip and read the text.

The 'Boks set up (3-4-0 bind) with the clear intention to wheel the scrum clockwise and do so by crabbing to the left

This is the most heartening evidence that wheeling can make a comeback.

Out with 'walking around'! Out with the bogus 'pulling by the prop'. Out with the non-existent requirement for the drive forward! :clap:

I can only hope that the light will shine in the US of A.

Phil E
15-01-15, 13:01
What about the green No8 / Blind side flanker releasing his bind?

That seemed to be the first offence to me. I also didn't see the "Welsh scrum disintegrate" as the text states??

Jacko
15-01-15, 14:01
What about the green No8 / Blind side flanker releasing his bind?

That seemed to be the first offence to me.

Exactly.

ChrisR
15-01-15, 14:01
C'mon Phil, this is about wheeling. Don't be hijacking the thread! Though you're quite right.

crossref
15-01-15, 15:01
at grass roots - has wheeling ever gone away?

SimonSmith
15-01-15, 18:01
No. But usually one of two things happen:
1. It disintegrates.
2. "90 degrees. That was about 45 degrees ago. And we have the ball at our feet. Shit"

crossref
15-01-15, 18:01
the most use of wheeling I see is by the side without the put-in who don't bother to hook (as the referee allows a squint feed anyway ;-) ) and instead attempt to push and wheel quickly enough to to win a turnover.

They do need to go forward, really, else the ball tends to come out and be away before they have managed to wheel it enough ..

ChrisR
15-01-15, 22:01
crossref, you are correct in that as the law is writ such that thru 90 is a turnover. I'd rather have the law changed so that the team in possession gets the put. Defensive wheeling would still have it's place but as a means of controlling (or influencing) which way the play goes.

Taff
16-01-15, 02:01
I still don't understand why Green 8 moves over to his right.

Surely it would be easier to wheel it clockwise if he'd stayed in his normal position.

Phil E
16-01-15, 10:01
I still don't understand why Green 8 moves over to his right.

Surely it would be easier to wheel it clockwise if he'd stayed in his normal position.

Scrums will naturally wheel clockwise because the LH is pushing on the TH's outside shoulder on both sides of the scrum.
To get it to wheel anti-clockwise is difficult and requires the whole back row running round to their right. I have never seen it happen. Usually the back row goes one way and the front row goes the other when its tried....result, disintegration.

Taff
16-01-15, 15:01
Scrums will naturally wheel clockwise because the LH is pushing on the TH's outside shoulder on both sides of the scrum.
To get it to wheel anti-clockwise is difficult and requires the whole back row running round to their right. I have never seen it happen. Usually the back row goes one way and the front row goes the other when its tried....result, disintegration.
I can understand the physics of it, but given that the SAs wanted to wheel it (clockwise naturally) isn't the No 8 just making life difficult for himself by gong in the Flankers position? Given that he's got more leverage at his normal No 8 position, why not just stay where he was?

Browner
16-01-15, 16:01
I can understand the physics of it, but given that the SAs wanted to wheel it (clockwise naturally)

Did they? That Blindside looked inviting to a Red wheeling move, perhaps it was simply a negate-wheel binding position? Looks like it was called into him from someone out in the SA centres

didds
16-01-15, 17:01
TH wheels are doable, and i've done them, without the back row running around. It concerns me that refs with as much experience as Phil believe this to be the case. (I'm not picking him out other than he stuck his head over the parapet :-)

Its not easy, agreed, principally as of course the TH has to combat two player in direct contest. But both locks driving off their RIGHT foot, along with the '8 (*cough*), while the LH and left flank maintain pressure but don't drive forward... the right flanker needs to give it some too. The 8 moving one space to the right can help here as well.

There you have it - a legal, all in a pushing position, nobody pulling, nobody running around, TH wheel.

didds

ChrisR
16-01-15, 17:01
You have to start with what Wales would likely want to run. With SA down to a 7 man scrum either a drive over or 8 take is likely. If it's an 8 take then a counterclockwise wheel is preferred as it would take the SA 9 out of play. Having the SA 8 bind as a flank is risky if Wales gets their wheel. Note that the SA 8 binds as an 8 on the "Set" then shifts to flank before the ball is in, Not "Tipping his hand"? So clearly SA wanted to force a clockwise wheel and having the SA 8 bind as a flank puts him a better defensive position in case things don't work out as planned.

