Offside line for scrum half at scrum

[smudgie49]

28. Prior to the start of play in the scrum, the scrum-half of the team not throwing in the ball stands:
a. On that team’s side of the middle line next to the opposing scrum-half, or
b. At least five metres behind the hindmost foot of their team’s last player in the scrum and remains there until the completion of the scrum.

29. Once play in the scrum begins, the scrum-half of the team in possession has at least one foot level with or behind the ball.

30. Once play in the scrum begins, the scrum-half of the team not in possession:
a. Takes up a position near the scrum with both feet no further than the centre line of the tunnel. or
b. Permanently retires to a point on the offside line either at that team’s hindmost foot, or
c. Permanently retires at least five metres behind the hindmost foot.

Fellow refs - my question is about 30 b and c. If a scrum half (once the scrum has started) retires to 'a point on the offside line either at that team’s hindmost foot' or 'at least five metres behind the hindmost foot' do they have to stay in line with the 'hindmost foot' (i.e. an invisible line parallel to the touchline) or can they traverse along either offside line (perhaps to support the midfield in defence). Thoughts on this?

 

[Jz558]

Basically its saying they can retire to the same offside line as the rest of their team and can move anywhere along that line, but no closer.

 

[Camquin]

Once they are five metres back, they are treated like anyone else not in the scrum.
However, if they do that, they cannot advance and retake usual the scrum-half position, and neither can anyone else.

 

[Decorily]

They can retire to the offside line at the hindmost foot of their own teammate and move across the pitch as long as they stay in line with the hindmost foot.

 

[Flish]

They can retire to the offside line at the hindmost foot of their own teammate and move across the pitch as long as they stay in line with the hindmost foot.

This, this is the oddity that doesn’t look right, but I’ve been asked about and seen it a few times since the 9 couldn’t follow the ball law tweak, typically line up opposite the 10 / 11 channel and 5m closer than the other defenders.

 

[Decorily]

This, this is the oddity that doesn’t look right, but I’ve been asked about and seen it a few times since the 9 couldn’t follow the ball law tweak, typically line up opposite the 10 / 11 channel and 5m closer than the other defenders.

Looks odd and often triggers debate but perfectly legal. I don't understand why it's not done more.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

This, this is the oddity that doesn’t look right, but I’ve been asked about and seen it a few times since the 9 couldn’t follow the ball law tweak, typically line up opposite the 10 / 11 channel and 5m closer than the other defenders.

Looks odd and often triggers debate but perfectly legal. I don't understand why it's not done more.

I do not understand why it is not done more with a flanker instead of the 9. any bozo can bind on to 2nd row and shoulder the prop, even a 9, it ain't even your put and it is going to be fed.

 

[thepercy]

That is a great idea

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

That is a great idea

it has been done before. in about 1986 we (us rugby) played a season where the "non put in" scrumhalf could not go past centerline. shortly thereafter wing forwards could no longer break away. it was a pitiful time. the game has never recovered.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I do not understand why it is not done more with a flanker instead of the 9. any bozo can bind on to 2nd row and shoulder the prop, even a 9, it ain't even your put and it is going to be fed.

At my level we get regular strikes against the head. Also a flanker should contribute to the push. Far more than a 9 could. So, if you wasnt to attack the scrum keep the flanker where he belongs. Not a bad occasional tactic though.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

We've had a few issues round here where scrum halfs are trying to start at the offside line of the hindmost foot opposite the opposition 10 thus trying to gain a defensive advantage. We've been asked to be vigil;ant and enforce the laws

 

[Decorily]

We've had a few issues round here where scrum halfs are trying to start at the offside line of the hindmost foot opposite the opposition 10 thus trying to gain a defensive advantage. We've been asked to be vigil;ant and enforce the laws

Am I misunderstanding you....that sounds perfectly legal to me?

Edit Oh you mean 'start' in that position as opposed to go there after the scrum begins.

 

[didds]

At my level we get regular strikes against the head. Also a flanker should contribute to the push. Far more than a 9 could. So, if you wasnt to attack the scrum keep the flanker where he belongs. Not a bad occasional tactic though.

Indeed Marc. It struck me some while back that if one had a very dominant scrummage one could use this sort of arrangement.

 

[Volun-selected]

At my level we get regular strikes against the head. Also a flanker should contribute to the push. Far more than a 9 could. So, if you wasnt to attack the scrum keep the flanker where he belongs. Not a bad occasional tactic though.

So as it stands do we all agree that the scrum half isn’t a set-in-stone designated player so any player could take that roll at the scrum?

So assuming we want the flanker to keep flanking, we could (should?) expect to see a center maybe step up as defending scrum half and get that 5m head start?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

We get it a lot at uncontested scrums. At our community level uncontested scrums = no pick up by the "no 8". Sides often out the 9 at 8 and use the big 8 as as the 9.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

So as it stands do we all agree that the scrum half isn’t a set-in-stone designated player so any player could take that roll at the scrum?

So assuming we want the flanker to keep flanking, we could (should?) expect to see a center maybe step up as defending scrum half and get that 5m head start?

Or, or we could get rid (God willing) of pesky little Napoleon by replacing that position altogether with a flank sized player for forever. The world could be a peace again.

 

[SimonSmith]

So as it stands do we all agree that the scrum half isn’t a set-in-stone designated player so any player could take that roll at the scrum?

So assuming we want the flanker to keep flanking, we could (should?) expect to see a center maybe step up as defending scrum half and get that 5m head start?

When I coached, if we had uncontested we'd drop 8 to the 10 slot on our ball and just run hard at the opposition 10

 

[Camquin]

If the scrum is uncontested, you should be made to put all your forwards in the scrum, otherwise you would put all the back row in the defensive line.
But I think it only calls for all the front row forwards to be in the front row.

 

[thepercy]

Where does it say if scrums are uncontested that there can be no #8 pick up? Is there a law reference for that, or is it a local competition rule?

 

[Dickie E]

Where does it say if scrums are uncontested that there can be no #8 pick up? Is there a law reference for that, or is it a local competition rule?

It is local. In my parish, #8 pick up is ok