If a maul forms, as long as all players stay connected then it doesn’t matter who’s in front of the ball. If there’s any separation then the infringement occurs when the player with the ball rejoins his mates who are in front of him. Haven’t seen the actual play you are talking about but perhaps someone can put up the footage??
Yeah the maul came off a scrum that had fragmented after it had wheeled around. The maul was just what remained of the Glasgow scrum after the front row had fallen off.
Damn the Bulls were kak.
They refused to pass the ball to the backs. There was a period of like five minutes, within striking distance, where Glasgow were very narrow but the bulls refused to pass the ball to them.
The exact kind of rugby that I despise.
Also, Goosen!!!??? That penalty that he wasted...my word!
The entire second half was the best example one could ever find of poor game management. Looked amateurish at times.
Just had a look and it was fair enough in my opinion. There was a split in the maul but at no stage did the back part of it attempt to link up again with the boys in front. Also thought it was a harsh call disallowing the Glasgow try. Not quite sure what the defender was supposed to do when he could see the Bulls player about to receive the ball. Very marginal decision.
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.
10,110 posts
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.