We are going to discuss several matters of law including feet on the heads of prone players.

Tappe Henning, it seems, was removed from the list of international referees for his failure to deal adequately with foul play, and the incident involving AJ Venter was cited against him. Down the popular Tappe plunged from being in the top 16 of referees in the world to below the top 26 - an awful plunge for a dedicated referee, having serious implications about his status and earnings.

Henning, surely, is not alone in this regard and other, similar circumstances could be cited concerning referees who are still on that list of 26. There are differences in the treatment of foul play.

Matt Dunning punches and is shown a yellow card. Tai MacIsaac punches and is sent off. Martin Johnson punches and is not shown any kind of card.

Clearly there is punching and punching and all that.

In rugby football the boot on the face or head is a different matter. It always has been looked on as an ugly happening.

1. The case of the accident

Dafydd Jones of Llanelli in a Heineken Cup match was given a red card and banned for six weeks when his boot landed on the head of Ludovic Lousteau of Perpignan.

When the Reds played the Waratahs recently, Jono West of the Waratahs put his boot on the head of Elton Flatley of the Reds. For this he was cited. At its meeting the SANZAR judicial committee found "that the incident was an accident which occurred as a result of players collapsing in front of him at a ruck situation, and was not stomping on the Reds' player Elton Flatley".

West was exonerated and a loophole provided - the accident.

In the Super 12 over the Easter weekend there was more than one incident of a boot landing on a head. It is understandable if the West case was regarded as a precedent - if you are looking for an excuse.

There looked to be four incidents other than the one we want to discuss - two when the Chiefs played the Cats, one when the Waratahs played the Brumbies and one when the Hurricanes played the Highlanders. Four in one weekend - that is a large number for one weekend - four accidents in one weekend.

We want to focus on one - from the match between the Hurricanes and the Highlanders.

Rodney So'oialo of the Hurricanes drove on the Highlanders 22. Filipo Levi of the Highlanders tackled him and both went to ground, Levi behind So'oialo. Kupu Vanisi, the Hurricanes' flank arrived. He put his boot on Levi, first on his body, then twice on his face.

The referee was in a good position to see it. Indeed he said that he saw it.

What he said was: "It was an accidental, guys. I saw it. It was an accident. I was right there, watching. Accidental."

Perhaps saying it thrice convinced him and everybody else that it was an accident. The upshot was a scrum to the Hurricanes.

Does accidental exonerate?

It would seem that there are three ways something cane go wrong - through accident, through negligence, through recklessness and by premeditation. Those would be in ascending order of gravity.

If I am driving along in a fashion acceptable to a reasonable man and a child suddenly rushes out from a bush in front of the car, that is an accident, and there is no blame to me.

If I am driving along below the standard of a reasonable and I bump into a child. I was negligent. I am culpable in this case. It is no longer an accident.

If I am driving along in a way that I know is dangerous and choose to continue in that way, having no regard for the dangers of such an act, I am guilty of recklessness. This is a case of dolus eventualis and not an accident.

Negligence could amount to culpable homicide, recklessness to murder.

The finding in the West case was of accident - that Flatley arrived there as his feet were coming down, so it seems.

That would have been an accident.

But in the Vanisi case, Levi was already lying there. Vanisi then chose to put his feet on Levi's body, something the Laws of the Game does not allow. He must have known, as a reasonable man would know, that it was well within the realm of possibility that his foot could make contact with Levi's head.

Surely that amounts to recklessness and a long way from accident/accidental.

Law 10.4 DANGEROUS PLAY AND MISCONDUCT
(b) Stamping or trampling. A player must not stamp or trample on an opponent.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Read it with Law 16.2 (f) A player rucking for the ball must not ruck players on the ground. A player rucking for the ball tries to step over players on the ground and must not voluntarily step on them. A player rucking must do so near the ball.
Penalty: Penalty Kick for dangerous play.

In the West case there was at least an inquiry - as would have happened if a child was killed even if it was an accident. In the four cases of this weekend there was no citing, no inquiry.

