Nige on improving Refs

[Neils]

https://mol.im/a/9015203

[hookender]

Saying more or less what we have been debating on here . Wonder what his member name is ?

[Neils]

Saying more or less what we have been debating on here . Wonder what his member name is ?

Ha - one of the new ones perchance.

Unlike others i think he listens to the comments generally. He has his faults but a listening ref is better than the one last week.

[Marlow Nick]

Can someone clarify for me... If a caterpillar forms then isnt offside measured from the back foot not the position of the ball? In which case how can the scrum half manipulate the ball backwards if he's not bound and therefore not part of the ruck? Surely that means he's offside and the only people who can move the ball back are those bound into the ruck!

If the caterpillar members had to heel the ball back within 5 seconds that would make the caterpillar a real test of skill!

[Nigel Med]

Can someone clarify for me... If a caterpillar forms then isnt offside measured from the back foot not the position of the ball? In which case how can the scrum half manipulate the ball backwards if he's not bound and therefore not part of the ruck? Surely that means he's offside and the only people who can move the ball back are those bound into the ruck!

If the caterpillar members had to heel the ball back within 5 seconds that would make the caterpillar a real test of skill!

I think this is a classic case of coaches looking to exploit the way the laws are interpreted. Some years back when I was refereeing, a ruck was deemed to be over when the 9 touched the ball. That led to scrum halfs getting clattered and very few successful rucks so someone pointed out that if the ball is still on the floor and is within the confines of the ruck, the ruck isn't over, even if the scrum half touches it. It's now refereed that the ruck is only declared over when the scrum half picks the ball up and moves it out of the ruck. Thus the 9 can move it backwards legally to the rear of the "caterpillar" and it's still a ruck. You are correct that he should retreat to alongside or behind the hind most foot of the latest player to join the ruck to form the ludicrous chain of players or he is offside by the letter of the law. That is however pretty much what they usually do. Irritating though it is, it will take a specific new "interpretation" to put an end to the caterpillar.

[Marlow Nick]

Can someone clarify for me... If a caterpillar forms then isnt offside measured from the back foot not the position of the ball? In which case how can the scrum half manipulate the ball backwards if he's not bound and therefore not part of the ruck? Surely that means he's offside and the only people who can move the ball back are those bound into the ruck!

If the caterpillar members had to heel the ball back within 5 seconds that would make the caterpillar a real test of skill!

I think this is a classic case of coaches looking to exploit the way the laws are interpreted. Some years back when I was refereeing, a ruck was deemed to be over when the 9 touched the ball. That led to scrum halfs getting clattered and very few successful rucks so someone pointed out that if the ball is still on the floor and is within the confines of the ruck, the ruck isn't over, even if the scrum half touches it. It's now refereed that the ruck is only declared over when the scrum half picks the ball up and moves it out of the ruck. Thus the 9 can move it backwards legally to the rear of the "caterpillar" and it's still a ruck. You are correct that he should retreat to alongside or behind the hind most foot of the latest player to join the ruck to form the ludicrous chain of players or he is offside by the letter of the law. That is however pretty much what they usually do. Irritating though it is, it will take a specific new "interpretation" to put an end to the caterpillar.

The reinterpretation I'm hoping for is that scrum halves can continue to move the ball at the back of the ruck as long as they don't pick it up and it stays forward of the back foot But the scrum half must have at least one foot behind the back of the ruck otherwise he's offside. That same reinterpretation would also point out that all the unbound guards lurking at the front 9f the ruck while pulling at opponents shirts are also offside! 😏

[hookender]

The original term for a ruck was a loose scrum.

So why don’t we treat it similarly? It could be called a ruck with with two players, one behind the other. But if a third joins at the back the ref calls scrum (or loose scrum ) , allowing the SH to come down the side but not being able to contest until ball comes out as per normal scrum.(Neils ,I think you made this point about coming down the side in a previous post). The ball could be picked up by the third player or the SH as per a normal scrum.

At least this would limit the length of the caterpillar to two stretched out forwards and SH or a much quicker ball to rear and used.

[coddy]

I'm not sure why we are getting our knickers in a twist about the caterpillar when the game is spoiled by so many needless penaltys. Scrum penaltys vex the hell out of me and slows the game down immensely and most of them are given because one prop gets a minor advantage over his opposing prop so why is that a penalty offence? Theres no cheating or foul play involved so why penaltys and not a free kick?

[coddy]

Oh and while we are at it, why is it a knock on when a defender clearly strips or knocks the ball deliberately from a ball carrier creating another boring break in play and odds on a scrum penalty for a dominant pack?

[hookender]

Going back to original article, Luke Pearse seems to have read it. Things going quick at Bristol tonight