Laws Question? Ask here!

tolosenc · 23-04-2012 12:58pm

Pinged at the weekend over something that I'm unsure of. Do there have to be players from both teams there for it to be a ruck? There was none from my team (defence) and I thought that that meant that the ball was out, so went for it.

Shelflife · 23-04-2012 1:38pm

If it was originally a ruck and then all your team pull out , its still deemed to be a ruck.

tolosenc · 23-04-2012 1:46pm

Thanks.

Maybe an ELV. Would encourage players to roll away, and would speed up play as a result.

For Paws · 23-04-2012 1:59pm

Downtime wrote: »

Interesting question. If you go to ground you are a tackler and must release the tackled player. If you do not go to ground but bring that player to ground you are not obliged to release him as you are not a tackler so I would assume you can drag him into touch. I cant see anywhere where it says you cannot.

Once a player in possession of the ball is brought to ground, the tackler (whether he is on his feet or not) must release him, and allow him to release / place the ball.

Downtime · 23-04-2012 3:06pm

For Paws wrote: »

Once a player in possession of the ball is brought to ground, the tackler (whether he is on his feet or not) must release him, and allow him to release / place the ball.

I misread a piece of law an in my search saw 15.6 (c) Players in opposition to the ball carrier who remain on their feet who bring the ball carrier to ground so that the player is tackled must release the ball and the ball carrier. Those players may then play the ball providing they are on their feet and do so from behind the ball and from directly behind the tackled player or a tackler closest to those players’ goal line.

daveharnett · 23-04-2012 4:29pm

tolosenc wrote: »

Pinged at the weekend over something that I'm unsure of. Do there have to be players from both teams there for it to be a ruck?

Yes. If there are no defenders, then it's not a ruck, just a 'tackle area'.

A ruck is a phase of play where one or more players from each team, who are on their feet, in physical contact, close around the ball on the ground. Open play has ended.
Players are rucking when they are in a ruck and using their feet to try to win or keep possession of the ball, without being guilty of foul play.

What you got pinged for (probably, I wasn't there

)

15.6
(d) At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the ball and from directly behind the tackled player or the tackler closest to those players’ goal line.

For those who don't speak IRB, that means the gate applies to the tackle area, even if there's no ruck. Tacklers are excepted - if they can get back on their feet before a ruck forms, they can jackal from any angle.

tolosenc · 23-04-2012 11:37pm

So, not obliged to stay on my feet, as if diving on a loose ball, but just have to come through the gate?

castie · 25-04-2012 6:38am

tolosenc wrote: »

So, not obliged to stay on my feet, as if diving on a loose ball, but just have to come through the gate?

As soon as you make contact with them its a ruck so if the ball is loose on the ground you can dive.

If theres someone between you and it so youll have to go through him then youll form a ruck in the process.

rje66 · 25-04-2012 6:59pm

castie wrote: »

As soon as you make contact with them its a ruck so if the ball is loose on the ground you can dive.

.

be careful there as Law 16.4 e states , players must not fall on or over the ball as it is coming out of a ruck.

I know its a greyish area. Is coming out of a ruck , it rolled 3inches past foot OR it squirted out at speed and stopped rolling 1 metre away.

Laws want players in close proximity to rucks to stay on their feet.

pigeonbutler · 25-04-2012 9:14pm

Came across this one flicking through laws.

(j) When a tackled player reaches out to ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try, an opponent may pull the ball from the player’s possession, but must not kick or attempt to kick the ball.

Sanction: Penalty Kick

In what circumstances could this NOT be a penalty try?

Surely in nearly all cases it's going to be a deliberate infringement, hence foul play and surely prevents a probably try, hence penalty try?

Podge_irl · 25-04-2012 9:55pm

pigeonbutler wrote: »

Surely in nearly all cases it's going to be a deliberate infringement, hence foul play and surely prevents a probably try, hence penalty try?

Probably, but they're not going to make the sanction a penalty try in the laws, they'll leave it up to the ref.

