大象传媒

Mike Druce:

Mike, I think that this practice of pretending to be trying not to interfere while still interfering by lying on the opposition side of the ruck is appalling. Unfortunately, this is a feature of the modern game, and I'm sorry to say, England are expert at it. All of our teams are now aping the Kiwis in this kind of cheating.

Other obvious cheats around the ruck are:

Anyone who is ahead of the back foot in the ruck is offside unless they are bound into the ruck. Binding is defined in the laws as one arm from the wrist to shoulder. It is therefore impossible to be in a ruck, ahead of the back foot, with just a hand on a player in the ruck. A player in such a position is offside, and deliberately so. The correct punishment for a professional foul is a RED card, and no discretion is given to the referee in the laws in relation to professional fouls on a rugby field.

Anyone who finds themselves ahead of the back foot while a ruck (or maul for that matter), is in progress must immediately retire. Tardiness in retiring is an infringement that should lead to the award of a penalty.

"Clearing out the ruck" doesn't exist within the laws of rugby. Therefore, anyone who has not entered and bound into the ruck correctly, who is in contact with an opposition player ahead of the back foot is offside, and furthermore is deliberately obstructing play. In this case, the ref would judge whether or not it was deliberate or an accidental occurrence during the fog of play. If the former, a red card should be shown. If the latter, a penalty. The yellow card should not be shown, because if it was accidental, then the player should not really be binned. If deliberate, it is a professional foul, and there is no discretion given to referees if they deem an act to be a professional foul - a red card has to be shown.

The standard of refereeing around rucks is chronically bad. Not only does it prevent the correct flow of the game by tolerating obstruction and the slowing of the ball, but it also increases the chances of serious injury in the ruck or maul.

The IRB has issued formal responses on all of the above issues, and they are publically available on the IRB site. I would have thought that referees would make it their business to read such important statements on the actual interpretation of the laws of rugby.

The standard of refereeing today sorely limps way behind the standard of play. This is nowhere more obvious than in the application of the offside rule at the ruck.

Any player who has not correctly entered the ruck is offside.

To correctly enter the ruck, one must come from behind the ruck, and behind the hindmost foot of the hind-most team-mate in the ruck.

On entering, one must immediately bind correctly into the ruck. To bind correctly means to have at least one full arm, from wrist to shoulder attached to the ruck.

Anyone ahead of the hindmost foot except in these circumstances is offside. Anyone who is legitimately bound into the ruck, but who has progressed beyond the ball-line in the ruck is offside, and must immediately and rapidly retire.

All players know these rules, but they study their referees to assess whether or not the ref applies these rules correctly. Unless the ref intervenes early to penalise such cheating, then the players will continnue to do so. However, where there is serious potential to either score or concede a try, you can plainly see that players can, when they want to, play by the rules.

It is therefore quite clear that infringement of the offside rules at the ruck are more often that not, deliberate. Deliberate fouls are otherwhise known as professional fouls. This leads me to my second gripe about referees, their failure to apply to rule regarding professional fouls.

Although this law has changed in recent years to give referees discretion as to whether to give a red or yellow card at the first infringment, the referee has no such discretion in subsequent infringements of the same nature by the same player subsequent to an admonition or caution. Such a player must be sent off. [10.3 (a)] and [10.5 (b)]

If a team repeats an infringement after a player has been suspended (sin-binned), the referee must send off the next player to repeat the infringement. [10.3 (b)]. No choice is given to the referee in this matter. Infringement is a matter of fact, and intention has nothing to do with it at senior and representative matches.

I can't remember the last time I saw a red-card employed by a referee at international level. Until referees find their cojones as start applying the rules, the ruck and for that matter the scrum will remain beyond the control of the referee to the detriment of the game overall.

The standard of refereeing today sorely limps way behind the standard of play. This is nowhere more obvious than in the application of the offside rule at the ruck.

Any player who has not correctly entered the ruck is offside.

To correctly enter the ruck, one must come from behind the ruck, and behind the hindmost foot of the hind-most team-mate in the ruck.

On entering, one must immediately bind correctly into the ruck. To bind correctly means to have at least one full arm, from wrist to shoulder attached to the ruck.

Anyone ahead of the hindmost foot except in these circumstances is offside, and is a loiterer, unless they immediately and rapidly retire without obstructing the opposition. Anyone who is legitimately bound into the ruck, but who has progressed beyond the ball-line in the ruck is offside, and must immediately and rapidly retire.

All players know these rules, but they study their referees to assess whether or not the ref applies these rules correctly. Unless the ref intervenes early to penalise such cheating, then the players will continnue to do cheat. However, where there is serious potential to either score or concede a try, you can plainly see that players can, when they want to, play by the rules.

It is therefore quite clear that infringement of the offside rules at the ruck are more often that not, deliberate. Deliberate fouls are otherwhise known as professional fouls. This leads me to my second gripe about referees, their failure to apply to rule regarding professional fouls.

Although this law has changed in recent years to give referees discretion as to whether to give a red or yellow card at the first infringment, the referee has no such discretion in subsequent infringements of the same nature by the same player subsequent to an admonition or caution. Such a player must be sent off. [10.3 (a)] and [10.5 (b)]

If a team repeats an infringement after a player has been suspended (sin-binned), the referee must send off the next player to repeat the infringement. [10.3 (b)]. No choice is given to the referee in this matter. Infringement is a matter of fact, and intention has nothing to do with it at senior and representative matches.

I can't remember the last time I saw a red-card employed by a referee at international level. Until referees find their cojones as start applying the rules, the ruck and for that matter the scrum will remain beyond the control of the referee to the detriment of the game overall.

Bring back the red cards that's what I say. I also think that refs should not concern themselves about the quality of the game from the audience's perspective. Instead, he or she is there to protect and apply the laws of the sport. When Laws are unenforced, they are ignored, and become very difficult to resurrent. We must enforce the rules for the benefit of the game. Most teams are willing to accept 10 minutes loss of a player as a fair exchange for conceding 10 minutes in the bin. Teams have to feel the pressure of the red card. No doubt Grewcock wouldn't have put a foot wrong had he felt that the red card was a possibility.

So, come on refs, tell us what your position is regarding offside at rucks and mauls, and red cards in general?

Please ignore my first post. It was posted inadvertently when I went off to recheck the laws, at which point I discovered that the laws had changed to give the refs more discretion regarding red cards and professional fouls (deliberate fouls).