As for getting the scrum to wheel? SA is applying the Judo technique of using the opponents energy against themselves. The SA TH just gives ground as their LH forms the pivot and the locks quickly crab left. The SA 8 would normally just follow around but in this case he breaks off as the Welsh threaten. If Wales picks it up quick at 8 then it's a sure try assuming that they can overpower the SA 9.

ChrisR
16-01-15, 18:01
Scrums will naturally wheel clockwise because the LH is pushing on the TH's outside shoulder on both sides of the scrum.
To get it to wheel anti-clockwise is difficult and requires the whole back row running round to their right. I have never seen it happen. Usually the back row goes one way and the front row goes the other when its tried....result, disintegration.

Phil, wheeling right is just as easy as wheeling left. It's all about the technique used. If the scrum attempts to wheel by driving the prop forward then you are correct, the LH has an edge. But if you apply the 'pivot and crab' technique then it works pretty much same both ways. This is the technique used by SA in the clip.

In the clip the SA LH is the pivot. Note how the scrum actually pivots about his shoulders. The SA TH & hooker give ground and the locks crab left. The LH flank tries not to get in the way and the TH flank should try to keep bound though not in this case.

Not every defensive wheel is trying for a turnover. A defensive wheel left puts your SH in a better position to defend a serve going to your right or it will make the ops 8 take to the blind side harder.

If the non-wheeling side want to keep it straight then their entire scrum need to crab into the wheel. Remarkably effective.

I despise the position that some folks take that "the scrum must wheel by the prop driving forward". That's just so much BS and it's not supported by law. Why should the big hulking scrum be given an advantage over the smaller nimble scrum. If technical skill can succeed over brute force then so be it.

didds
16-01-15, 18:01
I had the distinct impression from this forum that crabbing was not "in a position to push forwards" and was illegal?

didds

Phil E
16-01-15, 19:01
Guys I didn't say (or mean to imply) that a counter clockwise wheel was impossible; just that I have never seen one successfully executed.....and I have seen a lot of scrums.

OB..
16-01-15, 19:01
crossref, you are correct in that as the law is writ such that thru 90 is a turnover. I'd rather have the law changed so that the team in possession gets the put.Surely that would simply mean that the side in possession would be happy to continue a wheel that did not suit them?

ChrisR
16-01-15, 20:01
OB, that is correct. However, over doing it also means resetting and some degree of risk (especially if squint feeds are penalized).

I think most teams would take a won ball under the hind foot and a 45 wheel over a reset. Whereas the team that hasn't won the ball has a lot less to lose by wheeling sharply through 90.

ChrisR
16-01-15, 20:01
I had the distinct impression from this forum that crabbing was not "in a position to push forwards" and was illegal?

didds

Crabbing and being in a pushing position are not mutually exclusive. Likewise, giving ground is not "pulling".

ChrisR
18-01-15, 20:01
Just got a copy of the USA Rugby Game Management Guidelines. My hopes that wheeling will make a comeback is the US are dashed.

From the USA GMG:

C. WHEEL
1. A scrum has only wheeled through 90 if the line between the front rows has gone
through 90.
2. Whip-wheel (when the scrum turns/spins on its axis) or walking the scrum around
are not allowed. Before a scrum can be wheeled legally there must be a clear
forward movement by the combined front row of the team that is driving their
opponents backwards. PK

"Whip-wheel" not defined in law, "walking the scrum around" not referenced in law, "clear forward movement" not required in law.

Why? I don't get it. How did this get started? Not in the US of A. Not known for original thinking in the game.

Is this how it's done at the grass roots?

Pegleg
18-01-15, 20:01
That's poor. We often wheeled by on of the props taking the strain and the other driving. There is no requirement that both props have to push just not "pull" the other side round. That's tosh, probably written by an ex full back or winger.

Pegleg
18-01-15, 20:01
In fairness a whip wheel is understood (though not defined) as a wheel that is produced by a combination of push on onside and pulling on on the other ide of the scrum. It is dangerpous and correctly not welcome in the game.

didds
18-01-15, 21:01
whipwheels are often very obvious with the LH pushing UP and OUT.

didds

menace
19-01-15, 03:01
Just got a copy of the USA Rugby Game Management Guidelines. My hopes that wheeling will make a comeback is the US are dashed.