Its also a law that gets broken repeatedly yet goes unsanctioned.

locum-motion · 25-04-2012 10:08pm

Podge_irl wrote: »

...Its also a law that gets broken repeatedly yet goes unsanctioned.

Really? I don't think I've ever seen someone attempt to kick the ball out of the hands of a tackled player who is trying to place it over the line. I've seen players trying to dive in or slide in knees first to try to prevent the grounding, but not a kick or attempted kick.

Podge_irl · 25-04-2012 10:13pm

locum-motion wrote: »

Really? I don't think I've ever seen someone attempt to kick the ball out of the hands of a tackled player who is trying to place it over the line. I've seen players trying to dive in or slide in knees first to try to prevent the grounding, but not a kick or attempted kick.

I've definitely seen sweepers running across the kicking the ball as someone else grounds it. At least I think I have....maybe I'm just losing my mind.

locum-motion · 26-04-2012 12:01am

Podge_irl wrote: »

I've definitely seen sweepers running across the kicking the ball as someone else grounds it. At least I think I have....maybe I'm just losing my mind.

Ah, but the law in question specifically refers to a tackled player trying to place the ball across the line, not any other form of grounding.
As I said, I don't think I've ever seen anyone attempting to kick the ball in that situation.

castie · 26-04-2012 8:11am

rje66 wrote: »

be careful there as Law 16.4 e states , players must not fall on or over the ball as it is coming out of a ruck.

I know its a greyish area. Is coming out of a ruck , it rolled 3inches past foot OR it squirted out at speed and stopped rolling 1 metre away.

Laws want players in close proximity to rucks to stay on their feet.

It wasnt a ruck yet though until he is in physical contact with them.

Raises a funny point though.

If your standing just in front of the ball and a player of smaller height can reach in under your legs to get the ball without touching you it seems legal.

daveharnett · 26-04-2012 1:23pm

tolosenc wrote: »

So, [after a tackle] not obliged to stay on my feet, as if diving on a loose ball, but just have to come through the gate?

Nice idea, but no

15.6 OTHER PLAYERS
(a) After a tackle, all other players must be on their feet when they play the ball. Players are on their feet if no other part of their body is supported by the ground or players on the ground.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(e) Any player who gains possession of the ball at the tackle must play the ball immediately by moving away or passing or kicking the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

(f) Any player who first gains possession of the ball must not go to the ground at the tackle or near to it unless tackled by an opposition player.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Even if you didn't try to play the ball, I don't think a ref would take kindly to you sealing it off. As you can see from the extracts above, the motivation of the law is to keep players on their feet and give the ball every chance of getting away.

link

daveharnett · 26-04-2012 1:38pm

pigeonbutler wrote: »

Came across this one flicking through laws.

(j) When a tackled player reaches out to ground the ball on or over the goal line to score a try, an opponent may pull the ball from the player’s possession, but must not kick or attempt to kick the ball.

Sanction: Penalty Kick

In what circumstances could this NOT be a penalty try?

Surely in nearly all cases it's going to be a deliberate infringement, hence foul play and surely prevents a probably try, hence penalty try?

I've had it happen once. In the event, I gave a yellow card (it was dangerous) but not a PT.
The attacker had been grounded, and was just starting to stretch (so the ball was maybe 1.5-2 feet from the line. There were 3/4 tacklers hanging off him, climbing over him, dragging on his arms and so on, to the point where you couldn't say that a try was probable but for the foul play.

I could also imagine a scenario where a non-offending defender has planted himself on the line to prevent grounding, and a second defender kicks at the ball looking to prevent the subsequent 5m scrum. Again, no PT.

daveharnett · 26-04-2012 1:42pm

castie wrote: »

If your standing just in front of the ball and a player of smaller height can reach in under your legs to get the ball without touching you it seems legal.

Seems legit. Since there's no ruck, I suppose the smaller player isn't obliged to bind when he arrives at the gate, and is entitled to play the ball. I imagine the bigger player might have other ideas mind!

castie · 28-04-2012 7:01pm

If in a game I tell a SH or someone else to use the ball. (Whether it is a scrum/ruck)
If he does not use it its a scrum to the opposite team in my book.
Its not something I have a law quote to back up though.

