Pre-binding onto ball carrier is it allowed?

[Ciaran Trainor]

Watched the highlights of Aus v SA this morning. Well worked first try for SA at a line out.

I have it in my head that you cannot pre-bind onto a ball carrying team mate as it's dangerous but can't find a law reference.
Clearly when the ball is passed back to Etzebeth his teammates bind onto him and drive before any Aussie has engaged.
Have I just dreamt this? It looked wrong to me.

 

[Decorily]

In open play only one player is allowed pre bind. This is allowed in this scenario.

 

[tim White]

There is clearly more than one player pre-bound from SA. but were Aus players also 'pre-bound' thus forming an instant Maul?
And if so, what call might a ref consider?

 

[Decorily]

I'm not sure I understand your point...when one or more defenders bind on to the ball carrier a maul is formed.
Remember a 'potential maul' can be legally pulled down.

 

[Volun-selected]

Well worked idea by SA. Just one question though - looking at the SA 6 who is at the back of the lineout pretty much on the 15 when the ball leaves the throwers hands. They then move near the front while the ball is in the air.
I thought that as much as they can play musical chairs while lined up, once the lineout starts (when the ball leaves the thrower’s hands) players in the lineout can’t change position like that. Am I missing something (or just misinterpreting/plain wrong)?

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

I'm not sure I understand your point...when one or more defenders bind on to the ball carrier a maul is formed.
Remember a 'potential maul' can be legally pulled down.

I agree.
If we accept that passing the ball to Etzebeth is still part of the line out, then Aussie players could instantly bind on and sack him.

Would still like to find a law reference for pre binding in open play if anyone knows it.

 

[Decorily]

I agree.
If we accept that passing the ball to Etzebeth is still part of the line out, then Aussie players could instantly bind on and sack him.

The ball hasn't left the lineout so therefore the lineout hasn't ended.

 

[Decorily]

. .. Aussie players could instantly bind on and sack him.

Would still like to find a law reference for pre binding in open play if anyone knows it.

I hear what you are saying but be careful with the terminology. 'Bind on' may imply a maul is formed and subsequent 'sacking' may be interpreted as illegal.

 

[shep]

I agree.
If we accept that passing the ball to Etzebeth is still part of the line out, then Aussie players could instantly bind on and sack him.

Would still like to find a law reference for pre binding in open play if anyone knows it

World Rugby refers your to 9.22, which is the flying wedge law.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

World Rugby refers your to 9.22, which is the flying wedge law.

Thanks Shep.
That sort of clears it up but referring to the flying wedge which many of today's players will never have seen is a bit vague for me.
I would like to actually see a law written in plain language that prevents more than one teammate binding onto a ball carrier in open play..
In the SA lineout scenario, if Aus had just let them walk and not engage it would be an easy penalty to give.

 

[didds]

Thanks Shep.
That sort of clears it up but referring to the flying wedge which many of today's players will never have seen is a bit vague for me.
I would like to actually see a law written in plain language that prevents more than one teammate binding onto a ball carrier in open play..
In the SA lineout scenario, if Aus had just let them walk and not engage it would be an easy penalty to give.

isnt that then leaving the lineout? ISTR a long protracted thread here about why defending teams cant step aside and that what i recall from it.

probably incorrectly!

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

isnt that then leaving the lineout? ISTR a long protracted thread here about why defending teams cant step aside and that what i recall from it.

probably incorrectly!

They can't step back out of the line but they can move along out of the way and not engage.

 

[Decorily]

They can't step back out of the line but they can move along out of the way and not engage.

In which case the ball carrier and Co can continue on their way!

 

[Decorily]

In the SA lineout scenario, if Aus had just let them walk and not engage it would be an easy penalty to give.

Not an offence as long as the ball remains at the front and no obstruction occurs.

 

[JuDS]

Thanks Shep.
That sort of clears it up but referring to the flying wedge which many of today's players will never have seen is a bit vague for me.
I would like to actually see a law written in plain language that prevents more than one teammate binding onto a ball carrier in open play..
In the SA lineout scenario, if Aus had just let them walk and not engage it would be an easy penalty to give.

A couple of seasons ago the law was changed which only allowed one player to 'latch' onto the ball carrier before contact. That 'latcher' then has to stay on their feet after contact.

 

[didds]

In which case the ball carrier and Co can continue on their way!

but not bound > 1 or it becomes a FW though?

 

[Decorily]

but not bound > 1 or it becomes a FW though?

Nothing clear in law (surprise)... but not a FW if arising from a lineout.
Definition states either from a FK, PK or open play.

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

Nothing clear in law (surprise)... but not a FW if arising from a lineout.
Definition states either from a FK, PK or open play.

Agreed but if the pod moves forward, or back off the line of touch we have open play so it's a flying wedge. Don't you just love the ambiguous laws!

 

[Decorily]

Agreed but if the pod moves forward, or back off the line of touch we have open play so it's a flying wedge. Don't you just love the ambiguous laws!

I wouldn't be viewing it as a FW even after the LO is over....that's how we were told to referee it in IRFUland.

 

[jdeagro]

Not an offence as long as the ball remains at the front and no obstruction occurs.

"Ball remains at the front" or Ball Carrier?...i.e. could the Ball Carrier be penalized for obstruction if they face the direction of their own in-goal with the ball and walk backwards towards the opposition's, such that they themselves are blocking the ball from the opposition?