Marius had a busy time being an assisatnt referee over this weekend past and this weekend will be up in Johannesburg when the Lions play the Chiefs.  In between he again answers readers' questions. 
 
1.  Name: Neil Emmott
 
Question: Hello,  Marius. 
 
Thanks for fielding questions. 
 
What is your take on the final penalty that sealed the game for the Chiefs? The online version I saw seemed to show the ball going backwards and therefore fair for retiring Sharks players to gather. 
 
Thanks

Marius Jonker: Hi Neil. 

I expected this one!

Law 11 DEFINITIONS
In general play a player is offside if the player is infront of a team mate who is carrying the ball, or in front of a team mate who last played the ball. 

It is immaterial whether Roy Kockott knocked the ball on or not. The facts are that the player that played the ball next was in front of Rory Kockott when he last played it and did not get himself in an onside position before playing it. 

The offside player should have run behind Rory Kockott who last played/touched the ball and he would have been onside under Law 11.2 (a). 

Law 11.2 BEING PUT ONSIDE BY THE ACTION OF A TEAM-MATE
In general play, there are three ways by which an offside player can be put onside by actions of that player or of team mates:
(a) Action by the player. When the offside player runs behind the team-mate who last kicked, touched or carried the ball, the player is put onside.

Referee was correct. 

Regards, Marius. 
 
2.  Name: Chad McAlister
 
Question: It appeared to me that the Sharks game was given away to the Chiefs by a piece of poor decision making,  where a knock back by Kockot was called a knock on,  and Sykes was penalised for playing the ball from an offside position after Kockot played it back from the loose,  giving the Chiefs a sitter of a penalty in the dying seconds of the game.  (BTW I felt this way at normal speed,  but went back to SUPER SLOW and looked and this confirmed my opinion)         
 
What is your view of this?

Marius Jonker: Hi Chad. 

Please refer to the previous question and answer. 

Referee was correct. A sad way to lose but that is life. 

Cheers, Marius. 
 
3.  Name: Francois van Rooyen
 
Question: Hi.  Ek's van Richardsbaai. 
 
In Saterdag se game tussen die Sharks en Chiefs in die laaste sekond het die skeidsregter die strafskop gegee wat ek glo 100% reg is. 
 
My vraag is wanneer in daardie geval is 'n speler onkant. In dieselfde game het 'n paar spelers die bal vorentoe laat val en 'n speler van dieselfde span het opgetel en die bal gespeel en dan word daar 'n skrum gegee vir 'n aanslaan. 
 
So my vraag is wanneer is jy omkant in daardie geval en wanneer is jy nie onkant in so geval?
 
Dankie en sterkte vir die seisoen. 
 
Francois  

Marius Jonker: Hallo, my tjom. Goed om van 'n touch rugby buddy te hoor. 

Ek verwys graag na die vorige vrae en antwoorde. 

'n Speler in 'n onkant posisie is vir alle doeleindes ' uit die game' totdat hy aankant is. Die speler in onkant posisie kan op die volgende maniere aankant geplaas word.

-wanneer die onkant speler agter die speler wat die bal laaste geskop, gespeel of geraak het verby hardloop, 
-wanneer die speler wat die bal dra verby die speler wat onkant is hardloop, 
-wanneer 'n spanmaat wat gelyk of agter die speler was wat die bal laaste geraak het  voor die onkant speler verby hardloop is die speler aankant. 

Daar is gevalle waar 'n onkant speler nie kan verhoed dat hy die bal raak of 'n speler raak wat die bal dra nie en dan is dit 'accidental offside'. Dit het 'n skrum tot gevolg. (reël 11.6). 

Law 11.6 Law 11.6 ACCIDENTAL OFFSIDE
(a) When an offside player cannot avoid being touched by the ball or by a team-mate carrying it, the player is accidentally offside. If the player's team gains no advantage from this, play continues. If the player's team gains an advantage, a scrum is formed with the opposing team throwing in the ball.

