BRITISH & IRISH CUP - Press Release
===========================
LEINSTER V CORNISH PIRATES
Tuesday December 15, 2009 Issued by the British & Irish Cup
THE British & Irish Cup Organising Committee have ruled on the request by Cornish Pirates to review the circumstances of their match with Leinster on November 27 which resulted in uncontested scrums.
The Committee found that Leinster had complied with International Rugby Board Law and tournament regulations regarding the number of match day squad members capable of playing in the front row.
The referee also complied with IRB Law by moving to uncontested scrums once Leinster's starting hooker had left the field injured and their replacement hooker was yellow carded.
The Committee also affirmed that "the referee is the sole judge of fact and of law during the match" and as such any decision taken by him/her to move to uncontested scrums cannot be overturned after the final whistle .
However, the Committee recognised that the
British & Irish Cup regulation covering uncontested scrums should be re-drafted to avoid any furture confusion.
British & Irish Cup Director Terry Burwell said: "We regret any inconvenience caused by the wording of the tournament regulations and thank Cornish Pirates for highlighting this case.
Both Leinster and the referee complied with the Laws of the Game but we recognise that the tournament regulations allowed for confusion in this matter and they will be re-drafted to eliminate any in the future."
The Committee's full decision follows here:
BRITISH & IRISH CUP
LEINSTER VS. CORNISH PIRATES - REVIEW
Background and Facts
1. Cornish Pirates asked the Organising Committee (OC) to review the circumstances of their match on Friday 27 November 2009 vs. Leinster moving to Uncontested Scrums.
2. The facts, which are not in dispute, are as follows:
a. Leinster's hooker 2 [Strauss] left the field injured after 27 minutes to be replaced by 16 [Harris-Wright].
b. After 59 minutes
16 [Harris-Wright] was given a yellow card, at which time the game went to uncontested scrums.
c. After 10 minutes 16 [Harris-Wright] returned to the field and the match resumed with Contested Scrums.
3. Cornish Pirates contend that the move to Uncontested Scrums was a breach of Regulation 9.4 , which states:
Where a player or players is/are temporarily suspended from the field of play (which includes a blood injury) which creates a third or subsequent occasion that a front row forward needs to be replaced...
4. The fact that this was the second occasion, not the third, has led Cornish Pirates to the conclusion that a breach of Regulation has occurred.
Review
5. The OC has examined the evidence and the relevant Regulations.
6. There was consensus that the Laws of the Game must prevail.
7. In addition the OC believes in the importance of upholding Law 6.A.4.a that states "The Referee is the sole judge of fact and of Law during the Match." As such any decision taken by the
Referee to move to Uncontested Scrums cannot be overturned after the final whistle.
8. The OC notes that Regulation 9.3 requires teams to have 5 players in their squad capable of playing in the front row and to comply with Law 3.5 and, in this particular case, Law 3.5c . This Law requires teams to be able to replace prop for prop and hooker for hooker.
9. Clearly in this case the move to Uncontested Scrums on the second occasion complied with Regulation 9.3 and Law 3.5c because the starting hooker was injured and his replacement was yellow carded.
10. The Referee applied Law 3.5c by moving to Uncontested Scrums once 16 [Harris-Wright] was yellow carded as Leinster were not required by the Laws of the Game nor by Regulation 9.3 to have a third hooker.
11. The OC noted that all unions involved in the British & Irish Cup apply Law 3.5c to the domestic competitions in which their clubs/regions participate.
12. For Cornish Pirates the relevant Championship Regulation is 3.
