At the end of Munster's convincing defeat of Leinster in the Rainbow Cup on Saturday night, Neil Treacy spotted an apparent flaw in the wording and interpretation of the game's laws that caused confusion.
With Munster comfortably ahead on the scoreboard in the final few minutes of Saturday's game, an innocuous scrum awarded to Leinster for a collapsed maul prompted Peter O'Mahony to act.
In accordance with rule changes being trialed by the PRO14 for the Rainbow Cup, the Munster captain believed that he was entitled to question any decision made by the referee after the 75-minute mark.
Neil Treacy recounted on Tuesday's OTB AM the conversation that followed:
Referee: 'You can't challenge a non-decision, you can only challenge a whistled decision.'
Peter O'Mahony: 'But it's the last 5 minutes [of the game.]'
Assistant Referee (heard speaking to referee): 'You can't challenge a set-piece at a lineout.'
Peter O'Mahony: 'But it's the last 5 minutes, you can challenge anything.'
Referee: 'You can't challenge a non-decision.'
All clear and easy in the referee's eye, OTB's resident rugby expert spotted an uneasy openness in the interpretation of the laws, however.
Despite stating that Law 9.1 to 9.6 and 10.11 to 10.23 contain details of what can be challenged by captains in the final 5 minutes, it seems a mistake has been made.
"I'm almost certain that's a typo on their document," he explained. "It should say 'Law 9.1 to 9.6 and 9.11 to 9.23' - Law 10 doesn't even have that many subsections."
Yet, the problems didn't end there.
Despite the referee's insistence in real-time that Peter O'Mahony and Munster had no case because 'this was a non-decision', Treacy pointed out the holes in this theory.
"If we're talking about a non-decision," he reasoned, "surely the decision that the ball was taken in [to the maul] and made unplayable is a decision?
"Logically, Munster would be challenging the call that they brought the ball in and it became unplayable."
Counter to the assistant referee's reminder that 'you cannot challenge a set-piece,' he was at pains to point out that this was not really relevant at all.
"The set-piece is over as soon as the maul is formed," he explained, "so, a maul following a lineout is not a set-piece."
As if all this was not enough, Neil then addressed the issue of foul play and its (mis)application.
Trialed for these very reasons, Neil Treacy nevertheless concluded in pointing out that far greater transparency and clarity will be needed moving forward.
You can watch back this week's edition of the Tight 5 in its entirety here
Download the brand new OffTheBall App in the Play Store & App Store right now! We've got you covered!
Subscribe to OffTheBall's YouTube channel for more videos, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for the latest sporting news and content.
