As he was leaving for New Zealand to referee the opening match of the 2009 Tri-Nations, Craig Joubert answered readers' questions. It was something of a surprise appointment as it followed the withdrawal of Mark Lawrence.

1. Name: Ian Cook 

Question: The contentious issue of ruck entry has reared its ugly head again with the controversial suspension of Bakkies Botha for a shoulder charge while clearing out. This is an area which IMO elite referees tend not to police strictly enough. Even though a memo from the IRB was issued in August last year, specifying zero tolerance of players breaking Laws 10.4 (j) & 16.2 (b), we still see numerous examples of players charging into rucks dangerously, and without binding, going unpunished. I hope we are going to see the head/shoulder first flying entry to the ruck removed from the game as I believe the binding and driving technique is more skilful. What do you think, Craig? Will this go from the game entirely, or is it still going to be tolerated at the "showbiz" end of the game? 

Craig Joubert: The IRB continue to impress upon the referees right at the very highest level and to be fed down to all levels of the game that dangerous charging into rucks should not be tolerated. A DVD has been issued to all of us giving examples of illegal entries which are to be penalised and sanctioned by referees. Citing and judicial officers also tend to take a dim view of these types of infringements and certainly the intention is to eradicate it from the game completely.

Cheers, Craig

2. Name: Grant Malcolm 

Question: I love your site; it's entertaining and instructive - keep up the good work!

My question is about a situation I've seen a few times.  The ball is on the ground and defender A gathers it in a defensive fall.  Defender B arrives and crouches over A while A lays the ball back, so that it looks like a typical ruck after a tackle, except there are no opponents.  Suppose an opponent C arrives and looks to play the ball, but defender B grabs him: is B guilty of obstruction, or is he merely exercising his right to form a ruck?

Craig Joubert: A ruck is defined as 2 players in physical contact over the ball on the ground. Players bound in a ruck cannot play the scrum half attempting to clear if he doesn't have the ball.

Cheers, Craig    

3. Name: Hendri Richter

Question: I refer to a question from Stuart Knowling to Mark a few weeks ago regarding a quick throw in after a kick off directly into touch. The non offending team have an option of scrum, line-out or re kick. Is the first step then not for the non offending to choose their option. If this is the case then does the team needs to choose the line-out option, before being able to take a quick throw?       

[The question and answer referred to were:

Question: Current debate about the issue of a kick off going directly into touch (in the defending team's half). Law 13.8 says that the team can have a rekick, scrum back or line out on half way. My question is, does 19.2 cover this situation for a quick throw? i.e. can the defending team take a quick throw between where the ball went out and their own goal line? To me the law is clear that the line out must be on half way but others seem to be of the opinion that the quick throw is valid. What do you think? 

Mark Lawrence: In my opinion the player is entitled to a quick throw in. There has been an infringement by the kickers team and the receiving team has a choice as you mentioned. In the past the teams always tried to take a quick throw in on the half way line. This is forbidden by law 19.2 (b)

Law 19.2 (b) For a quick throw-in, the player may be anywhere outside the field of play between the place where the ball went into touch and the player’s goal line.

Law 19.2. (a), however, allows a quick throw with no limitations stipulated. Therefore as long as the receiving team is prepared to take the risk of taking the throw in from behind the place the ball went out rather than a formed line out on the half way line, that’s their choice and is at the risk of a huge territorial disadvantage. However, the crux of the matter to me is that the intention of the quick throw-in was to speed up the game. So why slow it down by forcing the team to have a formed line out!]

Craig Joubert: Mark's answer concluded by suggesting that the quick line-out is a tool teams can use to speed the game up. It seems reasonable to suggest that if the captain has not already chosen the scrum thereby nullifying his team's ability to take a quick throw-in, then the taking of a quick throw in is a tacit acknowledgement of their decision and the referee should allow play to continue.

Cheers, Craig

4. Name: Quintin Chellew 

Question: Tackled player crawling with the ball after been brought to the ground, but obviously not held.

Does the player not have to release the ball then if he can, pick it up and play on?

By holding on to the ball he crawls over the advantage line on his knees and sets up go forward ball for his side.

If the tackler does not release him the advantage of tackling an opponent is lost as it is a penalty.

So either way the tackler is at a disadvantage if he releases player.

Craig Joubert: A tackled player is obligated to release the ball and get to his feet before he can continue to play. Crawling on his knees should be penalised.

Cheers, Craig