Can opening at the ruck

Tim Robbins

One thing becoming more popular at ruck time now is can opening.
Good explanation here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1CW1G1s2DU

I am finding teams J2 / J3 / J4 etc level are also trying it. But, like lineout sacking you have to be very careful and good to do it properly. Otherwise you can be penalised for doing something dangerous. A bad can open is almost like a tip tackle and can incur a more serious sanction.

One thing, interesting Bernard J says in the clip is that generally you go into can open if your first man doesn't do a good clean out. I am finding teams are doing it regardless.

What are your thoughts?

stephen_n

Never knew there was a name for it but have always done that if I get to a ruck a little late, much easier to go over the top of someone and flip them, than try get underneath them.

armchaircoach

Surely the 'missile' is just going straight off your feet at a ruck? Not a very sensible tactic to aim for.

irishbucsfan

armchaircoach wrote: »

Surely the 'missile' is just going straight off your feet at a ruck? Not a very sensible tactic to aim for.

It's pretty essential these days. But noone calls it a missile that I know of, the usage of these terms, to me at least, are pretty cringe worthy.

CatFromHue

In fairness I think even Jackman seemed a bit cringing himself in that clip.

stephen_n

Looking at those videos, D'Arcy should definitely have been penalized for going of his feet. The one they're calling the can opener isn't illegal though is it?

irishbucsfan

stephen_n wrote: »

Looking at those videos, D'Arcy should definitely have been penalized for going of his feet. The one they're calling the can opener isn't illegal though is it?

No, he's on his feet when he makes contact with Farrell. If he went straight to ground he should be penalised.

stephen_n

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No, he's on his feet when he makes contact with Farrell. If he went straight to ground he should be penalised.

Very fine line in that interpretation, in most cases players will make some form of contact before going off their feet, clearly going by that footage though it's not uncommon as a tactic now, never really noticed it in the heat of play, though I probably will now.

.ak

As a small fella myself I generally have to roll someone to get them out of the ruck. Don't see anything wrong with it and players have been doing it for years.

irishbucsfan

stephen_n wrote: »

Very fine line in that interpretation, in most cases players will make some form of contact before going off their feet, clearly going by that footage though it's not uncommon as a tactic now, never really noticed it in the heat of play, though I probably will now.

No, there are cases where players go straight to ground over their own player before the opposition arrive, and that is illegal and is penalised. There's not really that much of a fine line in it in D'Arcy's case (first man in clearing out tackler).

stephen_n

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No, there are cases where players go straight to ground over their own player before the opposition arrive, and that is illegal and is penalised. There's not really that much of a fine line in it in D'Arcy's case (first man in clearing out tackler).

I've looked at both cases they have shown there and still think it would be easy for a ref to interpret what they are doing as going off there feet, yes the intent to clean out is clear but if the ruck is formed (that being to interpretation) then you can't compete on the ground, it must be over the ball. Well that's the way I'd see it anyway.

.ak

Refs generally only ping going off your feet if your sealing off the ball/contest.

For example if I clear the first man out and we both go off our feet I run the risk of leaving the ball open to play. So it's a risky situation, but the ref certainly won't ping you for it, however if the second man came in and panicked and blocked out daylight by diving in ontop of the open ball he'll certainly ping that player. As with every law in rugby it's interpretation and how the ref feels the play is being affected.

who_me

.ak wrote: »

Refs generally only ping going off your feet if your sealing off the ball/contest.

For example if I clear the first man out and we both go off our feet I run the risk of leaving the ball open to play. So it's a risky situation, but the ref certainly won't ping you for it, however if the second man came in and panicked and blocked out daylight by diving in ontop of the open ball he'll certainly ping that player. As with every law in rugby it's interpretation and how the ref feels the play is being affected.

By making contact with the first man though, at least you're forming a ruck which creates an offside line and makes playing the ball with ones hands a penalty.

sydthebeat

in our club we've always referred to the "can opener" above as a "crocodile" clean out.... because it mirrors how a croc would drag a large animal below the water. Generally used by small guys like a SH if theres a jackle close to stealing the ball.
Jackmans "crocodile roll" above is simply being active on the ground ... to get the best presentation possible.

who_me

Never heard the phrases before, but the 'can opener' (also heard it called a corkscrew?) in particular has been popular for a while. As players get bigger and ruck lower, blowing them out with an impact is going to be harder and risking a penalty, hence tipping them off their feet.