From the USA GMG:

C. WHEEL
1. A scrum has only wheeled through 90 if the line between the front rows has gone
through 90.
2. Whip-wheel (when the scrum turns/spins on its axis) or walking the scrum around
are not allowed. Before a scrum can be wheeled legally there must be a clear
forward movement by the combined front row of the team that is driving their
opponents backwards. PK

"Whip-wheel" not defined in law, "walking the scrum around" not referenced in law, "clear forward movement" not required in law.

Why? I don't get it. How did this get started? Not in the US of A. Not known for original thinking in the game.

Is this how it's done at the grass roots?

That is all but the same for oz land and grassroots here too. AIUI that came down from the super rugby requirements last season and how it was being refereed (Or perhaps season before?). I'm no scrum expert but I suspect having the entire front row going forward first (and we apply just a clear step forward) is the magic sign that a scrum that turns after the initial movement forward is NOT a whip-wheel. Probably on the basis that they have dominance and are therefore more likely to be controlling the amount of the scrum wheel.

Browner
19-01-15, 03:01
In fairness a whip wheel is understood (though not defined) as a wheel that is produced by a combination of push on onside and pulling on on the other ide of the scrum. It is dangerpous and correctly not welcome in the game.

I've never seen a prop in a 8 man scrum (15 aside) , shift his feet in order to execute a bonafide pull of an opponent.

Yes , offer little/no/passive resistence, but never pulling an opponent.

Pegleg
19-01-15, 08:01
Have you not? Fair enough.

ChrisR
19-01-15, 15:01
So, if your scrum is retreating you cannot wheel? You can't lock down one side and let the ops drive the other side around? I think the purpose in the pro game is to stop defending teams wheeling when a 5m scrum is being driven into goal.

I agree with Browner that to 'pull' your opponent you'd have to get your feet beneath you and that would be a practical impossibility without standing up.

Browner
19-01-15, 15:01
Have you not? Fair enough.
Have you?

If you can find any visual / clip, I'd welcome seeing it.:wink:

FlipFlop
19-01-15, 15:01
Pulling is not that common. Why pull, when all you need to do is step back exactly as if you were drive back? Same result, easier to do, harder for ref to spot.

ChrisR
19-01-15, 17:01
.... and legal.

Taff
19-01-15, 18:01
Pulling is not that common. Why pull, when all you need to do is step back exactly as if you were drive back? Same result, easier to do, harder for ref to spot.
It's not that easy to "step back" while still "in a position to shove forward". I've tried it; yes it can be done, but it's not natural and I really doubt it can be done at speed.

ChrisR
19-01-15, 18:01
It's not that easy to "step back" while still "in a position to shove forward". I've tried it; yes it can be done, but it's not natural and I really doubt it can be done at speed.

I don't understand. If your side is being pushed backwards you have to step back. You have no choice and your feet will still be in a pushing position.

"Forward" has to mean along the long axis of the scrum otherwise all wheeling would be outlawed.

crossref
19-01-15, 18:01
i think people are making this very complicated.

1 - surely we'd agree that it's a lot easier to wheel the scrum when you are going forwards than when you are going backwards. If you are going backwards and trying to wheel 90 deg then I think an attempt to wheel is likely to end up with players on their backsides and breaking binding, and PK against you.

2 - we'l also agree that the side not in possession of the ball is incentivised to wheel it 90 deg. The side in possession might fancy wheeling it a little bit, but not too much ... trickier to do.

So the best opportunity to wheel is you have a dominant scrum, and it's their ball, and you can push them back and wheel them before they can get the ball out.

Pegleg
20-01-15, 08:01
Have you?

If you can find any visual / clip, I'd welcome seeing it.:wink:


Seen it done it got the T shirt. No I have no clips, because I have not spent 40 years collecting video. It really is quite easy. It cause an unstable fast wheel. Hense the term "whip wheel" It involve both pulling on and stepping back. Just a in a tug of war the side pull and step back. 18 years in the front row. I did it many times.

Pegleg
20-01-15, 08:01
Pulling is not that common. Why pull, when all you need to do is step back exactly as if you were drive back? Same result, easier to do, harder for ref to spot.

It's a combined activity Just a whne you push you step forward when you pull you step back. The feet tell a lot.

