Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

      
  1. #1
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    I am a Fan
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    19 Sep 11
    Posts
    440

    Default Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    So, there was this maul which ended unsuccessfully and, I quite frankly don't understand totally AR's decision nor what he says.



    Why is it Toulouse's ball in the subsequent scrum?

    Not a direct catch? AR's unsure of who put the ball in the maul nor who had possesion so attacking team's ball?
    Sorry about my English, as it isn't my mother tonge.

  2. #2

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    12,918

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    Quote Originally Posted by MrQeu View Post
    Why is it Toulouse's ball in the subsequent scrum?

    Not a direct catch? AR's unsure of who put the ball in the maul nor who had possesion so attacking team's ball?
    Seems a bit odd to me. He originally gives the feed to White then changes his mind after a discussion with Asst Ref (I think). Perhaps he ruled that White caught the ball but a maul didn't form immediately?
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  3. #3

    Referees in England
    chbg's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    D&WRURS, HRURS & ARURS
    Grade
    Level 8
    Join Date
    15 May 09
    Posts
    1,088

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    Listen around 1:30 - 'Black' considered to have caught (comment: had more control over) the ball from their own kick.
    Be reasonable - do it my way.

  4. #4
    Rugby Club Member

    Soc/Assoc
    I am a Fan
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    19 Sep 11
    Posts
    440

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    But that's not the way it should be. If black caught the ball from a teammate kick, then it's turnover ball, shouldn't it?


    (c) Scrum following maul. The ball is thrown in by the team not in possession when the maul began. If the referee cannot decide which team had possession, the team moving forward before the maul stopped throws in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball.

    (h)
    Scrum after a maul when catcher is held. If a player catches the ball direct from an opponent’s kick, except from a kick-off or a drop-out, and the player is immediately held by an opponent, a maul may form. Then if the maul remains stationary, stops moving forward for longer than 5 seconds, or if the ball becomes unplayable, and a scrum is ordered, the team of the ball catcher throws in the ball.

    ‘Direct from an opponent’s kick’ means the ball did not touch another player or the ground before the player caught it.
    Sorry about my English, as it isn't my mother tonge.

  5. #5

    Referees in England
    chbg's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    D&WRURS, HRURS & ARURS
    Grade
    Level 8
    Join Date
    15 May 09
    Posts
    1,088

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    Of course - I stand corrected, thank you. But I think that AR and the AR made the same mistake. Easy to do!
    Be reasonable - do it my way.

  6. #6

    Referees in Ireland
    Chogan's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ARLB
    Grade
    National Panel
    Join Date
    03 Feb 12
    Posts
    412

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    Thanks MrQeu
    Last edited by Chogan; 12-01-14 at 23:01.
    If you look hard enough, there'll be a penalty in there somewhere.

    The greatest ruck is one that never forms, but sometimes it can't be helped. #Woshkabomy

  7. #7

    Resident Club Coach
    didds's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    N/A
    Grade
    Club Coach
    Join Date
    27 Jan 04
    Posts
    10,205

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    yep.. ref and AR decided that black kick + black catch plus unsuccessful end to a maul = black scrum.

    Cock up.

    didds

  8. #8

    Referees in Singapore
    talbazar's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Singapore Society of Rugby Union Referees (SSRUR)
    Grade
    IRB Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Apr 10
    Posts
    702

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    17.6.(h) states "kick from an opponent", as such, you guys are right to say it doesn't apply...

    But, see 17.6.(c):
    17.6.(c) Scrum following maul. The ball is thrown in by the team not in possession when the maul began. If the referee cannot decide which team had possession, the team moving forward before the maul stopped throws in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball.


    It looks to me like both players are catching the ball at the same time. Hence, it looks like we are in the bolded case above...
    Me thinks the decision is ok...

    Did I miss something?
    Cheers,
    Pierre.

    Edit: The explanation to the player isn't correct though
    Rule #1: If the law doesn't forbid it, it's allowed.
    Rule #2: If it ain't in the Law Book, don't make it up.

  9. #9

    Referees in Australia
    Dickie E's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    VRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    19 Jan 07
    Posts
    12,918

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    Quote Originally Posted by talbazar View Post
    17.6.(h) states "kick from an opponent", as such, you guys are right to say it doesn't apply...

    But, see 17.6.(c):
    17.6.(c) Scrum following maul. The ball is thrown in by the team not in possession when the maul began. If the referee cannot decide which team had possession, the team moving forward before the maul stopped throws in the ball. If neither team was moving forward, the attacking team throws in the ball.


    It looks to me like both players are catching the ball at the same time. Hence, it looks like we are in the bolded case above...
    Me thinks the decision is ok...

    Did I miss something?
    Cheers,
    Pierre.

    Edit: The explanation to the player isn't correct though
    But in this case it doesn't matter which team had possession when the maul began.

    If White took it in direct from a Black kick, then it is a White feed.
    If Black took it in direct from a Black kick, then it is a White feed.
    I, for one, like Roman numerals

  10. #10

    Referees in Australia
    menace's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    ACTRRA
    Grade
    Level 2
    Join Date
    20 Nov 09
    Posts
    3,579
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Stade Toulousain - Saracens

    Quote Originally Posted by Dickie E View Post
    But in this case it doesn't matter which team had possession when the maul began.

    If White took it in direct from a Black kick, then it is a White feed.
    If Black took it in direct from a Black kick, then it is a White feed.
    But if he didn't know who had possession when taken in, then black was moving forward when it ended bad, AND black were the attacking team...so black feed.

    But personally, I think AR had it right and equitable the first time, and looked to be more of a catch by white than black. I think his AR made him look a dick by chiming in. In crickets DRS terms it was a "umpires call!", and Roland should have stuck to his own decision.
    Tell em it's Law 23 and smile

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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