Law discussion: Uncontested scrums

The Springboks played the All Blacks at Ellis Park on Saturday, and in the second half there were six uncontested scrums, apparently because the Springboks had no suitable substitute for Vincent Koch who was himself substituting for Jannie du Plessis.  Du Plessis and Koch had both been playing tighthead.

The decision to have uncontested scrums has been contested with the finger pointing at the match officials.

Du Plessis was off for injury and Koch had gone off because he was bleeding. The reason stipulated at the time was that he was going off for blood.  But, although he showed no chest distress, he had also popped a rib cartilage. (It does not seem that the rib injury was serious enough for later mention.)

The replacement for Koch was Trevor Nyakane who, it is generally accepted, can play both loosehead and tighthead and do so effectively. He had played tighthead for the Bulls in the 2015 Super Rugby competition which was just past.

But when he went on he was not allowed to play tighthead and the game degenerated into uncontested scrums which was too the detriment of the Springboks, especially when Sam Whitelock was sent to the sin bin. Two uncontested scrums were five metres from the New Zealand line, which meant two occasions when South Africa could not shove for some advantage.

Let's look at the law to see if Nyakane had to be excluded from playing prop, so much so that scrumming was rendered thus ridiculous.

Law 3.4 PLAYERS NOMINATED AS SUBSTITUTES

(a) For international matches a Union may nominate up to eight replacements/substitutes.

(d) A team can (sic) substitute up to two front row players (subject to Law 3.14 when it may be three) and up to five other players. 

Law 3.5 SUITABLY TRAINED AND EXPERIENCED PLAYERS IN THE FRONT ROW

(a) The table below indicates the numbers of suitably trained and experienced players available for the front row when nominating different numbers of players.

Each player in the front row and any potential replacement(s) must be suitably trained and experienced.

Number of players     Number of suitably trained and experienced players

23                                  Six players who can play in the front row

(b)Prior to the match teams must advise the referee of their front row players and replacements. Each player in the front row and any potential replacements must be suitably trained and experienced.

(c) The replacement of a front row player must come from the suitably trained and experienced players who started the match or from nominated replacements. A player other than a nominated front row player is permitted to play in the front row only when uncontested scrums are being played and there are no available front row replacements.

(d) A suitably trained and experienced front row forward may start the match in another position.

(g) If a Union or match organiser decides to have 23 players nominated for a team there must be sufficient front row players to play at hooker, tighthead prop and loosehead prop who are suitably trained and experienced to ensure that on the first occasion that a replacement is required in each front row position, the team can continue to play safely with contested scrums. If a team is only able to nominate two suitably trained front row players then only 22 players may be nominated for the match.

(i) If a team does not have suitably trained front row players prior to the match so that contested scrums cannot take place the referee will order uncontested scrums. The referee will report the matter to the match organiser.

(k) When 23 players are nominated for a match, or if the Union having jurisdiction over a match or a match organiser decides that where uncontested scrums are ordered as a result of there being no suitably trained and experienced front row replacement for any reason the team concerned shall not be entitled to replace the player whose departure caused uncontested scrums.

(r)A previously substituted front row player is permitted to replace a front row player who is injured, temporarily suspended, or sent off if the replacement will ensure that scrums remain contested.

(s) If uncontested scrums have been ordered and there is an injury to a front row player which requires that player to be replaced and there is a front row replacement available, then the front row replacement must be used rather than other players.

(t) If uncontested scrums have been ordered and a team has utilised all its permitted replacements/ substitutes and a front row player is then injured, that player cannot be replaced.

That's a lot of law and we have left out some that are not applicable to this match.

It is clear from this law that World Rugby wants contested scrums to go on. It is clear that front-row replacements are to be suitably trained and experienced.

Nyakane was suitably trained and experienced to play tighthead. If he had been allowed to do so, contested scrums could have gone on.

Nobody is born with a birthmark that reads TIGHTHEAD. They become tightheads because they want to and they learn about it and so  they become suitably trained and experienced for the level at which they are playing.

Equally nobody is born with a birthmark that says LOOSEHEAD ONLY.

But the referee decided that Nyakane could replace only Tendai Mtawarira, not Du Plessis or Koch. But was it the referee?

In trying to unravel what happened there is a lot of 'was told to' – the anonymous passive voice.

But it is clear that the referee is told, presumably by information supplied by the match official on the side who was controlling Springbok coming and going, that scrums had to be uncontested.

The referee accepted this without questioning the player or his captain. He then told the scrums that became uncontested, to the Springboks' disadvantage.

One can surely presume that at such a sophisticated ground coaches can hear the conversation. The Springbok coaches must have known what was been said.

One knows only too well that coaches have the ability to relay messages to their players.

One could reasonably expect the coach to be able to object to the instruction which the referee received and relayed. That does not seem to have been the case.

One could then presume that there is something outside the laws of the game that lays down that a prop be stamped LOOSEHEAD or TIGHTHEAD. But this was not the case.

On the teamsheets of each team, Springboiks and All Blacks, the three front-row replacements did not mention loosehead, hooker or tighthead. Instead behind each name was (FR). FR = Front Row. No one of them was confined to only one position.

Instead, when Koch went off obviously bleeding, the manager of the Springbok team went to the official in charge of Springbok movement from and onto the field and told him clearly that the Springboks had only a loosehead replacement for Koch. The official then told the referee this that it would be a loosehead coming on to play in the tighthead position.

The referee understood and said: "OK. So uncontested scrums."

The referee then called the two captains and told them that the scrums would be uncontested. He said it audibly. There was no query from the captains.

The Springbok manager immediately acknowledged what was happening and said he understood and that they had no objection to this as they had run out of props, so to speak.

And so it happened that the Springboks and the All Blacks played on with uncontested scrums for the remainder of the match.

The first of the uncontested scrum was to New Zealand five metres from their line, and they won good ball easily and cleared.

There was another twist to the sorry tale. Adriaan Strauss, a hooker, replaced Mtawarira, a loosehead.  There was a suggestion that after Mtawarira's departure the Springboks should have had to play with 14 men, but it seems that the laws make allowance for this.

Law 3.5 (s) If uncontested scrums have been ordered and there is an injury to a front-row player which requires that player to be replaced and there is a front-row replacement available, then the front row replacement must be used rather than other players.

Strauss is a front-row player. There was a front-row player available to take Mtawarira's place.

All of this is part of a complicated law and it would seem that the management of every rugby team whould have an expert in the Laws of the Game as an important part of its management team.

It would also seem wrong to point a finger at the match officials.

By Paul Dobson