Stormers vs Toulon: Was the Referee Right? Law 13 Explained | Rugby Debate (2026)

The Stormers' Champions Cup campaign ended in controversy, with a series of referee decisions that left the team feeling hard done by. The most contentious moment came in the final play of the game, when Toulon flanker Charles Ollivon made a tackle that denied the Stormers a try. The decision to allow Ollivon to make the tackle, despite him being off his feet, sparked debate and raised questions about the interpretation of the lawbook.

The incident in question occurred during a pick-and-drive play, where Ollivon dropped onto one knee in anticipation of the next carry. His fellow back-rower, Mikheili Shioshvili, was still on the Stormers' side of the ruck when Marcel Theunissen made a grazing contact with him. Former Springboks head coach Nick Mallett was furious, believing that both Shioshvili and Ollivon were illegal. Mallett's frustration highlights a common misunderstanding of the law, as Ollivon was indeed off his feet, which is a violation of Law 13.3.

However, referee Christophe Ridley correctly explained that Ollivon was 'in-goal', which allows him to be off his feet. This interpretation is crucial, as it means that Ollivon's actions were not penalizable and perfectly legal. The lawbook's definition of 'in-goal' and 'field of play' is essential in understanding this decision. Ollivon's understanding of the laws and his ability to make the tackle without being on his feet showcased his rugby IQ.

The Stormers' gripe with the final passage of play was the question of whether the ball was grounded. Ridley asked the TMO for clarification, and the decision was made to rule no try. This decision was influenced by the fact that the TMO needed to find compelling evidence of a grounding to overturn the on-field decision. The Stormers' boss, John Dobson, conceded that they didn't make it easy for the officials and that they had other options to get the winning points.

The game ended with a one-point win for Toulon, and the Stormers felt aggrieved. They had several opportunities to score, including a drop goal and spreading the ball wider. However, their biggest gripe was the decision not to award a penalty try after Matthias Halagahu collapsed a threatening maul. This decision sparked debate, with some questioning whether it was the right call.

In conclusion, the referee decisions in the Toulon-Stormers match were controversial, but the interpretation of the lawbook was crucial in understanding the legality of Ollivon's tackle. The Stormers' frustration highlights the importance of clear communication and understanding of the laws in rugby, and it serves as a reminder that even the smallest details can have a significant impact on the outcome of a game.

Stormers vs Toulon: Was the Referee Right? Law 13 Explained | Rugby Debate (2026)

References

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Golda Nolan II

Last Updated:

Views: 6780

Rating: 4.8 / 5 (78 voted)

Reviews: 85% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Golda Nolan II

Birthday: 1998-05-14

Address: Suite 369 9754 Roberts Pines, West Benitaburgh, NM 69180-7958

Phone: +522993866487

Job: Sales Executive

Hobby: Worldbuilding, Shopping, Quilting, Cooking, Homebrewing, Leather crafting, Pet

Introduction: My name is Golda Nolan II, I am a thoughtful, clever, cute, jolly, brave, powerful, splendid person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.