Law Discussion: Order & consequence

It is not quite a chicken-or-egg situation but the sequence of events is important in three incidents taken from recent matches. What happens after decisions is also important.

The first was a Heineken Cup match between the Ospreys and Munster. The second from an Aviva Premiership match between Saracens and London Wasps. The third an Aviva Premiership match between Leicester Tigers and Sale Sharks. Let's take the third one first.

1. The Tigers score and Sale kick off to the left. Nick Macleod's kick sails towards the touchline where Thomas Waldrom, the Tigers' No.8, waits for the ball. He waits with a right foot anchored in touch and, with a wide stretch, his left foot anchored infield. Before the ball reaches the touchline or the plane of the touchline, Waldron catches the ball.

The referee and his assistant consider this a direct kick and the referee offers the Tigers the choice of a kick again, a line-out or a scrum at the middle of the half-way line. They choose the scrum.

All all right?

Law 19 DEFINITIONS
The ball is in touch if a player catches the ball and that player has a foot on the touchline or the ground beyond the touchline. If a player has one foot in the field of play and one foot in touch and holds the ball, the ball is in touch.

When Waldron catches the ball, he is in touch. That means the ball is in touch.

Law 19 DEFINITIONS
‘Kicked directly into touch’ means that the ball was kicked into touch without landing on the playing area, and without touching a player or the referee.

The ball was kicked directly into touch.

Law 13.8 BALL GOES DIRECTLY INTO TOUCH
The ball must land in the field of play. If it is kicked directly into touch the opposing team has three choices:
To have the ball kicked off again, or
To have a scrum at the centre and they have the throw-in, or
To accept the kick.
If they accept the kick, the line-out is on the half way line. If the ball is blown behind the half way line and goes directly into touch, the line-out is at the place where it went into touch.

The options the referee gave the Tigers were correct.

2. From deep inside Saracens territory Alex Goode kicks a ling kick down the touchline on his right. The ball does not go out but rolls and rolls, close to the touchline. Joe Simpson, Wasps' energetic scrumhalf, runs after the ball as it rolls towards the touchline. It is just short of the touchline when he grabs the ball. His left foot is in the field of play, his right foot in touch when he takes a quick throw-in.

The referee stops the quick throw-in and then Wasps throw into a formed line-out.

Now it's a matter of timing. When Simpson grabs the ball, the ball is in the field of play. It was in touch if that right foot of his was in touch when he caught the ball.

Law 19 DEFINITIONS
The ball is in touch if a player catches the ball and that player has a foot on the touchline or the ground beyond the touchline. If a player has one foot in the field of play and one foot in touch and holds the ball, the ball is in touch.

On the touchline or the ground. On the ground. Not in the air - on the ground.

When Simpson grabs the ball his right foot is in the air. That means the ball became out only when his right foot was grounded. That means it should have been the Saracens' throw-in.

All that said, It is a difficult decision for the assistant who was, of necessity, a long way down the field. It would have been a difficult decision even if he had been close. It was a difficult decision even with the advantage of slow motion.

What happens afterwards was not a difficult decision.

When Simpson attempts the quick throw-in his right foot is in touch all right but his left foot is anchored in the field of play.

Law 19.6 HOW THE THROW-IN IS TAKEN
The player taking the throw-in must stand at the correct place. The player must not step into the field of play when the ball is thrown. The ball must be thrown straight, so that it travels at least 5 metres along the line of touch before it first touches the ground or touches or is touched by a player.

Simpson was in the field of play. The throw-in was not correctly taken.

Law 19.7 INCORRECT THROW-IN
(a) If the throw-in at a line-out is incorrect, the opposing team has the choice of throwing in at a line-out or a scrum on the 15-metre line. If they choose the throw-in to the line-out and it is again incorrect, a scrum is formed. The team that took the first throw-in throws in the ball.

It should have been an option to the Saracens, though, for unclear reasons, it seems that this law, clearly written, does not apply.

This situation is different from the Waldron incident because Simpson's foot was not grounded.

3. From inside his own half, Ronan O'Gara kicks down towards the touchline on his right. The ball rolls and rolls over the Ospreys' goal-line and towards its touch-in-goal line. There Dan Biggar grabs the ball. He has a foot infield and a foot in touch.

But Like Simpson in 2. above his foot in touch is grounded after he has grabbed the ball.

In this case the referee and his assistant rule that there should be a scrum back where O'Gara kicked the ball, Ospreys to put in.

As with Simpson, this was not an easy decision, but in this case help was at hand.

The television match official could have helped. His area of jurisdiction includes:

Try
No try and scrum awarded 5 metres
Touch down by a defender
In touch - line-out
Touch-in-goal
Ball dead on or over the dead ball line
Penalty tries after acts of foul play in in-goal
All kicks at goal including dropped goals.

Touch-in-goal.

This time, however difficult, there seems less of an excuse for getting it wrong.

Getting the right decision is important. When the umpire used video help to show that Mitchell Johnson had bowled a no ball and so that Matthew Prior was not out, it had a big effect, Prior went on to score another 75 runs.

In 3. above the scrum resulted in a penalty for the Ospreys and three points which gave the Ospreys the lead in a close-scoring game.

In this case a decision and in 2. above had to be made and the referee and his assistant decided they could make it on their own. It's not quite the same a decision that need not be made.

Scott Hamilton of the Tigers passes to his left and tall Chris Jones of Sale intercepts. He charges ahead and passes inside to Asaeli Boko. Before Boko can get the ball he is grabbed from behind by Geordan Murphy, the Tigers' fullback. Boko does not catch the ball. It strikes his right knee and bounces forward.

The referee awards a scrum to the Tigers, presumably for a knock-on, presumably not seeing the early tackle.

But it was not a knock-on as a knock-on must come off the hands or the arms. This did not come off the hands or the arms.

Guessing is not good.

In the same match Sale put the ball into a scrum,. It is in the tunnel when the Tigers' flank on the right, Steve Mafi, hooks the ball back, giving the Tigers a tighthead from which they score a try and another seven points.

The referee was on the far side of the scrum and could not see this. He did not guess. That is good.

Could his assistant have helped him?

Yes - But only if the referee had wanted it.

Law 6 DEFINITIONS
An assistant referee may be appointed by a match organiser and is responsible for signalling, touch, touch in-goal, the success or otherwise of kicks at goal and indicating foul play. An assistant referee will also provide assistance to the referee in the performance of any of the referee’s duties as directed by the referee.

As directed by the referee.

What action should have been taken against Mafi?

Law 20.9 (f) Locks and flankers: Staying out of the tunnel. A player who is not a front row player must not play the ball in the tunnel.
Sanction: Free Kick

A free kick to Sale would have been more desirable to them than a try against them!