Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

      
  1. #21

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    LSRFUR
    Grade
    10
    Join Date
    14 Sep 09
    Posts
    13,204
    Thanks (Received)
    80
    Likes (Received)
    1093

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    the normal reason for not engaging in a maul is that you are hoping the oppo will mess up and you'll get a scrum. Otherwise there is no advatage in it.

    so it's not something you'd do if time has expired but you want to keep the game alive. It's a silly question

  2. #22
    Moderator Attention - New Usergroup Required

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    79
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    Or you do it to make the other side move the ball away from their driving maul (possibly their main attacking weapon). Agreed, it is not a tactic that makes a lot of sense unless you are within 7 and would rather the LBP than risk the other side scoring again to take that BP away from you. So you encourage them away from the driving maul to risk a back move or encourage the kick to touch to end the game.

  3. #23

    Referees in Ireland


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    25 May 16
    Posts
    312
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    28

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    The only reason , i have seen opposition not engage in a maul . From a normal line out ( not penalty line out )
    Is in anticipating the ball carrying side will now march forward with ball at back .
    And bag them selves a penalty .

  4. #24

    Referees in England
    Nigib's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Oxfordshire
    Grade
    Level 7
    Join Date
    02 Jul 07
    Posts
    321
    Thanks (Received)
    2
    Likes (Received)
    61

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy View Post
    The only reason , i have seen opposition not engage in a maul . From a normal line out ( not penalty line out )
    Is in anticipating the ball carrying side will now march forward with ball at back .
    And bag them selves a penalty .
    It was a penalty, it's now a scrum for if there's no engagement and the oppo lineout slides out of the way without a backward step. Oh, and you've shouted Use It and they've ignored you.

  5. #25
    Moderator Attention - New Usergroup Required

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    79
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    Quote Originally Posted by Christy View Post
    The only reason , i have seen opposition not engage in a maul . From a normal line out ( not penalty line out )
    Is in anticipating the ball carrying side will now march forward with ball at back .
    And bag them selves a penalty .
    I accept some will try to get themselves a scrum in this way. This would surely include a lineout from a penalty as well. I'm interested why you say, "( not penalty line out )".

  6. #26

    Referees in Ireland


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    25 May 16
    Posts
    312
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    28

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    Quote Originally Posted by Nigib View Post
    It was a penalty, it's now a scrum for if there's no engagement and the oppo lineout slides out of the way without a backward step. Oh, and you've shouted Use It and they've ignored you.
    i didnt know the laws had changed . {{ maybe im reading post wrong }}
    if ball at back & ball carrying team march forward ,,this is obstruction = penalty opposition

    if ball at back & ball carrying team dont use it = scrum opposition .

    if ball at front & ball carrying team march forward & opposition still dont engage = play on .

    heres an add on question ,,
    would you consider the call {{ USE IT }} meaning .
    it has to be passed away ????..
    or would you let guy at back of 1 sided maul peel off with ball & score a try

    any views
    Last edited by Christy; 3 Weeks Ago at 10:01.

  7. #27
    Moderator Attention - New Usergroup Required

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    79
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    "Use it" means just that. The ball has to leave the maul how that is done is up to the team involved so a player can peel away or pass the ball away.
    Last edited by Marc Wakeham; 3 Weeks Ago at 10:01.

  8. #28

    Referees in Ireland


    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Level 1
    Join Date
    25 May 16
    Posts
    312
    Thanks (Received)
    3
    Likes (Received)
    28

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wakeham View Post
    I accept some will try to get themselves a scrum in this way. This would surely include a lineout from a penalty as well. I'm interested why you say, "( not penalty line out )".
    hi marc
    i only say not from a penalty line out .
    because it was deemed earlier , if team wanted to end game ,,they would tap to them selves & kick ball off field .
    no other reason . { ive probably complicated matter ,,no complication intended }}

  9. #29

    Referees in Scotland
    Jolly Roger's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Edinburgh - ERRS
    Grade
    7
    Join Date
    19 Feb 10
    Posts
    105
    Thanks (Received)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    25

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    Quote Originally Posted by Marc Wakeham View Post
    "Use it" means just that. The ball has to meave the maul how that is done is up to the team involved so a player can peel away or pass the ball away.
    So long as players in front of peeling player are not obstructing. I would envisage that with a peel and dash close to the maul that the team mates in front would be likely to have had obstructed access to tackle. If ball carrier peels and then links with the backs then perhaps any potential obstruction may not be material. We should try and allow the game to flow so long as the opposition is not being disadvantaged.
    Keep smiling!

  10. #30
    Moderator Attention - New Usergroup Required

    Soc/Assoc
    Cardiff Society of Welsh Rugby Union Referees
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    05 Jan 18
    Posts
    79
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    20

    Default Re: No Maul Obstruction at lien out in over time

    Well yes whatever option a player take has be be legal. By the same token he should not use a forward pass. Sorry but I took that as understood.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •