New Ruck Law

Tim Robbins · 20-08-2009 9:35pm #1

Everyone up to speed with the new Ruck Law.

Basically if you are third man at the tackle and you begin grabbling for the ball, if you have your hands on it before the ruck starts, you can keep your hands on it.

However if you are third man and don't get your hands on the ball and the ruck begins - you can't put your hands on it.

Comments... Questions...

mikedragon32 · 20-08-2009 9:40pm

Seems straightforward enough, but as ever at our level, it really boils down to how the ref on the day interprets it!

Tim Robbins · 20-08-2009 9:54pm

mikedragon32 wrote: »

Seems straightforward enough, but as ever at our level, it really boils down to how the ref on the day interprets it!

I think it's brilliant ruling. The problem will be the thrid man thinking it's ok to put his hands on the ball when the ruck has already formed, or the ref being too far away and making the incorrect judgement.

[Jackass] · 20-08-2009 10:52pm

This sounds messy...

Oisinjm · 20-08-2009 11:28pm

I only know about schools level rugby, but its pretty much how its already played. Im a flanker and Ive never been called up on it if Im the 3rd man there before anyone else.

Downtime · 21-08-2009 7:11am

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Everyone up to speed with the new Ruck Law.

Basically if you are third man at the tackle and you begin grabbling for the ball, if you have your hands on it before the ruck starts, you can keep your hands on it.

However if you are third man and don't get your hands on the ball and the ruck begins - you can't put your hands on it.

Comments... Questions...

Surely the third man at a tackle would form the ruck and therefore cannot play the ball. My understanding of the ruling is that providing a player from either side on their feet after a tackle and have the ball in their hands prior to contact with an opposition player on his feet those players may continue with possession of the ball even if a player from the opposition makes contact with those players in possession of the ball. It is nothing to do with a third man - his role is still the same and must comply with law in that he cannot play the ball and must only play the opposition player. The ruling is for the tackler or second man taking the tackled player as a first man.

Tim Robbins · 21-08-2009 8:52am

Downtime wrote: »

Surely the third man at a tackle would form the ruck and therefore cannot play the ball. My understanding of the ruling is that providing a player from either side on their feet after a tackle and have the ball in their hands prior to contact with an opposition player on his feet those players may continue with possession of the ball even if a player from the opposition makes contact with those players in possession of the ball. It is nothing to do with a third man - his role is still the same and must comply with law in that he cannot play the ball and must only play the opposition player. The ruling is for the tackler or second man taking the tackled player as a first man.

The third doesn't always form the ruck (1st and 2nd still on the deck) in which case he can put his hands on it and keep them on it.

The ruling applies to the 2nd man (tackler) and 3rd (either side) providing the ruck hasn't form when they put their hands on it.

http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/2009rulings%5f8752.pdf

IRB wrote:

Providing a player from either side on their feet and after a tackle comply with all aspects of Law 15 and have the ball in their hands prior to contact with an opposition player on his feet those players may continue with possession of the ball even if a player from the opposition makes contact with those players in possession of the ball.

andrewdcs · 21-08-2009 8:53am

I'm all for the ref calling it as he sees it at schools/club tbh.
"Hands off blue/red" the call as to who has the advantage at joining a ruck. You keep at whatever you're doing, you get pinged. 'play the ref' promotes slowing/spoiled ball tho, I suppose, so this 'clarification sounds like it would help the Broussows and McCaws of this world as much as speed up turnovers / clean ball.

That said, this new advice is "post tackle - pre ruck" which is split second at test level, but can be a good few scrabbling seconds at lower leagues. I can see a lot of 3rd men being "cleaned out" big style if they are "locked in". Binding at rucks is a rule that needs reinforcing. Boks can say what they like, but some of Bakkies 'clear outs' would be classed as armless and dangerous tackles in open play, just because a ruck is forming/has formed doesn't mean peoples bodies can take that kind of hit, especially curled over the ball Broussow like, back/neck exposed.

dub_skav · 21-08-2009 9:13am

Seems like a good idea. It will clarify/simplify things. Most people know when it is legal to put hands on the ball, it is when you must take them off that leads to confusion. This will take the interpretation of when the ruck is formed out of the referees hands - for the first player to the tackle that is

Downtime · 21-08-2009 10:14am

Tim Robbins wrote: »

The third doesn't always form the ruck (1st and 2nd still on the deck) in which case he can put his hands on it and keep them on it.

The ruling applies to the 2nd man (tackler) and 3rd (either side) providing the ruck hasn't form when they put their hands on it.

http://www.irb.com/mm/document/lawsregs/0/2009rulings%5f8752.pdf

Yeah so it doesn't matter what number man it is. As i said: My understanding of the ruling is that providing a player from either side on their feet after a tackle and have the ball in their hands prior to contact with an opposition player on his feet those players may continue with possession of the ball even if a player from the opposition makes contact with those players in possession of the ball. Number of man just confuses things.

d'Oracle · 21-08-2009 10:22am

Is this really new?

Does it still apply if the third man ends up off his feet?

Im a bit confused about this one.

Downtime · 21-08-2009 10:39am

d'Oracle wrote: »

Is this really new?

