6N Week 1 - incidents
There are always refereeing matters to talk about after a match. We can learn from every match and especially from seeing top men in action. Here we discuss a few indents from the first week of Six Nations.
We have already spoken of Jonny Wilkinson's try and given stats.
We have given stats for the Super 14 and will discuss some incidents there as well. Don't miss the bit about a quick throw-in.
1. A hearing aid for a hooker
There was a lot of noise at Millennium Stadium and the Irish hooker had difficulty hearing the calls. Several times he took up his position to throw in and then left it to try to hear the call.
The referee asked the players in the line-out to be quiet, though they seemed not to be the problem and then chivvied the hooker along and then told him to get the call before he got to his position.
Fair enough?
Yes.
For Best's first throw it took 24 seconds for the ball to come back into play after being kicked out. For the second it was 35 seconds, for the third 33 seconds, for the fourth 35 seconds and for the fifth 1 minute and 3 seconds.
That's a lot of time. Over three minutes had elapsed when the ball had gone out five times. The average time it was out of play was 38 seconds. There were 32 line-outs in the match. If they averaged 38 seconds, it would mean cutting 20 minutes out of the game - that's a quarter of the game.
The Law says get on with it:
Law 19.6 (b) The throw-in at the line-out must be taken without delay and without pretending to throw.
Penalty: Free Kick on the 15-metre line
The referee was understanding of the player's problem but there are other solutions. The Welsh hooker had no problem in picking up the ball, taking his place and throwing it in. There is nothing which says that allowance must be made for noise. A different way of making the call can be found that does not rely on voice messages.
That is what the sensible Irish did and line-outs became less tedious.
2. Free but void
The referee awards a free kick to Wales at a line-out well inside Welsh territory. The ball is given to James Hook. He holds the ball in both hands and moves back from the mark he moves forward.
Ronan O'Gara of Ireland sees this and calls to his team-mates: "He's offered to kick, boys."
O'Gara dashes at Hook who tries to take evading action as more Irish players arrive.
The referee orders a scrum.
Commentator: "He just put the ball up. Harsh decision really."
Law 21.8 (e) Charging the free kick. Once they have retired the necessary distance, players of the opposing team may charge and try to prevent the kick being taken. They may charge the free kick as soon as the kicker starts to approach to kick.
O'Gara was well more than 10 metres back. Hook had moved back and then moved forward. He had started to approach to kick. He certainly gave a good impression of a player moving forward to kick.
Unlike the penalty, the free kick may be charged. O'Gara charged.
Then what?
Law 21.8 (f) Preventing the free kick. If the opposing team charge and prevent the free kick being taken, the kick is disallowed. Play restarts with a scrum at the mark. The opposing team throw in the ball.
That is what happened - a scrum to Ireland.
3. Beating the breast
From a scrum Ireland go blind and Peter Stringer is caught and held up. A maul forms. Ireland get it to go forward a way and it then falls down.
The referee stretches an arm out towards Ireland and then draws it back to beat the far side of his breast.
He is not being penitent but telling the world that Ireland had taken the ball into a maul. The ball did not emerge. The maul had not reached a satisfactory conclusion.
Law 17. 6 UNSUCCESSFUL END TO A MAUL
(b) A maul ends unsuccessfully if the ball becomes unplayable or collapses (not as a result of foul play) and a scrum is ordered.
(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.
(f) When the ball in a maul becomes unplayable, the referee does not allow prolonged wrestling for it. A scrum is ordered.
4. Culling the maul
France score and Italy kick off. They kick high and Julien Bonnaire reaches up to take the kick-off. Fabio Ongaro has run beyond Bonnaire but immediately joins in on the maul which is forming.
Referee: "Two White." It is a call for Ongaro to get out of the place where he is.
This is common practice but is it right.
Just imagine that Ongaro is part of the formation of the maul - there right from the start. In some circumstances he may be the only Italian amongst the French.
Why should he be told to get out and go round?
If he got there illegally, he should be penalised. If he got there legally, he should be allowed to stay.
If he arrived in the maul legitimately he is allowed to stay in his position, however inconvenient his positioning may be. It looks odd and it may incite untoward action against him, but there is no reason for him to get out of his position.
5. The non-maul
Raphael Iba?ez, the French hooker, throws in deep at a line-out. The French catch the ball and huddle together. The Italians don't join in the huddle. They separate from it. The French huddle, which is not a maul because there are no opponents in it, moves forward. Three Italians run round and attack the huddle from behind where, presumably, the ball is.
The referee blows his whistle and awards a scrum to Italy for accidental off-side.
This is not at all an easy one.
Firstly the Italians did nothing wrong.
They did not run away from the line-out but stayed there, shifting sideways. There would have been a problem if they had run backwards.
The Italians were clever. They waited till the huddle had moved over the line of throw before they climbed in. That means they were not off-side in the line-out.
When they got stuck in there was no maul. It then did not matter from which angle they moved into the French huddle.
Then, what about the French.
They had no intention of doing anything wrong. What they were doing was a standard procedure.
Because they did not make contact with the Italians as they moved forward they could not be penalised for truck-'n-trailer.
The decision to go for accidental off-side seemed the kind and sensible one.
You did have a man behind bumping into a man in front and that did make it harder for the Italians to get to him. That was wrong but there was nothing intentional about it.
A lot of crossing that becomes penalties should probably also be scrums - unintentional, just bad timing.
Law 11.6 ACCIDENTAL OFF-SIDE
(a) When an off-side player cannot avoid being touched by the ball or by a team-mate carrying it, the player is accidentally off-side. If the player's team gains no advantage from this, play continues. If the player's team gains an advantage, a scrum is formed with the opposing team throwing in the ball.
