Clarification 1-2026
Clarification in Law by the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
| Clarification | 1-2026 |
|---|---|
| Union / HP Ref Manager | RFU |
| Law Reference | 9 |
| Date | 2 March 2026 |
Request
When it comes to citings or disciplinary hearings, can you explain the difference between these two laws? Can you provide examples so disciplinary/judicial teams can ensure offences are dealt with appropriately:
Law 9.20(a): A player must not charge into a ruck or maul. Charging includes any contact made without binding onto another player in the ruck or maul.
Definition: Binding
Grasping another player’s body firmly between the shoulders and the hips with the whole arm in contact from hand to shoulder.
Law 9.20(b) states:
A player must not make contact with an opponent above the line of the shoulders.
Relevant Laws
Law 9: Foul Play - Dangerous play in a ruck and maul
Regulation 17: Annex 1 - Foul play sanctions tables
This question has arisen because the Regulation 17 sanctions tables provide different mid and top end sanction ranges for players who enter the disciplinary process for these offences. As a result, players and their representatives are often requesting for cases to be heard under Clause b which has a lower sanctions outcome than Clause a.
| 9.20 Dangerous play in a ruck or maul. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| a. A player must not charge into a ruck or maul. Charging includes any contact made without binding onto another player in the ruck or maul. | |||
| Low-end: 2 weeks/matches |
Mid-range: 6 weeks/matches |
Top-end: 10+ weeks/matches |
Max: 52 weeks/matches |
| b. A player must not make contact with an opponent above the line of the shoulders. | |||
| Low-end: 2 weeks/matches |
Mid-range: 4 weeks/matches |
Top-end: 8+ weeks/matches |
Max: 52 weeks/matches |
Clarification of the designated members of the Rugby Committee
Response
The following does not change any current process for on-field officials, outside of selecting the right offence when completing any post-game reports. It covers off-field disciplinary and judicial sanctions following a red card/citing.
In simple terms, the majority of offences which lead to red cards in these areas should be considered 9.20a offences. To have met the red card threshold, they usually involve a player arriving into a ruck/maul/tackle at speed, and with no grasp or bind with the arm at the point they make the dangerous contact with an opponent. A player attempting, but not completing, a grasp/bind is not sufficient.
Only if a player has a fully legal action arriving into contact (with a completed bind and/or grasp and so not to be deemed a charge) but still makes dangerous head contact which meets the red card threshold, should it be sanctioned under 9.20b. (Example here)
Law 9.20b would also include actions once a player is already in a ruck/maul and who then makes contact with the head/neck of an opponent. (Example here). These would be very rare as they would often be sanctioned as a strike or stamp, and so be sanctioned under law 9.12.
This approach is consistent with World Rugby’s player welfare philosophy including protecting the head/neck, which leads to higher sanctions. A player should not escape the consequences of their actions by being able to point to a less serious offence even if they could be deemed similar.
See examples of both offences in this file: https://worldrugby.box.com/v/ruckchargelaws