Brevard Old Red Eye Rugby Football Club

This is an interesting situation, to say the least. As referees, we mostly focus on the ball ( is it bound in the maul, is it being presented in short order, etc.) and movement of the maul ( is the maul going forward, has the maul gone stagnant?).

Laws regarding the maul are pretty straightforward and not open to a lot of interpretation. There are ways to properly enter the maul and end up bringing it down unintentionally, just as there are ways to enter the maul and bring it down intentionally.

I think that if a player enters the maul improperly ( i.e. going straight to ground) in an effort to bring down the maul, a yellow card for professional foul is entirely appropriate.

Along those lines, I think it would also be necessary to note when the player came into the maul and how he entered. In the beginning stages, most attacking team players are facing forward. If the offending player came in low and maybe dove toward the attacking players legs or possibly knees, I think a red card could also be justified.

Let’s face it. Our responsibilities as referees, before the whistles and the Law interpretations, is to keep the playing environment safe for all the players. Regardless of the endless criticism, when every player is able to walk away from a match, the referee did a good job.

The main question would have to be how we can position ourselves to see both sides of a maul at the same time. To fully monitor ball movement, we would have to give up some ability to see defenders coming into the maul, and vice versa.

Unless we can come up with a standard position for referees to monitor the maul, assuming there is one, I would suggest a hard line approach for punishment of the offender in an effort to make it wholly undesireable for anyone to try it in the future.

Comments anyone?

Cheers, P-Mac

Without watching the match or video, it is difficult to see the severity of the collapse, thus an answer that might be satisfying. Was the collapse intentional at first, then because it worked they kept doing it? Did the player know they were doing it all the time and do they know the law?, Need to quickly think the scenerio out first. At the first collapse, then absolutely a penalty should have been called. I wouldn’t be so fast as to throw a card, but to stop play for a second, explain the severity of the collapse, point blame at the individual for the collapse and let everyone know that the next time this happens, they will get the bin. As pointed out, safety is the major concern. We as refs need to get into positions were we can see these actions by players and not let them get away with it. Change your positions at scrums, lineouts, mauls, and general play and not get stagnate, therefore not letting players play you! Another words, Move your Ass around and don’t be afraid to blow the whistle!

Greg

I’ve read Pat and Greg’s comments and for the most part agree. My assessor this week reminded me about moving around and around - seeing not just the ball and off-side, but different angles on the bodies involved. My comment about the original question, though, is to separate two different occurrences. First, pulling down the maul is clearly dangerous and needs the penalty (I agree I wouldn’t card the first unless egregious, but would card the second by the same team). If this is higher quality play, however, this situation has come up before and requires really close attention to make the right call. The situation is the rolling maul. There is often a moment there when the ball carrier has separated and is not bound, and therefore the maul has ended with the ball being out, before the “next maul” has formed. That player can legitimately be tackled, and going low and taking him down is fine, regardless of the other shoving bodies. Tough judgment call. I’d suggest circling the maul until you see a peel begin such rolling maul, then stay to that side to focus on this timing. Or, just piss it off and go have a beer.

Yours in Rugby,

John

Friends,

I received a little insight from a friend regarding this question. Upon which I decided to re-read my response and the subsequent responses. Given that, I think I want to revise my comments.

I think Greg said it best when he said, and I am paraphrasing here, that we as referees need to keep our ass moving. The potential for missing this type of action increases dramatically when we become “flat footed”.

This type of dangerous play is nothing above and beyond what we should be looking for anyway. As far as giving yellow cards and such, that is referee judgement and nothing more needs to be said.
This may be a little technical thing here, but I question the description of this play as a problem. Referee abuse = problem, unnecessary violence ( fighting, raking ) = problem, going to the ground behind mauls = incident.

I don’t know about everyone else, but I don’t see this as a common problem where teams are using this as some sort of defensive tactic.

With all due respect to Les Davidson, whom I have a lot of respect for, lets not make a mountain out of a molehill.

I now think this rates nothing more than a ” Thanks for telling me, I’ll keep an eye out for it.” response.

In conclusion, I think that if we just keep doing what we are doing, eyes open, feet moving, penalizing when appropriate, then this is all a moot issue.

Comments??

Cheers, Pat McCollum