Glasgow truck and trailer try

I do want someone with a proper grasp of the rules to talk us through the first Glasgow try of the second half though. Looks like clear truck and trailer to me.

From theukrules.co.uk:

Obstruction in maul rugby rules is an infringement. It rarely goes unpunished by the referee in the modern game. The term ‘truck and trailer rugby’ offence occurs when a player screens the opposition.The result blocks tacklers from reaching the ball carrier.

Rugby guides suggest the law gets circumvented if two or more team-mates move forward while binding around the ball together.

The referee often allows a maul to continue providing the tackler has a reasonable opportunity to contest the ball.

Yet here we can see a train of no fewer than three players in front of the ball carrier (BC) as Glasgow march towards the line. No one has a fair chance to challenge the ball carrier. In the first half the Bulls were penalized for exactly the same thing with only Van Staden in front of the carrier.

PM

Critics call the game plan used by the Bulls yesterday as negative and often calls it Jake Ball.   It entails that the backline malfucntion in atacking play - an over-emphasis on aimless kicking  - but not lapses in defense which were in evidence yesterday,

Thanks for clearing that up, Moolaa & Stav.

I see why many pundits absolutely loathe this aspect of the maul though. It does amount to legal obstruction that's virtually impossible to defend.

Well the segment of the maul that peals off takes out Bull defenders who are outside the maul. Effectively Part A of the maul was a truck for the trailer….part B. At the time I thought the ref would call it..but the Laws are pretty vague.