Quote Originally Posted by crossref View Post
So Law 19 contradicts Law 16 !
It's messy* but nah.

Anyhow, Garces got to the correct answer correctly ;-)

*it would be helpful if the "unplayable maul" example in the table in 19.1 was an "unsuccessful maul" otherwise it appears to be linked to 16.17.a only! That said, 16.17.b-e all result in an unplayable ball (16.17.a). Well, 16.17.b might not result in unplayable ball but who has seen a scrum called if the ball was playable following a non-foul play collapse?