Maul ambiguity

[greybarnet]

As a keen Dad/Coach I've been roped into reffing at mini level (U 10's) and recently have had 'discussions' with other coaches re my decisions at mauls.

The RFU Continuum 6 (g) for this age states;

'In the case of a scrum following a maul, the team not in posession when the maul began will throw the ball in at the subsequent scrum. If the referee cannot decide which team had psession, the team moving forward before the maul stopped trows in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball.'

The scenario I keep encountering is Red takes ball into contact with Blue, say 5m into Red's half. The ball is held by both red & blue and with teammates binding and shoving a maul is formed but as it's a mess and you can't see the ball being won by either team. I award a scrum to blue as they're attacking (ie in reds half).

Could I give this either way as Red are attacking out of thier half. It seems your damned either way.

 

[Taff]

Hi Greybarnet.

With an unsuccesful end to a maul (and don't forget you need at least 3 players to form a maul) the throw in is always given to the team that didn't take the ball into the maul - regardless of whose attacking or defending. In your example if Red have the ball, gets caught and a maul forms but ends unsuccesfully, you award a scrum to Blue.

With an unsuccesful end to a ruck, the throw in is given to the side moving forward - or failing that the attacking side. Perhaps that's what threw you.

 

[Toby Warren]

Welcome (to RR.com and reffing!) many people start how you have, hopefully you enjoy it.

As TAFF says remember who took it in if it doesn't come out give it to the other side. If it becomes a mess a quick whistle at that age is appreciated.

 

[Dixie]

Agree with the comments above. Mini/Midi, Youth and Adult all share the same principle in this regard - if you set up a maul, then you use it or you lose it. That has to be the guiding principle. Set it up on your own goal line and drive it to within 1 metre of the oppo goal line if you like - but don't expect the put-in. You couldn't use it, so you must expect to lose it. At this age, the emphasis is on the key elements of rugby, and there are few more key than tackling low. Incentivising driving mauls allows players to justify not taking legs.

Use it or lose it! call it quick, adn call it loud. let 'em know what you want, and why they didn't get the put-in.

By the way, I reiterate Toby's welcome to the forums and to the arcane world of the referee. In common with a great many on here, I'm one of those who started at U.9 to keep warm in the depths of winter, and was reminded how much I love being involved with the game. You are on the cusp of a highly rewarding hobby - stay on here to iron out the finer points without embarrassing your son or daughter! Good to have you on board.

 

[Pinky]

Welcome, not that it matters to you, but in Scotland at that age group it is use it or lose it in a ruck also.

 

[Dixie]

The RFU Continuum 6 (g) for this age states;

'In the case of a scrum following a maul, the team not in posession when the maul began will throw the ball in at the subsequent scrum. If the referee cannot decide which team had psession, the team moving forward before the maul stopped trows in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball.'

The scenario I keep encountering is Red takes ball into contact with Blue, say 5m into Red's half. The ball is held by both red & blue and with teammates binding and shoving a maul is formed but as it's a mess and you can't see the ball being won by either team. I award a scrum to blue as they're attacking (ie in reds half).

Could I give this either way as Red are attacking out of thier half. It seems your damned either way.

Looking again at your post, greybarnet, it's possible you may have misinterpreted the Continuum provision. The key is NOT who is, or might be, winning the contest for the ball within the maul; rather, you ask yourself which team had possession of the ball at the start of the maul. To decide this, ask yourself who carried the ball into what turned into a maul. It will be extraordinarily rare for that to be uncertain, so you will rarely have to decide who was moving forward, or who was the attacking side.

 

[Adam]

The second and third clauses are there only if the referee has forgotten who set the maul up. The law book deems the attacking side to be the team that is in their opponents' half, irrespective of whether they have possession.

 

[OB..]

The second and third clauses are there only if the referee has forgotten who set the maul up.

Bouncing ball. Two players grab it at the same time and a maul forms. Who took it in?

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

The law book deems the attacking side to be the team that is in their opponents' half, irrespective of whether they have possession.

Try telling that to some people! :wink:

 

[Adam]

Try telling that to some people! :wink:

I leave you to do that bit!

 

[PaulDG]

Could I give this either way as Red are attacking out of thier half. It seems your damned either way.

No. The maul laws give credit to a defending team that manages to stop the maul.

So, in your scenario, as Red took it in and Blue managed to stop it progressing, Blue get the scrum.

As others have said, what you as the ref need to remember is "who took it in". A good way to set this in your mind is to call "Maul Red" as soon as you decide the maul has begun. (The ball carrier and a player from each team bound on, all on their feet).