Pegleg
20-01-15, 08:01
i think people are making this very complicated.

1 - surely we'd agree that it's a lot easier to wheel the scrum when you are going forwards than when you are going backwards. If you are going backwards and trying to wheel 90 deg then I think an attempt to wheel is likely to end up with players on their backsides and breaking binding, and PK against you.

2 - we'l also agree that the side not in possession of the ball is incentivised to wheel it 90 deg. The side in possession might fancy wheeling it a little bit, but not too much ... trickier to do.

So the best opportunity to wheel is you have a dominant scrum, and it's their ball, and you can push them back and wheel them before they can get the ball out.

1 - That is why is is quick and unstable / dangerous. It is a negative tool and tightly not welcome.

2 - First sentence is of course correct. The second misses the point of removing defenders by tuning the scrum. A scum that is wheeled around 40 -45 degrees in a controlled way pushing the defending flankers away from the point of attack can be a very powerful attacking weapon.

ChrisR
20-01-15, 12:01
Just a in a tug of war the side pull and step back. 18 years in the front row. I did it many times.

Pegleg, in your 18 yrs in the front row I bet you never packed down with your feet in front of your shoulders. Your "tug of war" analogy isn't very apt.

Here is something every referee should try. Kneel down on all fours facing a closed door with your head aligned with the door knob. Now, grasp the knob in both hands and raise up so that you mimic the body position of a scrum player. Now try and open the door.

Can't do it, can you. (If you succeed in opening the door please post a video). Now erase from your scrum management lexicon any reference to "pulling" when applied to wheeling.

Every time wheeling comes up I hear a lot of talk about "dangerous". This is a red herring. When a scrum wheels it loses power. It is true that unskilled scrums will tend to disintegrate when wheeled but in my experience they don't collapse.

SimonSmith
20-01-15, 13:01
I defer to your expertise in this area, but my experience they do collapse.

if the tight head starts walking backwards, I think there is a greater chance of the loose head falling in because in the vast majority of cases, he's expecting some resistance to his push, not to have the effect amplified by the THP walking back.

FlipFlop
20-01-15, 13:01
Just a in a tug of war the side pull and step back. 18 years in the front row. I did it many times.

Pegleg, in your 18 yrs in the front row I bet you never packed down with your feet in front of your shoulders. Your "tug of war" analogy isn't very apt.

Here is something every referee should try. Kneel down on all fours facing a closed door with your head aligned with the door knob. Now, grasp the knob in both hands and raise up so that you mimic the body position of a scrum player. Now try and open the door.

Can't do it, can you. (If you succeed in opening the door please post a video). Now erase from your scrum management lexicon any reference to "pulling" when applied to wheeling.


A more apt analogy would have someone trying to push the door open, on the other side of it to you. So then it is very easy to "open" the door. It is also easy to make the person trying to push the door on the other side fall over, by taking astep back, all the while staying in the "pushing" position. You do this simply by reducing your forward pressure, and allowing their forward pressure to push you backwards.

And also you fail to take into account the actions of the 2nd row (holding you up), and hooker (who can stabilise you). With all this in place, it is very easy to "open the door" as you describe.

ChrisR
20-01-15, 14:01
A more apt analogy would have someone trying to push the door open, on the other side of it to you. So then it is very easy to "open" the door. It is also easy to make the person trying to push the door on the other side fall over, by taking astep back, all the while staying in the "pushing" position. You do this simply by reducing your forward pressure, and allowing their forward pressure to push you backwards.

And also you fail to take into account the actions of the 2nd row (holding you up), and hooker (who can stabilise you). With all this in place, it is very easy to "open the door" as you describe.

FlipFlop, I agree with your statement but you miss my point. If someone is pushing the door from the other side then there is no need to pull. My position is that it is impossible to pull your opponent forward but very easy to allow yourself to be pushed back. No law prohibits being pushed back.

From SS: if the tight head starts walking backwards, I think there is a greater chance of the loose head falling in because in the vast majority of cases, he's expecting some resistance to his push, not to have the effect amplified by the THP walking back.