Have seen Poite do the opposite this evening.

Thoughts?

Shelflife · 28-04-2012 11:00pm

castie wrote: »

If in a game I tell a SH or someone else to use the ball. (Whether it is a scrum/ruck)
If he does not use it its a scrum to the opposite team in my book.
Its not something I have a law quote to back up though.

Have seen Poite do the opposite this evening.

Thoughts?

There's no obligation on a team to play the ball at a scrum or a ruck.
The ref telling them to use it is wrong!

castie · 29-04-2012 7:04am

Shelflife wrote: »

There's no obligation on a team to play the ball at a scrum or a ruck.
The ref telling them to use it is wrong!

Every International ref does it...

Shelflife · 29-04-2012 10:32am

castie wrote: »

Shelflife wrote: »

There's no obligation on a team to play the ball at a scrum or a ruck.
The ref telling them to use it is wrong!

Every International ref does it...

I know, it does my head in .

It's just their way of trying to get the ball moving and out if the scrum esp if the scrums are messy.
If the ball is not played its either a reset or the ref should penalise one of the teams.

At ruck time the ball is live and if a team wanted they could leave the ball there as long as they want.

CIARAN_BOYLE · 29-04-2012 1:00pm

Is it legal to pull on an opposition players scrum cap so that it comes down and covers their eyes during a ruck?

I saw it a couple of times in Ulster Edinburgh yesterday and complained to a friend sitting next to me but he said that it wasn't at all illegal. I reckoned that there was no law about it but I thought it would be covered by poor sportsmanship.

castie · 30-04-2012 2:43am

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Is it legal to pull on an opposition players scrum cap so that it comes down and covers their eyes during a ruck?

I saw it a couple of times in Ulster Edinburgh yesterday and complained to a friend sitting next to me but he said that it wasn't at all illegal. I reckoned that there was no law about it but I thought it would be covered by poor sportsmanship.

Pulling at a scrum cap I would put at the same level as pulling someones hair.
Tackling someone by the hair is illegal and so will be by the scrum cap.

daveharnett · 30-04-2012 10:22am

castie wrote: »

If in a game I tell a SH or someone else to use the ball. (Whether it is a scrum/ruck)
If he does not use it its a scrum to the opposite team in my book.
Its not something I have a law quote to back up though.

Have seen Poite do the opposite this evening.

Thoughts?

Since the ref has no mandate to dictate when the ball should emerge from a scrum/ruck/maul (unless we're talking about extreme time-wasting), the only time he should advise a team to "use it" is when it is good advice - he is about to award against them unless the ball moves. This could apply when a maul has stopped progressing, or a scrum is rotating toward 90 degrees.

It certainly shouldn't be happening when the front of a scrum has gone down (or up) and he ought to be stopping for safety.

I was surprised at the unenforced 'use it' from Poite yesterday. He is, for all his limitations, better than most at the scrum, and attempting to bluff a scrumhalf is never a good idea.

daveharnett · 30-04-2012 10:29am

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

I saw it a couple of times in Ulster Edinburgh yesterday and complained to a friend sitting next to me but he said that it wasn't at all illegal. I reckoned that there was no law about it but I thought it would be covered by poor sportsmanship.

Definitely. It's the kind of niggle that got overlooked in both semis over the weekend.

Shelflife · 30-04-2012 11:43am

I would look at interference with the scrum cap as foul play, and any player pulling a scrum cap off i would be looking at a min of a yellow.

Imo rippling a scrum cap off is very dangerous, tipping it down over his eyes is just acting the boll ix and i would penalise it as well.

Another thing that bugs me is this clapping an opponent on the back when they give away a pen, all it does is antagonise people. Id be having a word and then reversing a pen if it continued.

castie · 01-05-2012 3:34am

Shelflife wrote: »

I would look at interference with the scrum cap as foul play, and any player pulling a scrum cap off i would be looking at a min of a yellow.

