Law discussion: Any excuse?
The decision not to award a try in the match between the Stormers and the Hurricanes over the past weekend has raised eyebrows. We raise ours.
The Stormers storm the Hurricanes line. Schalk Burger of the Stormers charges at the line but is stopped on the line by Reggie Goodes and two team-mates, Callum Gibbins and Beauden Barrett. There is a heap of players and when Michael Rhodes (20) of the Stormers makes contact with Jeremy Thrush of the Hurricanes then a ruck was formed, a rudimentary ruck.
The ball is clearly on the Stormers' side of the ruck thing. Huw Jones (No.13) of the Stormers bends down, picks up the ball and grounds it in the Hurricanes in-goal.
The referee, Rohan Hoffmann of Australia, who was in a poor position at the side of the ruck, on the far side from where Jones grounded the ball, probably because the Stormers were going left and Jones acted on the right, consults the TMO.
The referee says: "I want to see if the player has picked up the ball from within the ruck. Has he played the ball from an offside position, please."
After replays, the TMO says: "I'm seeing him come forward and I believe he has stepped in front of the ball."
Referee: "And put his shoulder on the ruck, hasn't he?"
TMO: "That is correct."
Referee: "So he has taken the ball from an offside position and jumped over the ruck. So - no try."
TMO: "Yes."
The referee then makes the decision known: "No try. Offside at the ruck."
Let's see what Jones did.
Jones approached the ruck-thing from behind, i.e. there was no side entry.
He put both hands with outstretched arms on the players in front of him.
He bent down and placed his right foot beyond the ball.
His left shoulder made contact with Rhodes.
Jones picked up the ball and dived over to ground it.
First off all, when Jones got there, was it still a ruck. Accept that it became one when Rhodes and Thrush made contact, was it still one when there were no people on their feet?
In 2007, the designated members of the IRB's Rugby Committee gave a ruling on this situation.
Ruling in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
A ruck ends successfully when the ball leaves the ruck or when the ball enters in goal i.e. on or over the goal line.
A ruck ends unsuccessfully when the ball becomes unplayable.
As there has been a ruck formed initially, AND the criteria for a successful or unsuccessful ruck have not been exhibited, then the ruck has not ended.
So it was still a ruck?
Did Jones join the ruck?
Law 16.2 JOINING A RUCK
(b) A player joining a ruck must bind on a team-mate or an opponent, using the whole arm. The bind must either precede, or be simultaneous with, contact with any other part of the body of the player joining the ruck.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(c) Placing a hand on another player in the ruck does not constitute binding.
Sanction: Penalty kick
Jones did not bind on anybody as the law requires for joining a ruck. His shoulder making contact with Rhodes is certainly not binding. It is irrelevant and there is no obvious reason for the referee to mention it.
Jones was not part of the ruck. That means that Jones did not act 'from within the ruck'.
But was the ball in the ruck and so what about hands in the ruck?
The ball is behind Rhodes's foot, the hindmost foot on the Stormers' side. That would suggest that it was out.
Even if it were not out and this action established a standard of sanctioning 'hands-in' by a scrumhalf/receiver, there will be a plethora of penalties at scrums and rucks for 'hands-in' that would change the game.
At present it is regarded as acceptable that once the contest for possession is over, the scrumhalf/receiver is allowed to dig for the ball - put his hands in to get it out. In this case there was no more a contest for the ball when Jones picked it up. There was no legal way that the Hurricanes were going to get the ball.
What about Jones's right leg? Was he offside?
(a) The offside line. There are two offside lines parallel to the goal-lines, one for each team. Each offside line runs through the hindmost foot of the hindmost player in the ruck. If the hindmost foot of the hindmost player is on or behind the goal-line, the offside line for the defending team is the goal-line.
(b) Players must either join a ruck, or retire behind the offside line immediately. If a player loiters at the side of a ruck, the player is offside.
(c) Players joining or rejoining the ruck. A player joining a ruck must do so from behind the foot of the hindmost team-mate in the ruck. A player may join alongside this hindmost player. If a player joins the ruck from the opponents’ side, or in front of the hindmost teammate, the player is offside. A player may bind onto an opposition player providing the player is not otherwise offside.
Sanction: Penalty kick on the offending team’s offside line
(d) Players not joining the ruck. If a player is in front of the offside line and does not join the ruck, the player must retire behind the offside line at once. If a player who is behind the offside line oversteps it and does not join the ruck the player is offside.
That is all that the law says about offside at a ruck.
The one that applies here is (d).
in front off the offside line
Law Definitions
Beyond or behind or in front of a position: Means with both feet, except where the context makes that inappropriate.
Jones does not put both feet in front of the ball or Rhodes's hindmost foot.
It would seem that the try should have been awarded. The sad part is that the muddled thinking gives the impression that an excuse is being found not to award the try whereas there seems no reason not to award it. A referee's greatest joy is to award a try.
By Paul Dobson