Does it still apply if the third man ends up off his feet?

Im a bit confused about this one.

It's not a new law. Just a clarification on the interpretation of the breakdown. The player on his feet playing the ball must have control of the ball and maybe keep hold of it even if a ruck is formed. Before he used have to let go. Obviously there are other areas to look at - is player on ground holding on etc. If he goes off his feet then he must release the ball.

dub_skav · 21-08-2009 12:59pm

If it is indeed as presented then it is a new law (ar an addition to a law), not just a change to interpretation.

You can now have a player at a ruck who is allowed to keep fighting for the ball. At the moment he must release when ruck is formed.

d'Oracle · 21-08-2009 1:22pm

I cant seem to open the PDF.

It doesn't sound in anyway new to me.
Is it basically a move to stop the whole "look at <insert SH openside here>, Hands on the Deck!, Cheating!" malarky?

Stev_o · 21-08-2009 1:32pm

It's fair enough it does make rucks actually competitive now and not completely one sided, but IRB protocols last the best part of 5 months, remember when the IRB went mad on trying to control players going off their feet at ruck time? Personally as a 7 im happy:D

Tim Robbins · 21-08-2009 1:43pm

d'Oracle wrote: »

I cant seem to open the PDF.

It doesn't sound in anyway new to me.
Is it basically a move to stop the whole "look at <insert SH openside here>, Hands on the Deck!, Cheating!" malarky?

It's supposed to reward:
- very good number 7's coming in as the third man
- very good tacklers who can get to their feet quickly

Which will then increase the contest at a ruck.

Bring it on!

Downtime · 21-08-2009 1:58pm

dub_skav wrote: »

If it is indeed as presented then it is a new law (ar an addition to a law), not just a change to interpretation.

You can now have a player at a ruck who is allowed to keep fighting for the ball. At the moment he must release when ruck is formed.

He can't continue fighting for the ball though. If the player has a grip on the ball or is in control of the ball (i.e. it is in their grasp) on their feet the opposition must let them have it. If they are not in control of the ball they must leave it. They cant keep grabbing the ball if they don't have possession of it when the ruck is formed.

thebossanova · 21-08-2009 9:17pm

Just had a 60min training match tonight reffed by an AIL/Magners league grade ref. Turnover after turnover after turnover! Nearly every 2nd/3rd ruck the ball was turned over. Attacking ruckers need to up the pace seriously in getting to the rucks to protect the ball, as from what I can see it's just going to be turned over otherwise. Was just a free for all! Maybe it was just start of season lacklustreness, but it's going to be a steep learning curve for some teams I think.

Four-Percent · 21-08-2009 9:19pm

Mmmm... I like the sound of this.I always have a little bit of doubt if I'm going to get pinged when I hit a ruck.

vorbis · 21-08-2009 9:29pm

thebossanova wrote: »

Just had a 60min training match tonight reffed by an AIL/Magners league grade ref. Turnover after turnover after turnover! Nearly every 2nd/3rd ruck the ball was turned over. Attacking ruckers need to up the pace seriously in getting to the rucks to protect the ball, as from what I can see it's just going to be turned over otherwise. Was just a free for all! Maybe it was just start of season lacklustreness, but it's going to be a steep learning curve for some teams I think.

Sounds like the current trinations!
Maybe this is a different view to the majority but I believe the team with the ball should win the ruck most of the time. The way the game is today, you can't spin the ball wide as you risk giving away a penalty in the resulting ruck for holding on.

Stev_o · 21-08-2009 10:16pm

People just can't ruck properly, sorry but "rucking" doesn't meaning wrestling the man infront of you to the ground by pulling his shirt.

Four-Percent · 21-08-2009 10:30pm

Stev_o wrote: »

People just can't ruck properly, sorry but "rucking" doesn't meaning wrestling the man infront of you to the ground by pulling his shirt.

I hope that's not me you're referring to

dub_skav · 23-08-2009 9:38am

Stev_o wrote: »

People just can't ruck properly, sorry but "rucking" doesn't meaning wrestling the man infront of you to the ground by pulling his shirt.

is that tony buckley you.re talking about

emergingstar · 23-08-2009 11:13am

i like the new laws going to make it very interesting, attacking teams are gonna have to be very fast in protecting the ball, by the way how long can ya hold on to the ball on the ground is it 3 seconds?

Tomtom364 · 23-08-2009 12:35pm

dub_skav wrote: »

is that tony buckley you.re talking about

buckley has the strength that him pushing and pulling someone by the shirt knocks them completely off balance

emergingstar wrote: »

i like the new laws going to make it very interesting, attacking teams are gonna have to be very fast in protecting the ball, by the way how long can ya hold on to the ball on the ground is it 3 seconds?

there is no official time on it so really its up to the ref and you just gotta judgeby that.

the offical word says "immediately"

emergingstar · 23-08-2009 1:19pm

oh right we have a new coach this year and he is drumming it into us to hold on for 3 seconds before we release

Stev_o · 23-08-2009 1:24pm

emergingstar wrote: »

oh right we have a new coach this year and he is drumming it into us to hold on for 3 seconds before we release

Id be saying to them to position your body right when you hit the deck, people really need to put as much distance between the ball and themselves now so you really need to position your body so that your upper body is facing your try line thus giving you a huge outward stretch with your arms to place the ball a great distance away from the opposition. Also means that you'v provided quick ball.