Imo rippling a scrum cap off is very dangerous, tipping it down over his eyes is just acting the boll ix and i would penalise it as well.

Another thing that bugs me is this clapping an opponent on the back when they give away a pen, all it does is antagonise people. Id be having a word and then reversing a pen if it continued.

To be fair alot of times you see people ending up in head locks when being tackled. (BOD gave one)

Its just as easy to rip the scrumcap off by the player trying to get out of a tight position than the tackler trying to rip it off on purpose.

Agree if someone gets tackled by the scrumcap then its a penalty and should be treated exactly like pulling on someones hair.

Captain_Generic · 04-05-2012 8:09pm

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby? Pretty sure I do it all the time when tracking back

castie · 05-05-2012 4:25am

Captain_Generic wrote: »

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby? Pretty sure I do it all the time when tracking back

Unsportsman like conduct I believe would cover this.

daniels.ducks · 05-05-2012 7:42pm

Captain_Generic wrote: »

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby? Pretty sure I do it all the time when tracking back

Football as in GAA or football as in soccer?

awec · 06-05-2012 1:35pm

daniels.ducks wrote: »

Football as in GAA or football as in soccer?

It's against the rules in soccer.

daveharnett · 07-05-2012 7:01pm

Captain_Generic wrote: »

Was playing football yesterday and to my surprise calling for the ball when the opposition has it is a bookable offence. Is it the same in rugby?

It's not mentioned in law, which is not to say that a ref couldn't penalize it if he didn't like it, as per castie.

castie wrote: »

Unsportsman like conduct I believe would cover this.

sydthebeat · 14-05-2012 8:07pm

i cant find any minimum dimension anywhere... i have read the official law here which is fine but does anyone know of (unwritten or otherwise) minimum dimensions of a pitch??

surely its not allowed that the 22 can also be the 10 meter line

im trying to design in an extra pitch onto a clubs ground... im playing with a 60 x 90 pitch currently

rje66 · 14-05-2012 8:58pm

pitch 60m wide no prob.

pitch 90m long = 45m from half way to try line, 10m+22m= 32m accounted for,
so space between 10m and 22m is 13m, no problem there.
BUT.......

if your 90m has to include dead ball area then allow appox 3m for it, thus area between 22m and 10m is 10m no prob

also rem. you will need a strip along both touch lines of at least 3m for subs/spectators.

cym's pitch in terenure is tight for space and there dosent seem to be any probs. there

sydthebeat · 15-05-2012 12:58pm

thanks rje66

i hadnt included a dead ball area in that 90 m, i actually had allowed 10 m but looking at that now it may be too generous.... possibly 5 is ok?

the spectators areas work ok...

whats the breaking point?
is less than 10 m between the 10 and the 22 not acceptable?

locum-motion · 15-05-2012 7:03pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

i cant find any minimum dimension anywhere... i have read the official law here which is fine but does anyone know of (unwritten or otherwise) minimum dimensions of a pitch??

surely its not allowed that the 22 can also be the 10 meter line

im trying to design in an extra pitch onto a clubs ground... im playing with a 60 x 90 pitch currently

1.2 REQUIRED DIMENSIONS FOR THE PLAYING
ENCLOSURE
(a) Dimensions. The field of play does not exceed 100 metres in
length and 70 metres in width. Each in-goal does not exceed 22
metres in length and 70 metres in width.
(b) The length and breadth of the playing area are to be as near as
possible to the dimensions indicated. All the areas are rectangular.
(c) The distance from the goal line to the dead ball line should be not
less than 10 metres where practicable.

(The emphasis in the above quote from the Laws is mine)

I would suggest that 5m would be the smallest 'practicable' depth of the in-goal area. What level of rugby is to be played on this pitch? While you might get away with 90x60m for juvenile rugby, as an adult I wouldn't have liked to play on such a small pitch.

Some years ago, England were putting together a proposal to host the RWC (the 2007 one, I think), and they were planning a 16-team main competition with a second parallel competition for 2nd/3rd tier nations*. Their plan was to use soccer grounds to host this competition. One of the reasons the bid failed, IIRC, was that the playing enclosures in most English soccer grounds are only ~100m long, and it was deemed that this was too short.

