The most experienced referee in the history of Test rugby answers readers' questions. That he and others are still doing so is testimony to the complicated nature of the game.

1. Name: Grant Malcolm

Question: My question is about the Ireland-Scotland game in the Six Nations. Scrums had been a bit of a problem throughout the tournament, and after about 20 minutes of this game, the referee (Jonathan Kaplan) started holding the hookers' wrists before engagement, and after engagement would sometimes lift the Scottish tighthead's elbow.  I'd never seen anything like this before, and was wondering what it's purpose was? (The scrums were well-managed in that game!)

Jonathan Kaplan: Thanks, Grant.

If teams are preempting the call, it is easier to determine who is going first if you are touching/holding the hookers wrists; and with the ‘hit’ being so important it would appear to me to be the critical point in engagement sequence. It works for me! On a couple of occasions I did attempt to raise the elbow of the tighthead to keep the height of the scrum up.

2. Name: Willem du Plessis

Question: Hi,

I have a query regarding players shoving the referee as happened with Juan Smith and Ref Nigel Owens in the South Africa vs New Zealand test last weekend.

Your article with the clip talks about commonsense and this is also probably why Juan Smith was not in more trouble. However, for the sake of argument, what is the protocol when situations like this happen during a match where physical abuse with malice towards the official, however well disguised, occurs? I am wondering about both on and off-field options.

Thanks for a great website!

Jonathan Kaplan:  As far as I am aware, players may not assault the referee in any way.

There are instances on the field where the referee does get in the way, but ALL players know that an effort must be made to avoid the referee. On the odd occasion where contact does occur, commonsense is used to ascertain whether the action was intentional or merely an accident. I don't believe the Smith incident is anything other than an accident, even though there is a nudge to the back of the referee.

3. Name: Werner du Preez

Question: How can I as a Primary school Referee bring the X factor in a game? What is the X factor? 

Jonathan Kaplan: X-factor is the ability to read a game well and bring out the best in the players to make it special for everyone involved. Sometimes it is making the right call under pressure, sometimes talking to the right players at the right time in the right tone.

4. Name: Phil Everitt

Question: Hi

Law 21.3 tells us how a Penalty or Free Kick must be taken.  It says the player may take it with any type of kick: punt, drop kick or place kick.

21.4 (d) says you can't place kick for touch.
21.5 (b) says if you indicate to the referee that you are going to kick for goal you cannot change your mind.
Finally 21.4 (b) says the intention to kick at goal is indicated by the arrival of the tee.

So my question is: Can a player use a place kick to kick downfield if he has told the ref that he is definitely not kicking for touch or goal?  (Let's say he is on his own goal line and just wants to use a tee to get as much distance down field as he can).  Or, when he asks for the tee to do this, does it automatically mean he "must" kick for goal.

We will assume for the sake of the question that he breaks no other laws, such as time wasting.

Many thanks, Phil

Jonathan Kaplan: One can place the ball only when attempting to kick at goal. If I remember correctly, this came about as a result of the time it wasted to get the tee on the field and line up for goal. If the referee thinks the player who asks to take a shot at goal is not doing so, i.e. kicking for the corner, etc, he may order a scrum to the opponents or even penalise the kicker for doing something which is contrary to the spirit of the game!!

5. Name: Winston Harbottle

Question: Hi Duty Ref,

I would like you to answer a question regarding an incident that happened in a friendly game I refereed recently.

A player for the home team (Red, number 12) went off for a blood injury and was replaced by a fellow player, Red 22. Quite quickly, he returns to the game and enters the field during play. He assumes his position on the pitch without checking and the blood reversal does not occur, and so Red have 16 players on the pitch.

The Red Team are attacking at this time, and because of this they have an overlap on the far side. At this time, I was playing a penalty advantage for offside, and using this overlap they score in the corner. At this point, the opposition captain points out that Red have 16 players on the pitch. I check with my assistant, who confirms the player had entered the pitch without any players going off.

At this point, I disallow the try that has been scored. I did this because the extra player was crucial in creating the try, meaning it was unjustly scored. As I was playing advantage, I award the Red team a penalty. I then sent Red 12 to the sin-bin for entering the field and joining in with the game without permission. Red 22 also leaves the field, to complete the blood reversal.

What would you have done in this situation, and do you think my actions were appropriate for this incident?

Thanks for allowing me to ask this question.

Winston Harbottle

Jonathan Kaplan: I think you should have disallowed the try and penalised Red where the player entered the field.

If you see the incident only in terms of what is written in Law 3, you would end up allowing the try and then finding a place to award the penalty - before or after the conversion?

Surely, this is a case for Law 10 Foul Play which includes acts against the spirit of the game. The spirit of the game - and commonsense - suggest that try should not be allowed which was scored with 12's help. You assistant was able to point out to you that foul play had occurred prior to the scoring of the try and that gives you the right to declare the try void and penalise 12 where he took part inn play.

It would have helped if the assistant had stuck his flag out when aware that 12 was illegally taking part in play.

6. Name: Lappies Labuschagne

Question: Boks vs Australia, 28/8

Near the end of the first half Australia has a lineout near the tryline.

Alain Rolland kept telling the Bok "scrumhalf" to stand 2 metres back. (He was intending to join the line-out.) Please explain the law about the Scrumhalf/receiver joining the lineout.

Jonathan Kaplan: The receiver must stand a minimum of 2m from the lineout. They may join the lineout and perform any function but only once the ball has left the hooker's hands!