1. Bleeding changes
A coach asks
What does the change in the bleeding law allow and not allow? How many times is a player allowed back onto the field for bleeding?
The IRB answers:
A player who is bleeding must leave the field. If he is off getting attention for 15 minutes, he will not be allowed back on.
The fifteen minutes is running time. If he is injured five minutes before half time and half time lasts for ten minutes, he would have to be back on the field for the start of the second half.
The player is allowed back onto the field repeatedly in the same match – as long as he gets back before the 15 minutes is up each time. The 15 minutes are not accumulated. If he is off for 15 minutes in one absence, he is not allowed back on.
Clearly this is open to manipulation which is not what the law intended.
2. The Eales Leap
A referee asks:
What is the change to the law as far as jumping to stop a penalty kick at goals goes, the way John Eales did?
The IRB answers:
The John Eales Leap, not to be confused with the Fosbury Flop because it is much, much higher, happened when opponents were kicking at goal, especially from a long way out.
Eales – and other did it – would stand under the crossbar and two team-mates would hoist him into the air to catch the ball as it dipped towards the crossbar.
As of 1 January 2002, that is out. If a player prevents the goal from being scored in this way, the referee will award a penalty to the kicking team 5m from the offender’s goal-line.
If he does it and the kick would not have gone over, play goes on.
3. Blind man’s bluff
A player asks:
What is this business about not being allowed time to replace a contact lens?
The IRB answers:
For quite some time players have been allowed time to replace contact lenses. It can be a time-consuming exercise.
The law in this regard has not changed, but at a meeting of referees in Singapore it was decided that losing a contact lens was not an injury and so time should not be allowed to replace one.
This used to be the law for a loose bootlace as well. Time was then allowed to replace a jersey or shorts (Remember the old-fashioned circle in days when players wore jockstraps?) but not to retie a bootlace.
This led to silly abuse. A team-mate would feign injury to buy time for his chum to retie his lace.
Now we could get the case where a team-mate could feign an untied lace to buy time for his chum to get a contact lens back in place.
4. Ruck and maul
A lady asks:
What are the differences between a ruck and a maul and are there different rules for how each must be played? If so what are these rules?
The IRB answers:
Gently, rugby football is a noble game and has laws, not rules. I say that just to get terminology right. It’s not a serious point.
Ruck: The ball is on the ground and at least one player on his feet makes contact with an opponent on his feet over the ball.
Maul: The ball is being carried by a player on his feet. He is held by an opponent on his feet and a team-mate of the ball-carrier joins the pair. That is the essence of a maul.
The difference is that in a maul the ball in being held and handled. In a ruck the ball be neither held nor handled.
5. Tee for kicks
A spectator asks:
There don't seem to be any laws on the restrictions for kicking tees. Does anything go?
The IRB answers:
The laws say simply the tee "approved by the Union".
I know of no tees disapproved by any union or by any referee.
They have now reached ridiculous proportions and kick-offs have become punts off a piece of plastic. There is no question of kicking from ground as a place kick is supposed to be.
The Laws define a place kick. The ball is kicked after it has been placed on the ground for that purpose.
There are not many plastic grounds in use!
The idea of the tee was to act as a ball-holder for a kick from the ground.