There are a few other things about the breakdown I've always been curious about -

- Obviously a tackled player at a ruck can't hold onto the ball, but can he push an opponents hands away, or better yet pull him down onto the ground so he can't legally compete?
- If an opponent has hands on the ball and is about to steal, can you (while standing) put your foot on the ball to either dislodge it from his grasp or at least make it very difficult for him to rip it? A lot quicker than trying to clear him out or "can open" him.
- I actually saw a good tactic the other week (similar to the quick ruck idea previously mentioned) - when a player was tackled, instead of hanging onto the ball and being penalised he released and immediately jumped to his feet and rucked the tackler off it.
- When are hands in the ruck legal? Obviously the scrum half (or someone in that role) has to be able to dig the ball out. But with counter-rucking it's not clear when the ball is playable again, and by whom?

.ak

who_me wrote: »

By making contact with the first man though, at least you're forming a ruck which creates an offside line and makes playing the ball with ones hands a penalty.

Not if we both go off our feet at the same time. We're then no longer a ruck. It happens rarely but you do see it, ofcourse you generally need to check with the ref before going for the ball but if only two contest and both go to ground they're no longer part of the ruck. Again context is everything, if both are still somewhat over the ball like on their knees the ref will generally still consider it a ruck, but if we both fell to the side completely off our feet, bodies on the ground, then there is no ruck.

That's all academic though the only time that happens is on a break or kick turn over. Generally there'll always be atleast three or four players at a breakdown and someone will be keeping their feet.

sydthebeat

who_me wrote: »

1 - Obviously a tackled player at a ruck can't hold onto the ball, but can he push an opponents hands away, or better yet pull him down onto the ground so he can't legally compete?
2 - If an opponent has hands on the ball and is about to steal, can you (while standing) put your foot on the ball to either dislodge it from his grasp or at least make it very difficult for him to rip it? A lot quicker than trying to clear him out or "can open" him.
3 - I actually saw a good tactic the other week (similar to the quick ruck idea previously mentioned) - when a player was tackled, instead of hanging onto the ball and being penalised he released and immediately jumped to his feet and rucked the tackler off it.
4 - When are hands in the ruck legal? Obviously the scrum half (or someone in that role) has to be able to dig the ball out. But with counter-rucking it's not clear when the ball is playable again, and by whom?

1. id be more worried about getting as long as possible presentation... if the opposition are in a position to jackle over, youd want to be protecting your head

2. you could, but that would mean a few things, youd be standing up in a ruck and would be in a prime position to be minced with a "missile" above. also, you run the risk of stamping on your own tackled player... and also you could be in trouble if you miss use your boot

3. a tackled player has to release the ball immediately. if youve isolated, its becoming more frequent to release the ball and stand back up to either retrieve the ball or ruck over. its smart play.

4. hands in a ruck are not legal hands on the ball can only happen before a ruck is formed.

who_me

.ak wrote: »

Not if we both go off our feet at the same time. We're then no longer a ruck. It happens rarely but you do see it, ofcourse you generally need to check with the ref before going for the ball but if only two contest and both go to ground they're no longer part of the ruck. Again context is everything, if both are still somewhat over the ball like on their knees the ref will generally still consider it a ruck, but if we both fell to the side completely off our feet, bodies on the ground, then there is no ruck.

That's all academic though the only time that happens is on a break or kick turn over. Generally there'll always be atleast three or four players at a breakdown and someone will be keeping their feet.

Are you sure about that? I always thought once the ruck was formed it was considered formed until the ball left or the ref deemed it unplayable. Certainly according to the ruck laws (16.6 and 16.7 here) there's nothing about a ruck ending when the players over the ball go off their feet.

who_me

sydthebeat wrote: »

1. id be more worried about getting as long as possible presentation... if the opposition are in a position to jackle over, youd want to be protecting your head

2. you could, but that would mean a few things, youd be standing up in a ruck and would be in a prime position to be minced with a "missile" above. also, you run the risk of stamping on your own tackled player... and also you could be in trouble if you miss use your boot

3. a tackled player has to release the ball immediately. if youve isolated, its becoming more frequent to release the ball and stand back up to either retrieve the ball or ruck over. its smart play.