Yes, this does happen. If the ops aren't pushing then it's hard to use their force against them to wheel. And, yes, if one prop retreats too quickly the opp prop can fall but he is the falling without the pressure and so that mitigates the risk.

tim White
20-01-15, 19:01
I tend to see front rows holding the pressure but the back rows pulling round/across - watch the 'leading' flanker and the number 8 most likely to pull, together with the angle of binding of the 'trailing' flanker who will be pushing in that direction.

Wheeling is not dangerous -destabilising the scrum is dangerous, and this is related to the speed of the wheel. Add on to this a person who is pulling around is almost certainly not bound properly.

Herein I present my own personal can of worms -please help yourself!

Pegleg
20-01-15, 22:01
Just a in a tug of war the side pull and step back. 18 years in the front row. I did it many times.

Pegleg, in your 18 yrs in the front row I bet you never packed down with your feet in front of your shoulders. Your "tug of war" analogy isn't very apt.

Here is something every referee should try. Kneel down on all fours facing a closed door with your head aligned with the door knob. Now, grasp the knob in both hands and raise up so that you mimic the body position of a scrum player. Now try and open the door.

Can't do it, can you. (If you succeed in opening the door please post a video). Now erase from your scrum management lexicon any reference to "pulling" when applied to wheeling.

Every time wheeling comes up I hear a lot of talk about "dangerous". This is a red herring. When a scrum wheels it loses power. It is true that unskilled scrums will tend to disintegrate when wheeled but in my experience they don't collapse.


THe ToW reference is not an analogy but stating that as you step back yo ualso pull back the two work together. So no I'll not erase the memory thanks.

You miss the point dramatically. Wheeling is not inherently dangerous. The "Whipwheel" IS. You seem to misunderstnad the difference.

And yes I can open that door. And no I have no intention of wasting my time setting up a camera to prove the obvious.

Browner
21-01-15, 01:01
THe ToW reference is not an analogy but stating that as you step back yo ualso pull back the two work together. So no I'll not erase the memory thanks.

You miss the point dramatically. Wheeling is not inherently dangerous. The "Whipwheel" IS. You seem to misunderstnad the difference.

And yes I can open that door. And no I have no intention of wasting my time setting up a camera to prove the obvious.

Props can reduce their push ( even to the point of zero push ) or let their opponents push overpower their resistance , but if their feet are way back behind their arze then that IMO isn't a bonafide pulling position.

If you can find any videos of a prop bonafide "pulling" then i'll applaud loudly, although to test your theory I will ask a training front row to attempt it at my next session.

Pegleg
21-01-15, 08:01
Browner, you are entitled to your opinion. I could pull back in my playing days (It involved the legs too. Just a your legs go forward with a push too). I can still do it at the age of 55. Tried it on two doors after Maurader's post yesterday to see if I could. Tried it on the LH and TH side of door and could do it on either.

I think some people (perhaps who've never been in a FR) are assuming we mean just pulling whilst keeping the rest of the body still. Big mistake.

ChrisR
21-01-15, 13:01
Pegleg, c'mon! This is your moment! Get a video of you opening the door and put it on YouTube. Viral! The next "Gangnam Style"! OK, maybe not.

Seriously, now that you've mastered "The Door" have some brute start pushing like hell from the other side. Now your 'pulling' isn't material. And that's the point I'm making.

ChrisR
21-01-15, 14:01
Revisit the video from SAReferees:

http://www.sareferees.com/laws/view/2830740/

Would you ping Green for wheeling. (Ignoring the Green 8 unbinding)?

This scrum would get pinged in the US of A every time! Every time, if the USA Rugby GMG is followed because:

Green didn't drive forward and Green clearly 'walked around'.

Would you ping it? What law does it violate?

Pegleg
21-01-15, 16:01
Now your 'pulling' isn't material. And that's the point I'm making.

No you said I could not do it. Now you change your argument. The question about materilaity is a totally separate issue.

Pegleg
21-01-15, 16:01
Revisit the video from SAReferees:

http://www.sareferees.com/laws/view/2830740/

Would you ping Green for wheeling. (Ignoring the Green 8 unbinding)?

This scrum would get pinged in the US of A every time! Every time, if the USA Rugby GMG is followed because:

Green didn't drive forward and Green clearly 'walked around'.

Would you ping it? What law does it violate?

The video that's already been posted. No I'd have an issue with the no 8. Not with the wheel. There;s something going on between the two props on the far side but I can't see it on the TV screen. The USA is not WR so I don't feel bound by their advise.