Onkant by 'n aanslaan word 'n strafskop net as die onkant speler verhoed dat sy opponente die bal speel om voordeel te kry.

Law 11.7 OFFSIDE AFTER A KNOCK-ON
When a player knocks-on and an offside team-mate next plays the ball, the offside player is liable to penalty if playing the ball prevented an opponent from gaining an advantage.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Ek hoop Manie, Duncan en Ramon (Wimpy) weet ook nou waaroor dit gaan! Sien julle vanaand. 

Cheers, Mara. 
          
 
4.  Name: Naas Ferreira
 
Question:  Marius, 
 
Ek het twee aspekte. 
 
Die eerste is onbillik om vir jou te vra; dus kan Paul miskien laat weet of hy saamstem. 
 
Die laaste losskrum Saterdag in Durban was Chiefs No.5 duidelik met sy hande in en moes dit sekerlik 'n strafskop vir die Sharks gewees het?
 
Die aspek wat jy gerus mee kan handel is die doodgevatte speler by die doodvat.  Die reël sê duidelik dat hy ook moet wegrol.  Die reel is duidelik maar word dit duidelik geignoreer en slegs die doodvatter word gestraf?
 
Die nuwe toepassing het goeie voordele maar sal meer he as die reëls korrek toegepas word soos dit lees 

Marius Jonker: Hallo Naas. 

Goed om van jou te hoor. 

Ek ken jou goed genoeg om te weet dat jy redelik op hopgte van die reëls is. Die eerste gedeelte van jou vraag kan jy self oordeel.  Daar's 'n clip hiervan lanksaan.

Wat jou tweede gedeelte aan betref. . . .

Jy is korrek. Skeidsregters is getaak om op die 'tackler' te konsentreer en hopelik het dit die gewensde uitwerking maar ons is ook heeltemal bewus daarvan dat ons nie nou die ander reëls moet vergeet nie. 

Ek en al die ander skeidsregters daarbuite neem kennis van jou baie goeie stelling wat jy maak. 

Dankie, Marius.      
 
5.  Name: John Davies
 
Question: Watching the Wales vs Scotland yesterday  as a neutral,  a  number of issues  came to mind.  Could you comment?
 
The scrummage was a mess.  I don't know the stats but I feel very few ended correctly. 
 
What could or should our Irish colleague have done? Despite his threat to escalate to cards the problems continued.  Was his credibility undermined by not carrying out the threat. 
 
Secondly not having the benefit of seeing a replay at the end of the game when the second yellow card was issued was the Scottish defender in the air attempting a charge down when contact on the Welsh player was made and controversially did the welsh player accentuate his fall to earth.  Would it be opening a Pandora's box to extend the remit of the TMO to cover such game-changing,  critical decisions. 

Marius Jonker: Hi John. 

Some really interesting observations made by you. 

Scrums were not good. I know that the referee on the day will assess this and so will he be assessed accordingly. I am not at liberty to discuss what should have or what should not have  been done in this particular game but can tell you that in South Africa (and I am sure this is the case worldwide) all our referees work hard on this aspect of the game. We have lots of discussions/sessions with Balie Swart, Tappe Henning, André Watson and other role players in order to reach perfection at scrum time. 

Referees want the following at scrum time. . . . 
-Proper engage, 
-Decent hit on engagement, 
-Honest angles, 
-Proper binding, 
-Credible feed by scrumhalf. 

Referees manage these and need to identify problems whilst under huge pressure and this is not an easy task. The facts are that players need to take responsibillity at scrumtime. Referees do not collapse scrums or mess scrums up. 

In regards to the second part of your question. . . 

I know that there are people for and against the expansion of the TMO's powers in games. Personally I am with you on this one and I believe it can be really good for the game. Status quo at present is that this is not the case though and the TMO can be used only in regards to in-goal decisions. 

Regards, Marius.