4. hands in a ruck are not legal hands on the ball can only happen before a ruck is formed.

1. Probably right, though he's you've presented the ball, normally the tackled player is a bit passive, was wondering if he could be more useful.

2. Definitely vulnerable to a big clear-out, but in the case where the opposition is jackalling and there isn't time to dislodge him in time, a foot on the ball might slow him enough that he couldn't get the ball away before your support arrives.

4. Then how does the scrum half get the ball out?

sydthebeat

who_me wrote: »

4. Then how does the scrum half get the ball out?

you already said

Obviously the scrum half (or someone in that role) has to be able to dig the ball out.

Thud

who_me wrote: »

1. Probably right, though he's you've presented the ball, normally the tackled player is a bit passive, was wondering if he could be more useful.

Pushing the ball back on the ground is risky enough (hands get stood on by own players etc), trying to wrestle with someones arms while lying on the ground would be asking for injury with a "missile" flying in or some lump falling on you

irishbucsfan

who_me wrote: »

- Obviously a tackled player at a ruck can't hold onto the ball, but can he push an opponents hands away, or better yet pull him down onto the ground so he can't legally compete?

No player can do that to another player actually, regardless of whether they're in a ruck or not. The only time you can pull a player to the ground is if they are the ball carrier and you are on your feet (you can't tackle someone if you're off your feet remember).

who_me wrote: »

- If an opponent has hands on the ball and is about to steal, can you (while standing) put your foot on the ball to either dislodge it from his grasp or at least make it very difficult for him to rip it? A lot quicker than trying to clear him out or "can open" him.

I'm not actually sure of the legality of this. I can't imagine it's illegal if the ball is on the ground (if he has picked it up it's illegal).

who_me wrote: »

- I actually saw a good tactic the other week (similar to the quick ruck idea previously mentioned) - when a player was tackled, instead of hanging onto the ball and being penalised he released and immediately jumped to his feet and rucked the tackler off it.

There was a clip of Shane Horgan doing this before I think. So long as the tackled player exits and enters it's fine. But it's so rare that anyone would ever have a chance to do that if the defense are in any way remotely organised.

who_me wrote: »

- When are hands in the ruck legal? Obviously the scrum half (or someone in that role) has to be able to dig the ball out. But with counter-rucking it's not clear when the ball is playable again, and by whom?

Hands in the ruck aren't legal ever. If you're in the ruck, you cannot use your hands. The scrum half can't handle the ball if they're engaged in the ruck, the scrum half is not a part of the ruck when they're playing the ball.

awec

Is there a name for when instead of trying to get someone to ground / cleared out through sheer impact you lift one of their standing legs and clear them out sideways instead?

irishbucsfan

awec wrote: »

Is there a name for when instead of trying to get someone to ground / cleared out through sheer impact you lift one of their standing legs and clear them out sideways instead?

I don't know if it has a specific name, but we'll generally call those soft clearouts, and the direct impacts hard clearouts. Basically anything where the clearing player has to slow down into contact would be "soft." Nothing wrong with them mind.

awec

I've heard other "odd" names for things unrelated to rucking, like "leeching".

sydthebeat

awec wrote: »

I've heard other "odd" names for things unrelated to rucking, like "leeching".

ah yes, my favourite

stephen_n

who_me wrote: »

- Obviously a tackled player at a ruck can't hold onto the ball, but can he push an opponents hands away?

I did this in a game last week, was thinking afterwards that it was probably illegal but wasn't actually sure if it was or wasn't, assume though it's kind of not releasing, by making the ball unplayable.

who_me

irishbucsfan wrote: »

No player can do that to another player actually, regardless of whether they're in a ruck or not. The only time you can pull a player to the ground is if they are the ball carrier and you are on your feet (you can't tackle someone if you're off your feet remember).

Ah, didn't know that was the case at the breakdown too, thanks.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

There was a clip of Shane Horgan doing this before I think. So long as the tackled player exits and enters it's fine. But it's so rare that anyone would ever have a chance to do that if the defense are in any way remotely organised.