Many would subscribe to the belief that nothing happens by accident. A player must be careful about where he put his boots.

Let's leave the matter there. There are many more things which could be said.

2. Shoulder to shoulder

We are not talking about the amiable Irish pre-match anthem but about running for the ball. In Pretoria the week before Frikkie Welsh of the Bulls was accused of pushing a player as he went for the ball. In the match between the Crusaders and the Sharks, Chris Jack of the Crusaders was penalised for pulling Butch James of the Sharks away as the two ran for the ball.

What is allowed?

Law 10.1 OBSTRUCTION
(a) Charging or pushing. When a player and an opponent are running for the ball, either player must not charge or push the other except shoulder-to-shoulder.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

This is ancient law and stands to reason. In 1903 it read: A player running at the ball may charge an opponent also rubbing at the ball, but such a charge may only be shoulder to shoulder.

In 1905 at was changed.

It is law that stands to reason. If two players are running for the same ball but are required to stay apart they would end up running parallel to each other and past the ball!

Even soccer allows such shoulder-to-shoulder contact.

It did not look as if Jack pulled James aside.

3. The touched drop

Butch James of the Sharks dropped for goal. The ball struck Chris Jack of the Crusaders or Jack struck the ball. The ball flew over the crossbar and the referee awarded the goal.

No problem?

No, not now but the ancients amongst us will remember that a goal was not allowed if a defender touched the ball on its way goal-wards.

Imagine a situation where James's kick is a low one and certainly not going to go over the crossbar. But it strikes Jack's leg and flies into the air and over the bar.

Over?

Yes.

4. Between the legs

Xavier Rush plays No.8 for the Blues. At scrums he traps the ball and then flicks it back through his legs to Steve Devine, the scrum-half.

OK?

Not so sure, are you?

If Rush is bound, that is if he has an arm bound to a lock from hand to shoulder, he is guilty of hands in the scrum. If he is not bound the scrum is over and the opposing scrumhalf is allowed to play the ball.

5. Dead?

De Wet Barry of the Stormers kicks the ball ahead. It rolls into the Blues' in-goal area. Mils Muliaina of the Blues waits for the balls which stops in in-goal. He picks it up with one foot over the dead-ball line.

Is the ball dead? Yes.

Is there now an option to the Blues of a drop-out or a scrum where Barry kicked the ball?

Law 22.8 Ball kicked dead in in-goal.
If a team kicks the ball through their opponents' in-goal into touch-in-goal or on or over the dead-ball line, except by an unsuccessful penalty kick at goal or an attempted drooped goal, the defending team has two choices:
To have a drop-out, or
To have a scrum at the place where the ball was kicked, and they throw in.

The ball was not kicked on or over the dead-ball line. Muliaina made it dead.

It should be a drop-out.

6. Quick throw-in - 1

Aaron Mauger of the Crusaders kicks ahead. Marika Vunibaka chases. Under pressure Butch James of the Sharks gathers and chips into touch. Mauger picks up the ball and fires a quick-throw-in into midfield where AJ Venter of the Sharks catches the ball and passes it to Charl van Rensburg.

Off-side? No. It's general play. There is no line-out at a quick throw-ion.

If the throw was skew? There is advantage to the Sharks, who in fact scored a try as a result as the excellent referee waved play on

7. Quick throw-in - 2

Just after the Reds kick off, the ball comes back to Bulls' fullback Jaco van der Westhuyzen who kicks a long kick into touch. Reds' scrumhalf Josh Valentine collects the ball and passes it to Julian Huxley. The passes is substantially backwards.

Commentator: "It's OK to pass it backwards - just not forward."

True?

No. The quick throw-in must be straight, neither backwards not forwards.

But play went on, you say.

The kick had been from inside the Bulls' 22 where the referee and the touch judges were. Not even the most fleet footed Bull was able to get to where Valentine throw in. One could hardly expect the referee or the touch judges to get there.

The decision about straight is the referee's. The excellent referee did not guess and play went on.