ChrisR
21-01-15, 20:01
No you said I could not do it. Now you change your argument. The question about materilaity is a totally separate issue.

Well, I didn't think you'd actually do it. So,well done and glad I didn't make a bet or offer a prize.

However, details aside, I know you get the point and I think we're basically on the same page.

Next time I come up with an idea like that I'll have to try it for myself first.

Browner
30-01-15, 12:01
Presumably 'wheeling' law was initially created to address the fact that scrums would invariably wheel when various pushing forces were applied unequally.

Law then was 'improved' to reward the opponents ( if the scrum went beyond 90 ) by way of a turnover of possession at a new scrum feed.

The wheel turnover ( in a game of ever decreasing turnovers) was now a valuable tactic, and the natural imbalance set up of the scrum has meant that wheeling is now arguably blighting this restart.

Perhaps its now time to reverse the wheel turnover law, & put the emphasis on the non feed side to deliberately drive straight??? I'd like to see.....
a) wheel beyond 90 = side in possession gets to re-feeding at next scrum
b) x2 90 wheels = FK to the team in possession at the time.

This supports the notion that the side in possession mostly prefers to use/run/play off this possession rather than wheel beyond 90.

In essense, negate the gainful tactic of 'deliberate wheeling for disruption/turnover' from which a number of scrum messes emanate.

Pegleg
30-01-15, 13:01
Well yes! The side in possession will want it straight and controlled with possibly a slight wheel to remove the flanker & 8 from the attack lines.

So the wheel is, mainly, a scrum "defence" weapon. Purely used to try and get a turnover.

didds
30-01-15, 13:01
Well yes! The side in possession will want it straight and controlled with possibly a slight wheel to remove the flanker & 8 from the attack lines.

So the wheel is, mainly, a scrum "defence" weapon. Purely used to try and get a turnover.

Well, I disagree.

Wheeling by the attacking (feeding) side can be used to move the oppo back row away from the attack
Wheeling by the defending (non feeding) side can be used to move the ball further from the #10 (not so much on mid field scrums of course :-) leading to a longer pass giving the #7 more chance to get to him, or to force the 10 closer to the scum and #7

Wheeling CAN also be used to force a turnover by defenders... but its far from being "purely" the reason.

didds

Pegleg
30-01-15, 14:01
It can be true. But is it actually done for that reason? It would have limited effect there anyway as sides would then, in all probability, just pick and drive feeding the 10 from the resulting ruck / maul instead.

didds
30-01-15, 18:01
I'd say forcing the oppo to go pick and drive and thus bring your backline 5m forward up to the ruck offside line is a bit of a tactical result frankly.

didds

Browner
30-01-15, 18:01
I'd say forcing the oppo to go pick and drive and thus bring your backline 5m forward up to the ruck offside line is a bit of a tactical result frankly.

didds

Or it might be a poor option (?) IF the attacking 8 can back into/block/fend manipulate the defensive 9 into inadvertantly blocking off the defending 7 , leaving the peeling attacking 6 to smash straight through the weak tackling isolated defensive 10.

Rugby Union = Chess on grass (albeit not always !).
Don't you just love the tactical nature of this code.:love: & long live all those who sail in her !

didds
30-01-15, 19:01
? you wheel their back row AWAY from your #10?

any 6 coming slightly round the corner would meet the advanced #8 picking him off?

I see some benefit to going blind here to be fair... but then you may well drop your own #9 around the corner to defend on the hind most feet line.

most likely howeever to be done in the oppo 22 when they are looking to clear rather than attack from 80m out.

didds

Browner
30-01-15, 23:01
??

My example had defenders @ north facing south. Attack @ south facing north.

A clockwise wheel 45 sending defending #8 to 1.30am ( unable to protect his #10) , attacking #8 trapping/driving defending#9 into defending #7 , leaving the attacking #6 to peel clockwise from 4pm to 8pm & over the defending #10.
Best description I can offer.
Soz .

didds
31-01-15, 00:01
right - I thought we were discussing defending usage - soz!


Of course defensively that direction wheel would work if close to to the "west" touchline - now defensive 8 is towards the open side, defensive 7 is closer to attack 10, the ball is further from attack 10 and a blind side move by the attackers has the touchline as an extra defender.

didds