Laws Question? Ask here!

Can you provide the rule? I'm not doubting you, i'm doubting myself.

Here's what i based it on.

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/clarification/2007/2/

Some optional law changes that unions may introduce in the community game to help increase participation

Will be interesting if many/any do get put into practice here...

Think you have to designate all front rows before the game. So they needed to have someone nominated in advance who could play and is a experienced hooker.

Is it possible to say how many positions a sub can cover when they can cover more than one of the front row positions? Or is it one designated sub per front row position?

For example, Porter can obviously cover both sides.

And some hookers would be capable of playing loosehead prop and vice versa.

Perhaps they want to limit it in this way to prevent a team having say three tighthead props and subbing every 25 mins or something, if that were advantageous?

Or is there like a medical cert a player needs to become allowed to play in each of the front row positions, perhaps a certain number of hours playing or practicing in that position or something? The union probably have to declare that ahead of time and could be in serious trouble if they declared someone were able to cover a position without them being prepared properly and played someone in the wrong position and it ended up causing an injury.

Subs can cover multiple positions but at this level you must have 3 players to cover the replacement of each of the starting front row and if for example a loosehead prop was replaced tactically in a game or a loosehead on bench was nominated before the game as also able to play tight head and the starting and replacement tight heads were out/off then they could play.

its not about preventing a team having 3 TH and replacing them whenever as laws allow you do that with 2 props right now

Its not a medical cert to play each position but the scrummaging is very different in each and you really do need to be fairly experienced to play both at an elite level.

you have to declare who front row replacements are at every level of game. be it u14 or elite pros. you declare when handing in team sheets to match organisers/officials.

AFAIK you can name more players as “qualified” to play in front row positions - I’ve often started games in 2nd row or at 8 and been designated as eligible to play at 1 or 3, even with us having replacements for both on the bench, and designated also.

Few times where we’ve have starting prop play 40, replacement play 20, and then I’ve moved from 5 to 3 for final 20

Correct. Without such a law in place, a team can load their bench with back row players or backs and simply sub them on for the front row if their scrums are costing them possession during the game. Scrummaging is integral to the game and there is a clear discrepancy in law if a team can be afforded an advantage over their opposition by dodging them without some sort of sanction. Although it was a hard situation on Italy the issue only arose when they lost one hooker to injury and another to ill discipline.

One thought I had watching the match yesterday was, why is it the rule that the team causing uncontested scums loses a player for the rest of the match? I think there's no real reason to disallow a player joining back into the play as soon as the next restart of play takes place that isn't being restarted with a scrum.

So, for a scrum, you'd be down a player, but at the next stoppage in play the player would come back on until the next scrum were called. Seems that would be a bit fairer anyway.

Looking at the technique here - in many of the tackles he seems to be dropping to his knees before executing the tackling.

Is he not in beach of Law 13-3:

https://www.world.rugby/the-game/laws/law/13

A player on the ground in the field of play, without the ball is out of the game and must:

c) Not tackle or attempt to tackle an opponent.

I get that it’s not one that a referee is ever likely to call, but once knees are down then strictly speaking is he not “on the ground” under he laws, and in breach of the above?

Any thoughts on matt williams article about referees and the laws etc from todays irish times

Williams has always been a disconnected moan bag. So coming out with that stuff isn’t really surprising. It’s a growing trend from the SH to moan about and attack referees. From the games gone soft brigade. It’s not “in the spirit of the game” to cynically waste time. The I’ve not spoken to any former players, who agree with this. To try lend gravitas to his view point. Is like an argument a child would use.

The term stealing a living is used around here quite often. Both as a coach and a pundit, I can’t think of anyone it’s more accurate for than Mutt.

They're only supposed to call 'use it' when it becomes stationary. I can't say I can think of examples where a team driving forward has been told to use it.

Not as far as I know. Use it means you have to get it out of the scrum.