If you do that, you're warning the players that there now is a maul and they must join from the back foot (can be worth calling "Maul Red.. Come in from the back foot") and by shouting "Red" you've increased the chances that you'll remember it was Red that took the ball in.

So you'll know if the ball doesn't emerge that Blue will get the scrum.

 

[greybarnet]

Thank you gents (poss ladies) for your input and welcome it was most helpful. I'm not sure of the most appropriate ettiquette here but Dixie's response put it into perspective for me.

Cheers

 

[Michael P]

<<recently have had 'discussions' with other coaches re my decisions at mauls.>>

I can't think why. The situation you describe sounds like coaching failures at U10.

Blue are trying to strip the the ball from the ball-carrier; they should be practising their tackling.

Red cant get past an opponent who doesnt even bother to hold or tackle them;
running into contact with no thought for ball retention is the worst possible option: they should be running into space / passing / offloading or, if they must go into contact, going to ground and winning the ruck.

 

[menace]

Use it or lose it! call it quick, adn call it loud. let 'em know what you want, and why they didn't get the put-in.

not sure if you mean to pull up the maul quickly or quickly and loudly inform the players a maul has formed??...but in my earlier days of refereeing kids, one of my referee coaches told me not to pull it up too quick if it stops moving forward - but rather let the kids wrestle a little bit for it (they love that sh!t) as it helps them learn to use ripping techniques as well a trying to move it to the rear of a maul (otherwise how else to they practice it for real). Obviously when it gets to the point that it gets dangerous or clearly nothing is going to happen then pull it up. I thought this approach had merit to allow a bit of sustaned 'mauling' to go on in a safe manner. Many times when I did allow it it was quite amazing how many times the ball emerged and play continued (as messy as it looked). What do others think?

The second and third clauses are there only if the referee has forgotten who set the maul up. The law book deems the attacking side to be the team that is in their opponents' half, irrespective of whether they have possession.

further to OB's case - what about a rip/steal either just before or after the maul has formed (and you've called it)..sometimes the ball changes 'hands' just as the maul forms (or is about to form) and makes it hard to determine exactly who took it into the maul (especially as you don't call maul until one is clearly formed - with binds..not just touching). I think these are the 'out' clauses for the ref!

 

[Adam]

not sure if you mean to pull up the maul quickly or quickly and loudly inform the players a maul has formed??...but in my earlier days of refereeing kids, one of my referee coaches told me not to pull it up too quick if it stops moving forward - but rather let the kids wrestle a little bit for it (they love that sh!t) as it helps them learn to use ripping techniques as well a trying to move it to the rear of a maul (otherwise how else to they practice it for real). Obviously when it gets to the point that it gets dangerous or clearly nothing is going to happen then pull it up. I thought this approach had merit to allow a bit of sustaned 'mauling' to go on in a safe manner. Many times when I did allow it it was quite amazing how many times the ball emerged and play continued (as messy as it looked). What do others think?



further to OB's case - what about a rip/steal either just before or after the maul has formed (and you've called it)..sometimes the ball changes 'hands' just as the maul forms (or is about to form) and makes it hard to determine exactly who took it into the maul (especially as you don't call maul until one is clearly formed - with binds..not just touching). I think these are the 'out' clauses for the ref!

I call," maul on [insert team who took it in]". This way it serves to imprint it on my memory and everyone knows where they stand. I would make a decision there and then on almost all occasions.

 

[Dixie]

I'm not sure of the most appropriate ettiquette here but Dixie's response put it into perspective for me.

It's acceptable just to put as your signature: "Dixie's response put it into perspective for me.". That shows you are a contributor of perspicacity and judgement. :wink:

 

[Pinky]

Menace, in Scotland at age grade where there is mauls, these are limited to 5 seconds before turnover, so no prolonged wrestling.

 

[MiniRef]

The RFU Continuum is dead (has been for some time), despite many coaches and refs believing it still exists (unsurprising, given the RFU communication). It was replaced by the age grade regs, found at:

http://www.rfu.com/TheGame/Regulations/

 

[Donaldo01]

Menace, in Scotland at age grade where there is mauls, these are limited to 5 seconds before turnover, so no prolonged wrestling.

Ditto in Leinster ..... irrespective of whether the maul is moving. Sometimes leads to interesting invective from the sidelines!

D

 

[Davet]

Does the Maul Law not say that prolonged wrestling for the ball should not be allowed?

It certainly used to.