True, though I have seen some players being very sharp at the breakdown; for instance I often see players making a tackle, releasing and then "chickening out" of a jackalling attempt as they know a clear-out is coming so the ball-carrier releases, hops up, picks the ball up again quickly and runs on. They're probably more likely in a scenario where the ball-carrier has made a break/half-break and the tackler & defence are at a disadvantage.

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Hands in the ruck aren't legal ever. If you're in the ruck, you cannot use your hands. The scrum half can't handle the ball if they're engaged in the ruck, the scrum half is not a part of the ruck when they're playing the ball.

See, here is where it gets really murky for me. What's "in a ruck"? In some scenarios, having a hand on another player's back is considered being in the ruck (how rarely are guard players whistled up for offside/blocking?). So then how can a player who has both hands on the ball be "not in the ruck" while a player with one hand on a teammate is "in the ruck"? Especially since rucks are rarely so clinical that you'll have hands on the ball without making any contact with an opposition player. It seems to me the interpretation - if not the definition - of "bound" in a ruck is very hazy.

While we're talking about the breakdown - there's another one that I find funny. You sometimes see a player tackled, with an immediate effective clear-out; so he's lying on the ground with the ball looking for someone to pop the ball up to. To the letter of the law, is that not a penalty to the defending side, for the tackled player not releasing immediately? I don't know of anything in the law that specifies you only have to release immediately if the ball is being contested.

The Lost Sheep

Tim Robbins wrote: »

One thing becoming more popular at ruck time now is can opening.
Good explanation here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1CW1G1s2DU

I am finding teams J2 / J3 / J4 etc level are also trying it. But, like lineout sacking you have to be very careful and good to do it properly. Otherwise you can be penalised for doing something dangerous. A bad can open is almost like a tip tackle and can incur a more serious sanction.

One thing, interesting Bernard J says in the clip is that generally you go into can open if your first man doesn't do a good clean out. I am finding teams are doing it regardless.

What are your thoughts?

Teams have always been doing that Tim. Don't be so naïve to think that's only been tried recently... You wont find too many occasions in games where a can opener is penalised. The first man will generally try and drive through the ruck and if not successful try the can opener. Nothing new there. Teams are doing it regardless as its probably quicker and you can use less men in the ruck

awec wrote: »

I've heard other "odd" names for things unrelated to rucking, like "leeching".

Leeching is just a support player joining with the ball carrier to help turn the contact zone more in favour of the ball carrier

who_me wrote: »

See, here is where it gets really murky for me. What's "in a ruck"? In some scenarios, having a hand on another player's back is considered being in the ruck (how rarely are guard players whistled up for offside/blocking?). So then how can a player who has both hands on the ball be "not in the ruck" while a player with one hand on a teammate is "in the ruck"? Especially since rucks are rarely so clinical that you'll have hands on the ball without making any contact with an opposition player. It seems to me the interpretation - if not the definition - of "bound" in a ruck is very hazy.

While we're talking about the breakdown - there's another one that I find funny. You sometimes see a player tackled, with an immediate effective clear-out; so he's lying on the ground with the ball looking for someone to pop the ball up to. To the letter of the law, is that not a penalty to the defending side, for the tackled player not releasing immediately? I don't know of anything in the law that specifies you only have to release immediately if the ball is being contested.

The first will differ per referee.
Why is it a penalty? If there isn't a ruck he doesn't have to release the ball.

.ak

who_me wrote: »

Are you sure about that? I always thought once the ruck was formed it was considered formed until the ball left or the ref deemed it unplayable. Certainly according to the ruck laws (16.6 and 16.7 here) there's nothing about a ruck ending when the players over the ball go off their feet.

Not if all the players at the ruck go off their feet. Here's an example, a 9 stands over the ball at the back of the ruck, all the people rucking infront of him lose their feet, the 9 tries to rescue the situation by joining in the ruck and protecting the ball, but he too is cleared out. Now everyone is off their feet and the ball is sitting at the back of this pile. You often see a ref make a 'play on' gesture or say 'ball is out' in this case and will allow players to come from an on-side position to claim the ball.

Tim Robbins

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Teams have always been doing that Tim. Don't be so naïve to think that's only been tried recently...

Teams are doing it way more than they did a few years ago. Especially at lower level. That would be my opinion.

