Lol what a shame

01

i was pretty confused on them myself, i know if you don't engage a maul but don't necessarily leave the lineout, it can either be a penalty or a scrum to you, depending on the oppositions actions, but some of those seemed top defy that

My understanding of this law is that since the defending team doesn’t engage in the “maul” then technically the “maul” isn’t formed and if the receiving lock feeds the ball to his players it’s an obstruction therefore penalty to the defending team the best thing for the lock to do in these type of situations is to keep the ball and break from the “maul” and carry the ball. I could be wrong though

Hi, ref here. A player who is part of the lineout has to remain there and can't retreat backwards until the lineout is over. In simple terms, a lineout is over when the ball is passed away or a maul is formed and crosses the line the ball was thrown along. So, if the defending team doesn't want to engage in the 'maul' they can move sideways to create a gap, but can't drop backwards because they'd be penalised. If they're successful, then the attacking team can either keep the ball at the front of their 'half maul' and advance forwards. But, if they've already passed the ball to the back, then technically the players in front of the man with the ball are obstructing. World Rugby's directive in this case was for the referee to call "use it" and give the attacking team the opportunity to get the ball out, and if they don't then it's a scrum to the defending team for accidental offside. They decided for this rather than a penalty for obstruction because they didn't want to encourage defending teams to do this as it's negative play.

@Joel Taylor thanks a lot for explaining the rules! At 6'30", it seems the "maul" has crossed the line the ball was thrown along when the defender engages. So why the penalty?

True that, it's called click bait!

Seems like there is confusion about the ability to use 100% of ones brain.

Hey! For some reason the site removed them.

@@KOROLRUGBY is there another way i could buy them that sucks

I made some research, and it is quite confusing. First, the black team refuses the maul by not engaging. They were trying to trick the white team, that cannot, in this case, pass the ball backwards, otherwise, they would have players obstructing any tackle attempt, because, well, there is technically no maul. White team would probably have been penalized if they did so, but they were vigilant. When penalizing the black team, ref says in french "Vous sortez de l'alignment", which means "You left the lineout". So, it seems that he considered that the lineout was still going on, which is OK I guess, because article 19.9(b) clearly states 7 cases when the lineout is considered ended. None of them can be applied, here. The closer case would be "When a ruck or maul develops in a lineout, and all the feet of all the players in the ruck or maul move beyond the line of touch, the lineout ends.", but there was no maul because black teams refused it. On the other hand, if you consider the that the lineout is still going on, its a good call because the article 19.14 states that no player should leave the lineout. You can see the tackler going backwards which means he left the lineout in ref's opinion. What I cannot figure out is : When would the lineout have ended ? No rule clearly states it in this situation. Hence, I cannot find any reason white team couldn't have continued to progress until reaching the try line. My guess is that the ref would have called it at some point, just like when your maul isn't going forward any more. If not, it MIGHT be a way for referees to penalize a team that is refusing to engage a maul : "You tried to trick the other team by not playing the maul, but they didn't fall into your trap, so you are all offside becaused considered outside of the lineout, and you are getting penalized anyway." If this is the case, as a black player, you should tackle the ball carrier as soon as possible to prevent them from gaining any more field. In doubt, what I would have tried as a black player would have been to reach for the ball carrier and try and block the ball, in the general confusion, in order to build a maul and eventually gain the ball back on a scrum. But you would have to think in a blink of an eye, and the rules are really confusing in this case.

They do!!! It happens in the majority of plays throughout a game

It did?

It was , but sneaky so referee couldnt see it, part of the game.

Half of the plays in this video are either illegal or unsportsmanlike.