Loose Pass

This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with refreshing honesty, urban myths, law clarification, game feeling, and fun!

This week we will mostly be concerning ourselves with refreshing honesty, urban myths, law clarification, game feeling, and fun, fun, fun!

A typical post-match interview these days consists of various combinations or variations on the following sentences: 'We had to work hard', 'full credit to the opposition', 'we just managed to get more points on the day', or 'the whole team has to take the plaudits' from winning players, to 'we just came up short', 'we can't blame the referee', 'we'll go back and work hard' or 'credit to the opposition' from the losers. You can add any number of bland media-savvy homogenous neutral soundbites to that list. It gets incredibly boring.

Not quite so media-savvy and nondescript are the French, the Argentinians and the Canadians, though. We'll start off with our favourite quote of the World Cup so far from Canada's Ryan Smith about the make-up of his team: “I think it helps that we have a bunch of guys that look like homeless guys and a bunch of blue-collar guys putting in the hard work.”

We also have Felipe Contepomi ensuring nobody would fight his corner and try to plead he was onside when preventing Dan Parks kicking a late drop goal for Scotland in Sunday's thriller: “It was a very tough decision to make. Wayne Barnes fortunately had his back to me.”

And finally Marc Lièvremont gives up on blandly deflecting spiky questions from French journalists: “Your question gives me the sh*ts!”

It's nice to know some people still say what they think.

There's been quite a few TMO calls this World Cup, which can be a pit of a pain in the neck for those in the stands, a good chance to go to the fridge for the TV viewers, and a great chance for TV commentators to flex their vocal chords further.

Yet nearly to a man, every single one seems to be insistent that a player grounding the ball for a try needs to have control of the ball when it's touched down.

At no point in the lawbook does it mention the word control. Not once. All there needs to be is downward pressure. So a player can put his hand on a mid-air ball and force it downwards, and if his hand is still touching the ball when it hits the ground, it will be a try – irrespective of whether the ball then squirts away uncontrolledly. It could even be his little finger.

Additionally, when the ball is on the ground, the player can touch it down with the entire front portion of his torso from waist to neck inclusive – he could even have his hands tied behind his back.

The key for a TMO call, and for any observer, is simply to ensure there was downward pressure applied, with one of the correct parts of the body, and in the absence of any knock-on or other transgression. so next time you see a TMO call, remember, this is all you need to look for. Not control.

Sticking with laws for a moment, a question came to us regarding when players are offside at a drop goal attempt which hits the post – sparked by Morgan Parra's failed effort against the All Blacks on Saturday.

Our reader – a Mr. Aaron O'Donell – argued thus: “he hit the post, then all the French forwards attempted to gather the rebound and nearly scored. My question is, why were they not offside? they were 15 meters in front of Para when he took the shot, and he did not move after it hit the post . Does hitting the posts mean they are played onside?

So, when the drop goal attempt was made, for players in front of Parra the 10m law applied: “When a team-mate of an offside player has kicked ahead, the offside player is considered to be taking part in the game if the player is in front of an imaginary line across the field which is 10 metres from the opponent waiting to play the ball, or from where the ball lands or may land. The offside player must immediately move behind the imaginary 10-metre line or the kicker if this is closer than 10 metres. While moving away, the player must not obstruct an opponent.”

In the instance of the ball hitting the post, what matters is where the ball lands – the 10m law still applies until the ball lands and then from the point the ball lands. So it does indeed look as though the French forwards are offside, as they were almost under it when it came down.

However, while Parra didn't follow his kick, if his centres did and came from behind Parra, the chasing centres would have put all the forwards onside immediately – and it is common practice for at least one centre to be told to do this for precisely this reason. It is also worth noting that offside is always a flat line across the field, so a centre could have been 20 yards wide of the point where the forwards were, out of camerashot, but still playing the forwards onside by being beyond that initial offside line.

Unfortunately, the bottom line here is that we've not yet seen a replay of the incident. But we're willing to bet that, while Mr. O'Donnell is indeed correct in the point of law, there was one French back there who had put all the forwards onside by coming from behind Parra when he made his kick.

*huff, puff* Rugby is not an easy game.

While on the subject of what Alain Rolland might or might not have noticed in regard to drop goal offsides, we're giving big props to him for halting play immediately for an injured player during the match – even though the player was some way behind the subsequent breakdown. Contrast that with Wayne Barnes letting the game go despite a clearly distressed and injured Juan Fernandez Lobbe being quite materially in the way during Argentina v Scotland.

There's a certain licence granted to referees to let injured players be treated while play goes on, which is understandable when one team has a clear advantage – which does prevent any pernicious soccer-style hoodwinking going on – or when the player is well out of the way.

But we've pointed out these two cases because to our mind they were remarkably similar: similar positions of non-advantage on the field, and similarly able to be stopped for treatment and reset with a scrum to the side in possession. It boils down to common sense and feel for the game. Rolland got it spot on, Barnes did not.

We don't think Barnes is as bad as all his detractors make out, but we did feel this little incident – and the potential for danger it presented to Fernandez Lobbe – represented the way Rolland's playing experience gives him more feel for the game than Barnes, or for that matter any of the current crop of professional referees who have never played to any significant level. It is why – assuming the absence of Ireland or France in the final – we reckon Rolland might get the plum match once again this year, and why we'd be very much in favour of that decision.

Finally, props too to the organisers of the tournament for their game build-up agenda. The countdown to kick-off: inestimable fun. The choral anthems: wonderful every time. The pukaea blowing to announce the arrival of