Gelio · 23-08-2009 1:48pm

What exactly was the old rule?

Tim Robbins · 23-08-2009 6:23pm

ajeffares wrote: »

What exactly was the old rule?

Once the ruck formed, the 2nd / 3rd man had to remove their hands.

Gelio · 23-08-2009 8:34pm

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Once the ruck formed, the 2nd / 3rd man had to remove their hands.

Ha Ha thats funny. I play and I thought once you had your hands on before the ruck was called you could hold on. So basically what I thought was the rule has just become the rule

theKramer · 23-08-2009 9:53pm

ajeffares wrote: »

Ha Ha thats funny. I play and I thought once you had your hands on before the ruck was called you could hold on. So basically what I thought was the rule has just become the rule

Im glad its changed. It used to wreck my head, as Im very good at getting my hands on the ball when the person is going to ground. I didnt know the old law, as am a recent convert to rugby, so it made no sense to me why I should have to let go. Giving away loads of penalties changed my opinion.

Looking forward to new season with this law. I wont know myself with this

CdeC · 31-08-2009 2:29pm

I'm not sure that this is a new law. If I am following the ball and it gets out to second centre and our team is defending and our 13 tackles the player with the ball then if I am the first man there I am entitled to take the ball from the tackled player on the ground, well at least I always assumed I was as no other player from the opposite team was there so therefore no ruck. If I arrived at the same time as another player from the other team then fair enough have to drive in and wait for someone to take the ball from the back.
Hopefully this will help refs to police the rucks better especially since as I hated being blown up for a penalty when no ruck had formed and I tried to rip the ball. Guess we'll see though if it'll work on the pitch.

Tim Robbins · 31-08-2009 3:32pm

CdeC wrote: »

I'm not sure that this is a new law. If I am following the ball and it gets out to second centre and our team is defending and our 13 tackles the player with the ball then if I am the first man there I am entitled to take the ball from the tackled player on the ground, well at least I always assumed I was as no other player from the opposite team was there so therefore no ruck. If I arrived at the same time as another player from the other team then fair enough have to drive in and wait for someone to take the ball from the back.
Hopefully this will help refs to police the rucks better especially since as I hated being blown up for a penalty when no ruck had formed and I tried to rip the ball. Guess we'll see though if it'll work on the pitch.

Yes. It's technical a "new ruling" rather than a new law.
Apologies for poorly named thread.

Downtime · 31-08-2009 3:35pm

CdeC wrote: »

I'm not sure that this is a new law. If I am following the ball and it gets out to second centre and our team is defending and our 13 tackles the player with the ball then if I am the first man there I am entitled to take the ball from the tackled player on the ground, well at least I always assumed I was as no other player from the opposite team was there so therefore no ruck.

Yes but if you hadn't manage to get the ball off th payer on the ground and an opposing player bound on you therefore forming a ruck you had to let go. Now you don't as long as you have a grasp of the ball. it is not a new law but a new interpretation.

Tim Robbins · 31-08-2009 4:22pm

Downtime wrote: »

Yes but if you hadn't manage to get the ball off th payer on the ground and an opposing player bound on you therefore forming a ruck you had to let go. Now you don't as long as you have a grasp of the ball. it is not a new law but a new interpretation.

Downtime, the way I see it is any new penalty for "not releasing" this year could have technically have been give for "not releasing" last year.

The 2nd/3rd man has to have both his hands on the ball (the ruling clearly states both hands must be on the ball) before the ruck formed. Now if that happened last year a lot of refs would have pinged for a "not releasing".

I know it depends on other facts, but I think you get my point.

Now, what I think is interesting this year, is how long a ref will let it go before pinging for not releasing.

Some refs will ping immediately for not releasing. Arguments against this:
- Can result in a high penalty count
- Just because the jackler is jackling doesn't mean he has both his hands on the ball and is prevented from getting it back to his own team. It actually takes a considerable amount of skill to be able to do this.

I like to let the ruck develope so as there's a bit of contest.
- Jackler gets his chance
- Attacking team get their chance to ruck

And only to ping for the "clear and obvious".

Other refs I have seen tend to immediately ping for not releasing.

Downtime · 01-09-2009 3:53pm

Its all about tackle management - if you are there you can manage it and assist in a quicker game, if you are not well then you'll be penalizing guys everywhere. I refereed a senior game on Sat and had about 4 penalties at breakdown and a load of turnovers

Tim Robbins · 01-09-2009 4:25pm

Downtime wrote: »

Its all about tackle management - if you are there you can manage it and assist in a quicker game, if you are not well then you'll be penalizing guys everywhere. I refereed a senior game on Sat and had about 4 penalties at breakdown and a load of turnovers

Reffing senior is different. Players' fitness and skill level is much higher.

Reffing J3 / J4 is far more challenging. You have far more complexity, far more times when there are multiple infringements at the same time and much more player management is usually required.