1
OK, I had a look at it, I'd say Faf was bound when he was blatantly using hands in the ruck, the ref told him to get out of it and he retreated. Faf does shift out of it, I don't think he changes his bind so he's still bound to the ruck? He certainly retreats from the contest and is only lightly bound, but it is full arm and shoulder so I reckon there's an interpretation to be made there.
I'm gonna call him bound, as it relates to the question I'm about to ask and also to Mr Owens' assertion that it wasn't a penalty.
If a player is bound to the ruck, driving through and counter rucking makes a play at the halfback, is that not considered a penalty? I've seen plenty of those types of penalties blown and can't identify the difference between that and what Faf was doing. Is it because the ball had cleared the ruck and therefore White was fair game? I'm really confused about that interpretation and if it had come from anybody other than Nigel Owens I would have thought they got it wrong, but I do respect his opinion.
C'mon the
Whilst Faf is initially bound when he goes fishing for the ball to slow it down further, you can see him clearly remove his bind to the Wallabies players when he removes his hand from the ball.
Does this mean he's now in an offside position as he is no longer bound to the ruck?
FWIW, I think Nigel Owens is really stretching things with his interpretation here. But I do wonder, given the usual Cone of Silence on such matters, what the other referees make of his public critiques of their performances.
"The main difference between playing League and Union is that now I get my hangovers on Monday instead of Sunday - Tom David
Thoroughly recommend it as well given that I'm currently doing the level 1 referees course.