Rugby 101 - Know your rucks from your mauls!

pickarooney · 25-09-2016 6:28am

mfceiling wrote: »

Player kicks a penalty. Misses. Opponent attempting to catch it in the dead ball area knocks it on. Is it counted as a knock on and therefore a 5m scrum to the other team?

What's the dead ball area? There's the in goal area, in which case it's a 5m scrum, at the end o which is the dead ball line. If it's beyond the dead ball line it's off the pitch so if a player is standing there he's not in play.

Quin_Dub · 29-09-2016 12:48pm

mfceiling wrote: »

Player kicks a penalty. Misses. Opponent attempting to catch it in the dead ball area knocks it on. Is it counted as a knock on and therefore a 5m scrum to the other team?

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Yes.

I'm not sure that it is..

The ball is out of play if it's caught in the dead-ball area is it not, so it doesn't matter what the player does surely?

The Lost Sheep · 29-09-2016 6:00pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I'm not sure that it is..

The ball is out of play if it's caught in the dead-ball area is it not, so it doesn't matter what the player does surely?

From a penalty if a defending player knocks the ball on in the in goal area it is a 5m scrum to the opposition with the scrum formed in line where the infringement occurred. The ball is still in the playing area and while it isn't in the field of play it certainly does matter what player does

Quin_Dub · 29-09-2016 6:03pm

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

From a penalty if a defending player knocks the ball on in the in goal area it is a 5m scrum to the opposition with the scrum formed in line where the infringement occurred. The ball is still in the playing area and while it isn't in the field of play it certainly does matter what player does

In goal Area - Totally agree , knock-on, 5M scrum to the attacking team..

But the question was about the dead-ball area , which is not the field of play , it's out.

The Lost Sheep · 29-09-2016 6:05pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

In goal Area - Totally agree , knock-on, 5M scrum to the attacking team..

But the question was about the dead-ball area , which is not the field of play , it's out.

I will assume op meant area between dead ball line and goal line so I was correct.

sydthebeat · 07-10-2016 9:33pm

One that stuck in my head from a game a few weeks ago.

Restart after a score and kicker grubbers it low and hard as it was a windy wet day.

Ref blows up saying ball must travel 10 before hitting the ground, scrum turnover.

Was he correct?

phog · 07-10-2016 10:34pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

One that stuck in my head from a game a few weeks ago.

Restart after a score and kicker grubbers it low and hard as it was a windy wet day.

Ref blows up saying ball must travel 10 before hitting the ground, scrum turnover.

Was he correct?

Yes.

Didn't Italy try that in Dublin to start a 6Ns game to get a scrum but Ireland won a penalty from the scrum.

The Lost Sheep · 07-10-2016 10:44pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

One that stuck in my head from a game a few weeks ago.

Restart after a score and kicker grubbers it low and hard as it was a windy wet day.

Ref blows up saying ball must travel 10 before hitting the ground, scrum turnover.

Was he correct?

The law doesn't state the ball must travel 10 before hitting the ground though. So no he wasn't. Ball must reach 10 metres but can hit ground beforehand

Conchir · 12-02-2017 2:13pm

In yesterdays match, around the 25 minute mark, Wales box kicked out from their 22. England didn't deal with it, and Dan Biggar recovered the ball and set off towards the England try line. He kicked ahead, and himself and Jack Nowell chased it down, with Nowell getting there first. Nowell was tackled by Biggar, and then got up, with Biggar still holding onto him with one hand.

My question is, was he not held in the tackle, and therefore not allowed get up?

I'm guessing I've interpreted it wrong, if someone could explain it that'd be great

errlloyd · 12-02-2017 2:14pm

Conchir wrote: »

In yesterdays match, around the 25 minute mark, Wales box kicked out from their 22. England didn't deal with it, and Dan Biggar recovered the ball and set off towards the England try line. He kicked ahead, and himself and Jack Nowell chased it down, with Nowell getting there first. Nowell was tackled by Biggar, and then got up, with Biggar still holding onto him with one hand.

My question is, was he not held in the tackle, and therefore not allowed get up?

I'm guessing I've interpreted it wrong, if someone could explain it that'd be great

I also thought Nowell was held, Penalty for me.

Conchir · 12-02-2017 4:40pm

errlloyd wrote: »

I also thought Nowell was held, Penalty for me.

I wouldn't even have questioned it but the lack of reaction to it at the time, in the part of the pitch it was in, had me doubting it.

Losty Dublin · 12-02-2017 9:18pm

Look back at the incident from about 32 minutes. Nowell wasn't held down by Bigger as he hit the floor. Under Law the tackle hasn't been completed so he was entitled to get back on and to play on. The replay shows it a lot more clearly if you let it run for a wee bit.

locum-motion · 14-02-2017 12:32am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

... Under Law the tackle hasn't been completed ...

Which Law?

MJohnston · 14-02-2017 12:38am

locum-motion wrote: »

Which Law?

Bird Law. It's not governed by reason.

.ak · 14-02-2017 10:35am

For me that's a completed tackle.