.ak

stephen_n wrote: »

I did this in a game last week, was thinking afterwards that it was probably illegal but wasn't actually sure if it was or wasn't, assume though it's kind of not releasing, by making the ball unplayable.

Yeah, I often hook the players arms and hang onto them to make it difficult, give your support an extra second to get to the breakdown. Also it can give the impression that the tackler isn't releasing you. Doubt it's legal.

dub_skav

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Teams are doing it way more than they did a few years ago. Especially at lower level. That would be my opinion.

It's been happening for years at higher levels, but is probably now drifting down the levels as those higher level players of a few years ago become the coaches (and indeed players) at the lower levels.

It is the kind of attention to detail stuff that only higher level teams would have had time for. As it becomes more everyday then it happens at the lower levels.

You could say the same for decent maul setup 15 years ago, only the higher levels - AIL for example - had the time to spend teaching everybody proper positioning and technique.
As it became more commonplace and therefore easier to point to and emulate, it is now common practice to set up a maul properly at all levels - or at least try to.

stephen_n

Have to say, we did it as a rucking exercise a few weeks ago in training and that's the first time I'd ever seen it done as a trained thing, so maybe it is filtering down.

Tim Robbins

stephen_n wrote: »

Have to say, we did it as a rucking exercise a few weeks ago in training and that's the first time I'd ever seen it done as a trained thing, so maybe it is filtering down.

Exactly my point. Now, may I ask thee - was it instructed to the players that this was a plan B type of rucking as in your first option should be a conventional clear out and if this is not the case, can open as plan B.

Because what I am seeing is that teams are doing it first. Making the rucks messier than they usually are.

irishbucsfan

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Exactly my point. Now, may I ask thee - was it instructed to the players that this was a plan B type of rucking as in your first option should be a conventional clear out and if this is not the case, can open as plan B.

Because what I am seeing is that teams are doing it first. Making the rucks messier than they usually are.

What level is it you're seeing players doing that? Their coaches should be murdering them for that!

stephen_n

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Exactly my point. Now, may I ask thee - was it instructed to the players that this was a plan B type of rucking as in your first option should be a conventional clear out and if this is not the case, can open as plan B.

Because what I am seeing is that teams are doing it first. Making the rucks messier than they usually are.

It's a timing thing, if the defender has got over the ball (wide stance) already, then you clean them out that way, first option is still put him on his ass about two feet backwards if you can. It's a plan B mostly as it doesn't give quick ruck ball, I'm sure there are some teams at junior level that like slow ball though and they might use it as a preference.

Tim Robbins

irishbucsfan wrote: »

What level is it you're seeing players doing that? Their coaches should be murdering them for that!

J2 down. But note, it might just be a few players at a few rucks in a few games.
Rather than everyone doing it.

.ak

stephen_n wrote: »

It's a timing thing, if the defender has got over the ball (wide stance) already, then you clean them out that way, first option is still put him on his ass about two feet backwards if you can. It's a plan B mostly as it doesn't give quick ruck ball, I'm sure there are some teams at junior level that like slow ball though and they might use it as a preference.

Exactly. I'd only do it if the defender looks like in a good position to jackal and he needs to be off his feet asap.

I've always called it a crocodile roll though.

who_me

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

The first will differ per referee.
Why is it a penalty? If there isn't a ruck he doesn't have to release the ball.

I don't think so - a player who's tackled and held must release the ball immediately ( 15.7 (e)). It doesn't say anything like "a tackled player must release the ball immediately only if an opponent is attempting to strip it", nor does it mention a ruck.

The law is often interpreted that way, but it doesn't seem to be written that way.

evancmurphy00

Our coaches always say that a "can opener" should only be used if you are unable to clear someone out the normal way as it is slower.

pickarooney

There are some players you just know you won't be able to shift without rolling them and even then some are a hernia in waiting.

.ak

There are some players who think this thread is about rugby tours and how you can sneak a drink in before the final whistle.

twinytwo

evancmurphy00 wrote: »

Our coaches always say that a "can opener" should only be used if you are unable to clear someone out the normal way as it is slower.

their right though, i remember a few occasions watching ireland where the likes of best or POM get "can opened" but the tackler is just that like bit to slow that the action of the can open actually helps them steal the ball.