Request
within law 3.14. Rolling Substitutions
1. Does the injured player have to go off at the time of the foul play or can the player try to play on first?
2. Can a No. 22 who has tactically replaced No. 10, and then gets injured by foul play, be replaced by the No. 10 while other unused subs remain on the bench?
3. What is the definition of foul play for the purpose of this Law?
4. What happens if the referee plays advantage from the foul play; can the player still be replaced?
5. What happens in games where there are rolling substitutions?
6. Does the injured player have to go off permanently; or, if deemed fit, can he return later in the game?
Clarification of the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
The Designated Members have reviewed this request for clarification and the below are the relevant responses.
1. Replacement should be immediate.
2. The substituted No. 10 can re-join even if another replacement is available.
3. Law 10.4 defines foul play for the purposes of this Law
4. Yes, player must be replaced at next stoppage.
5. The player will be deemed to be injured and will not be permitted to return to the field of play.
6. If a player is injured and is replaced, he may not return. There are no temporary replacements while injury is being assessed.
Following on from the recent Law Clarification (Law 3.14) further clarification is sought by the WRU as to the following scenario:
Scenario – Red No.3 (TH) is injured and replaced by No.18 (declared TH cover). No.18 then gets injured as a direct result of foul play. No.18 can be replaced but Red has no recognised TH on the bench and, as such, would have to go to uncontested scrums. Law 3.6(d) states that a player whose departure causes the referee to order uncontested scrums cannot be replaced.
In the above scenario, can the Red team now continue for the remainder of the game, however long it may be, with 15 players – due to the fact the replacement TH has been injured as a direct result of foul play – which has to be verified by the match officials, or do they reduce to 14 (as per Law 3.6(d))? This scenario can relate to any member of the front row.
It is noted that if the above were to arise then front row replacements must be used first for uncontested scrums.
The WRU view is that the game should continue with equal numbers and Law 3.6(d) is not enforced. There is a direct correlation with HIA albeit a time constraint.
Clarification of the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
The Designated Members have reviewed this request for clarification and the below are the relevant responses.
In this scenario the Red team can continue with 15 players. The new clause to 3.14 was added so as to not disadvantage a team that had lost a player due to foul play. Law 3.14 should supersede Law 3.6(d) in the unusual situation where a front row player has been injured as a direct result of foul play.