IMPORTANT RULINGS BY THE APPEAL COMMITTEE.

Evening Post, Volume LII, Issue 93, 10 September 1896, Page 6

IMPORTANT RULINGS BY THE APPEAL COMMITTEE.

The following decisions have been given by the Appeal Committee of the N.Z. Rugby Union on appeals submitted by the various Unions. MABLBOBOUGH BUGBY UNION. A and B sides are playing ; B side obtains a try ; placer brings the ball out ; kicker takes it from him and shows placer how he wants it placed, putting it on the ground. Can a side charge when the .ball was put down by kicker ? Decision. — The kicker may place the ball on the ground for the purpose of showing the placer how he is to place it for the kick. CANTEEBUBY KUGBY UNION. Is it lawful for a referee to allow a second kick if the kicker has taken his kick before the whistle sounded for an illegal charge ? Decision. — The referee should not have blown his whistle after the kick had been taken. Law 10 says " provided the kicker has not taken his kick." A second kick should not be allowed. A's side obtain a mark, and while the catcher is about to place the ball for one of his side to kick, there is an appeal from A's side for B's players (who are going to charge the kick) standing at the wrong place. The referee blows his whistle, and while putting B's players back to the place where the mark was obtained, A's side takes the place kick, and kicks a goal. Before the goal is "kicked — that is, while the ball is in transit — the referee blows his whistle, and orders another kick on the ground that, he had not blown his whistle to re-start the game, and therefore A's side should not have kicked. Decision. — The referee acted within his powers in ordering the kick to be taken again, and his action must be endorsed. This decision must not, of course, be interpreted to mean that a referee is bound to blow his whistle in all cases to re-start the game after a mark or a breach of rule is allowed. TITE CANTEBBUBY BEFEBEES' ASSOCIATION. This Association recommended that it is necessary for a player catching the ball to call " Mark " if he wish to have a mark. Decision.— Appeal Committee could not enforce such a recommendation, as there is no law under which a player could be penalised for not calling " Mark." KELSON KUGBY 'UNION. In a cup match, the referee blew his whistle and took possession of the ball on account of several players being down in the scium. He then consulted his watch, and found time was up. Under a mistaken impression that he could not call " no side " till the ball went out of play, he proceeded with the game. The .ball was subsequently ag.iin held, and after that a try was obtained. The referee admitted having overlooked Law 3 (i), otherwise he would have called " no side " before the try was obtained. Decision. — The try must be disallowed, as the referee admits having overlooked Law 3 (t), under which he could otherwise have called " no side " 'before the try was obtained. WANGANUI BUGBY UNION. After a try or free, kick has been gained, may the kicker be the placer if j he so desire ? On page 30, Case Law, New Zealand Annual, paragraph 4, first line, should the word " placer " be read " player" ? Decision. — Appeal Committee ruled that the meaning of Case Law on page 30 of the New Zealand Rugby Union Annual is that, "Any one of the side may touch and arrange the hall." The paragraph in question is correctly copied from the English Annual. The player intended to be • the kicker could therefore change places with the player intended to be the placer if he desired. The Wanganui Referees' Association has ruled that should any part of a player who is running with the ball swing into.touch, such player be considered in touch. It was also ruled that the same ruling apply to touch-in-goal as in touch-line play, but if the ball be lying in goal, a player may score a try, although he be in touch-in-goal himself. Decision. — Appeal Committee approves of rulings. MABLBOBOUGH EUGBY UNION. Case I.— Marlborough and Awaruas playing. — Marlborough team started with 14 men, including an emergency player ; then another emergency player came on, making their team complete. The match had been started five minutes when another player (one originally chosen in the team) came on. The captain of the Marlborough team three minutes later, noticing he had 16 men, at once sent off the emergency player who was playing when the game started. No score was made up to this time. The game was won by the Marlborough team by thr,ee points to nil. The Awarua captain entered a protest "that the Marlborough team changed men during the game without permission." The protest watf considered at a meeting of this Union, and, it was decided that the game he played over again. It was also decided that the Marlborough team had changed men during the game, also that as there was no rule bearing on the case that it be sent as a precedent for the N.Z.R.U. to decide. Decision. — Ruling of Marlborough Union upheld. Case 2.— 1. Rule lof game says—" The Rugby game of football should be played by 15 plaj-ers on each side." 2. In decisions of English Rugby Union it says — " The onus is on a side to see that their opponents do not play more than IB men, and if they fail to do so they must be sufferers thereby, and points scored must be counted." 3. Case law 1893 says- -" A team Was discovered at half time to have been playing with 16 men. Its opponents claimed the match on this ground. The • Wellington Union ordered the match to be re-played. Decision of Wellington Union upheld." 4. Case law, 1894, says : — " A team*played to near call of time with 16 men, when the opposing team became aware of the fact, and one man was sent off. The non-offending, team appealed, and the Poverty Bay Union' ordered the match to be re-played. Decision Poverty Bay Union upheld." 6. If 2 is correct, is not case law wrong, as a case might arise where a team played with 16 men and won, and its opponents did not find it out till after the match ; they could still enter a protest and get the game played over again, according to case law 1893 and 1894, and 2, according to these rulings, «ould not be taken any notice of. 6. Does 2 mean that supposing a team played with 16 players, and they scored before opposing team found it out, that a man must be sent off and the points already

scared counted, and also supposing it was not found out and the 16 men played the game right through and won, would the game be a win for the team with the 16 men, as the opposing team did not find it out ? Decision. —1. " Should " is intended. As explained iv case law, it is the duty of each side to see that their opponents have no more than 15 players — they may have less than 15. 2, was passed after 3 and 4 and by a superior court ; 3 and 4 are therefore of no effect. 6. Yes, that is the correct meaning.