Law Clarification: Maul goes to ground and is not deemed to be collapsed intentionally

There still seems to be some confusing regarding the MAUL. Please share this. Thank you! When a maul goes to ground and is not deemed to be collapsed intentionally: There is no obligation for any players to release the ball or roll away. If the ball is available, play should continue. Availability would constitute that [...]

Non Compliance with Kick-off and Restart Kicks – Reviewing IRB Law 13

Referees & Team Coaches, it has come to the attention of RATO that lately there have been a few issues of non compliance in regards to Kick-off and Restart Kicks. We’d like to review this law to ensure that this trend doesn’t continue. Unfortunately it appears that restarts are much overlooked by teams and referees [...]

Law Trials – Scrum engagement procedure clarification

Following the introduction of the” Crouch, Touch, Set” instructions for scrum engagement as part of the current set of Law trials it has become evident that some referees are not leaving a pause between the “Touch” request and the “Set” request. The pause is required to ensure that the front row players are steady and are able [...]

IRB Law Clarification – Law 3 Front Row Replacements

Attached is the most recent Law clarification from the IRB. It addresses replacement front rows and what should happen in a game with eight allowed substitute/replacements when uncontested scrums are ordered. This is consistent with the USA Internal Variation that has been in place for a couple of years. Currently the IRB is trialing the [...]

IRB clears up bench substitution/replacements law

from Following the confusion about the use of substitutes/replacements in the Pretoria Test when South Africa played Australia, the IRB has clarified the relevant law and issued a protocol for those in charge of the coming and going of players during a match. The problem in Pretoria revolved around the number of substitutes/replacements of [...]