* I think the idea for this stemmed from the Rugby League World Cup in 1995, which had both a main World Cup and also what they called the 'Emerging Nations World Cup' (Ireland were beaten in the final of this competition by the Cook Islands, if anyone's interested)

rje66 · 15-05-2012 8:58pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

thanks rje66

i hadnt included a dead ball area in that 90 m, i actually had allowed 10 m but looking at that now it may be too generous.... possibly 5 is ok?

the spectators areas work ok...

whats the breaking point?
is less than 10 m between the 10 and the 22 not acceptable?

wouldnt see any problem with an area between 22 and 10m being around 10m or less.
If its junior rugby then def no problem with a small pitch, for adults still no problem, they might have a bit of a moan but will be glad to have somewhere to play.
certainly as a ref i wouldnt see any probs. once the area is safe, eg if dead ball is 3m then at 3.1m i wouldnt like to see a wall or drain etc

Rem its all about getting people out playing the game they love, a slightly smaller pitch shouldnt stop this, besides they will all think they are really fit:):)

Downtime · 17-05-2012 11:08am

The in goal should not be less than 10m where practicable. 5m is very short.

armchaircoach · 17-05-2012 4:57pm

The IRB website has full details on required pitch dimensions.

5 meters is very short for a dead-ball area. That's the kind of thing you see in Premiership rugby (look at Bath) and guys come very close to sliding dead/running into hoardings every time a try is scored.

It also very much limits the tactics that an attacking team can use, for instance, it is almost impossible to grubber/chip the ball ahead into the dead-ball and have your guys chase for it.

Same applies to a pitch that is less than 70m wide, you end up constraining how your team trains and plays, and run the risk of other teams running rings around you when you have to play on a more spacious pitch that the team is not used to.

rje66 · 17-05-2012 7:50pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

im trying to design in an extra pitch onto a clubs ground... im playing with a 60 x 90 pitch currently

we are tight for space, so are you saying no pitch because the LOTG state some recommended dimensions ?

''if you build it they will come''

sydthebeat · 17-05-2012 8:20pm

rje66 wrote: »

we are tight for space, so are you saying no pitch because the LOTG state some recommended dimensions ?

''if you build it they will come''

its ok, no matter what way i locate them theres no way of getting a 3rd full size pitch in on the existing land.

the current pitches (2) are both 100 x 70 with 10 m dead ball areas.

Podge_irl · 17-05-2012 11:57pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

its ok, no matter what way i locate them theres no way of getting a 3rd full size pitch in on the existing land.

Try some non-Euclidean geometry!

castie · 18-05-2012 7:02am

Common deadball zones...simplies

thomond2006 · 02-06-2012 6:19pm

Is there a law preventing a drop goal being scored from a restart kick?

Podge_irl · 02-06-2012 6:45pm

thomond2006 wrote: »

Is there a law preventing a drop goal being scored from a restart kick?

Yes, though I don't remember the specifics.

Shelflife · 02-06-2012 11:56pm

Team A are attacking and are camped on team Bs line under the posts.

the offside line is the the goal line.

Can team B position a man up against the goal post as in in front of the posts in order to prevent a try being scored by touching the bottom of the posts?

rje66 · 04-06-2012 8:14pm

in a word no, he is now in the field of play and not in in goal anymore.

pickarooney · 05-06-2012 8:50am

Was Matanavou not hard done by here? He picks up a loose ball and gets carded for offside. Should he have run around the back of the tackled player and climbed back over to get the ball?

Shelflife · 05-06-2012 7:06pm

pickarooney wrote: »

Was Matanavou not hard done by here? He picks up a loose ball and gets carded for offside. Should he have run around the back of the tackled player and climbed back over to get the ball?

IMO yellow was a good call, he was never onside and the ball was on the try line.
If he wanted to play the ball he would have had to been behind the hind most foot.

Laws Question? Ask here!

Comments