Law discussion: Final nail for Scotland

After a controversy-free 2015 World Cup, we have returned to refereeing controversy – following the match between Australia and Scotland.

It follows the 21st century trend – England's anger in 2003 when André Watson penalised their scrummaging, Wayne Barnes missed a forward pass that contributed to France's victory over New Zealand in 2007 and the 2011 anger at Bryce Lawrence for what was seen as his tolerance of Australian shenanigans at the tackle.

Now we have the 79th minute penalty against Scotland for offside that enabled Australia to win 35-34.

The Scottish anger this time is as furious and passionate as it was in 2003, 2007 and 2011.

However, it does not change the outcome.

But let's look at the incident and the law.

Australia are penalised and Scotland throw into a line-out. They throw deep and Dave Denton just manages to get a hand to the ball, knocking it to his side untidily. Players from each side make for the ball, among them Josh Strauss and John Hardie of Scotland and Nick Phipps and Greg Holmes of Australia. In the turmoil Hardie is closest to the ball and then Phipps. The ball strikes Strauss on the shoulder and travels quickly to Jon Welsh of Scotland, who plays the ball just in front of Scott Fardy.

The referee penalises Welsh for being offside.

The decision caused an outburst of booing in gracious Twickenham.

Bernard Foley goaled the penalty and Australia knocked Scotland out of the 2015 World Cup, causing a spate of European anger. All four of the semifinalists are from the Southern Hemisphere.

Those are sideshows. Let us return to our muttons, as the French say, and look to the laws of the game.

First of all, we are not dealing with a knock-on as the ball hits Strauss's shoulder. This is a straight forward case of offside.

Law 12 DEFINITION: KNOCK-ON

A knock-on occurs when a player loses possession of the ball and it goes forward, or when a player hits the ball forward with the hand or arm, or when the ball hits the hand or arm and goes forward, and the ball touches the ground or another player before the original player can catch it.

‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball-line.

Law 11 DEFINITIONS

In general play a player is offside if the player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team-mate who last played the ball. Offside means that a player is temporarily out of the game. Such players are liable to be penalised if they take part in the game.

Strauss played the ball. Welsh, who was in front of Strauss played the ball.

Definition

Played: the ball is played when it is touched by a player.

Welsh touched the ball.

But what if the ball had touched Phipps?

Law 11.3 BEING PUT ONSIDE BY OPPONENTS

In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by an action of the opposing team. These three ways do not apply to a player who is offside under the 10-Metre Law.

(a) Runs 5 metres with ball. When an opponent carrying the ball runs 5 metres, the offside player is put onside.

(b) Kicks or passes. When an opponent kicks or passes the ball, the offside player is put onside.

(c) Intentionally touches ball. When an opponent intentionally touches the ball but does not catch it, the offside player is put onside.

If Phipps touched the ball intentionally, Welsh was onside.

But what if the ball had touched Phipps?

Then Welsh was offside.

What if Phipps had touched the ball in trying to grab it?

Welsh was onside.

What if Phipps had not touched the ball in trying to grab it?

Welsh was offside.

It is that complicated and it happened at speed, here and there.

Those people booing from the stand could simply not have been able to judge the situation. They were booing only because Scotland were penalised.

Later people had a chance to watch repeated slow-motion recordings of the incident, which the referee did not have.

There were queries as to why the referee did not refer the incident to the TMO.

The simple reply to that is that he was not allowed to by the protocol that applied in the World Cup. If he had have been refereeing in South Africa, he could have referred it as the TMO protocol is broader in South Africa.

But what about the TMO's input that led to the yellow card for Sean Maitland?

The World Cup allows for the TMO to have a say in the matter of foul play, a deliberate infringement which is an aspect of foul play and a possible infringement on the way to scoring a try.

Law 10.2 UNFAIR PLAY

(a) Intentionally Offending. A player must not intentionally infringe any Law of the Game, or play unfairly. The player who intentionally offends must be either admonished, or cautioned that a send-off will result if the offence or a similar offence is committed, or sent off.

Sanction: Penalty kick

And what about the cancelling of Adam Ashley-Cooper's try because of Will Genia's prior knock-on.

From a line-out the Wallabies attacked the Scottish line. Drew Mitchell was tackled about a metre shot and Genia got the ball behind the tackle and threw a long pass to Foley who passed to Kurtley Beale who gave to Ashley-Cooper who dived over in the right corner.

The referee immediately referred the matter to the TMO and it was clear that Genia had knocked on in receiving the ball.

By the protocol for the World Cup, he was allowed to do that because a potential try had been scored.

Also, earlier in the match the referee had awarded a scrum to Australia when the ball made with a player in an offside position.

It was not the same situation.

Dave Denton raced down the left touchline and then passed infield to Stuart Hogg who gave a no-look pass over his shoulder. It fell to ground and was picked up by Michael Hooper who gave it to Kurtley Beal who gave it to Ashley-Cooper who kicked a low which struck WP Nel on the foot and the ball went straight to Finn Russell who was in front of Nel and facing him. Russell seemed to try to gather the ball.

The referee ruled an accidental offside, which mostly makes sense in such cases.

It's horrible when a player gives away three points for a minor infringement.

What one can say is that decisions should be based on the clear and obvious.

The Welsh case was clearly not clear and obvious.

By Paul Dobson

@rugby365com