Anyway, in the scenario where a player is tackled to ground like that he can only get back up if he releases the ball on the deck. The tackler must release the tackled player also. You often see it in games when someone is conscience about being isolated, they'll release the ball, get back to their feet and pick the ball back up, buying time for support or making an extra break. It's risky tho as you're releasing the ball.

yoursaviour1989 · 17-02-2017 9:05pm

Just watching the Leinster game andesign a question popped up.
Ryan is gone for a HIA and has been replaced temporarily by Leavy. Since that happened VDF has since been injured and replaced by Mick Kearney. Obviously if Ryan returns Leinster will want to keep 3 natural back rows on the field. Can Leinster move Leavy in as a replacement for VDF and state that Kearney has now come on as a temporary replacement for Ryan?

Shelflife · 27-02-2017 2:46pm

If Ryan returned , It is Leavey that must go off. He could then replace Kearney as a tactical sub but Kearney wouldnt be able to come on again except as a blood replacement

KevinK · 25-03-2017 12:03pm

https://www.facebook.com/Rugbyrama/videos/10155146730529800/?t=23

Anyone explain this?

LeinsterDub · 25-03-2017 12:11pm

KevinK wrote: »

https://www.facebook.com/Rugbyrama/videos/10155146730529800/?t=23

Anyone explain this?

Team in red refuses to engage. In my opinion the ref should of told white to use it twice and then awarded red the scrum.

Shelflife · 25-03-2017 3:40pm

Ball is available , play on.

.ak · 25-03-2017 9:47pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Team in red refuses to engage. In my opinion the ref should of told white to use it twice and then awarded red the scrum.

You HAVE to engage in the lineout though. How you do that is up to you, but you can't REFUSE to engage.

Shelflife · 25-03-2017 10:02pm

.ak wrote: »

You HAVE to engage in the lineout though. How you do that is up to you, but you can't REFUSE to engage.

What law says you have to engage ? You can choose to contest the lineout or not.

The ball is live, it's available so it's play on, it's bizarre but it's a strategy both teams wish to persue.

.ak · 25-03-2017 10:02pm

Shelflife wrote: »

What law says you have to engage ? You can choose to contest the lineout or not.

The ball is live, it's available so it's play on, it's bizarre but it's a strategy both teams wish to persue.

I'll dig it out, but there's a law against not competing at line outs.

Shelflife · 25-03-2017 10:05pm

.ak wrote: »

I'll dig it out, but there's a law against not competing at line outs.

I don't think there is, but I'll wait to see what you come up with.

.ak · 25-03-2017 10:23pm

Shelflife wrote: »

I don't think there is, but I'll wait to see what you come up with.

19.8 (g) Failure to form a lineout. A team must not voluntarily fail to form a lineout.
Sanction: Free Kick on the 15-metre line

The definition of 'forming a lineout' is usually interpreted as competing for the ball, whether that's jumping or tackling the player with the ball in the line out or the receiver moving in.

Red team did neither of those things, and moved away from the line out which is the critical part.

Shelflife · 26-03-2017 12:18am

.ak wrote: »

19.8 (g) Failure to form a lineout. A team must not voluntarily fail to form a lineout.
Sanction: Free Kick on the 15-metre line

The definition of 'forming a lineout' is usually interpreted as competing for the ball, whether that's jumping or tackling the player with the ball in the line out or the receiver moving in.

Red team did neither of those things, and moved away from the line out which is the critical part.

In this case a line out was formed and the ball was thrown in, the lineout is still live, red are technically in the line out as are white, if red had left the lineout it would be a pen to white on the 15m line.
It's a stalemate but the correct call is play on until one of them blinks.

Losty Dublin · 26-03-2017 2:50am

Shelflife wrote: »

In this case a line out was formed and the ball was thrown in, the lineout is still live, red are technically in the line out as are white, if red had left the lineout it would be a pen to white on the 15m line.
It's a stalemate but the correct call is play on until one of them blinks.

I agree. No law has been broken in doing what they did up until the point when the ref blew up for a scrum for the line out not going anywhere. It's the far end of what Ireland were doing at the line out some seasons ago but from the defensive point of view.

Now, had red engaged with either of the two protecting player then the chances of them getting a penalty would have been high for an offside obstruction as binding or tackling the ball carrier would have been high. I guess they'll know that for next week

Dog Botherer · 26-03-2017 5:34am

Thought this was a really concise and straightforward explanation of lineout mauls by Nick Mallett, dunno if it's the done thing but might be worth merging into the OP.

https://youtu.be/x5LgkJkHLgY

irishbucsfan · 09-04-2017 1:05pm

Something randomly popped into my head and I'm not sure its covered in Regulation 8

If a player is adopted by new parents, how does that affect their national eligibility?

MJohnston · 09-04-2017 2:01pm

irishbucsfan wrote: »

Something randomly popped into my head and I'm not sure its covered in Regulation 8

If a player is adopted by new parents, how does that affect their national eligibility?

Explanatory section 13 on regulation 8 covers this - eligibility of formally adopted players applies over blood parents, however eligibility via grandparents always comes via blood grandparents even when formal adoption has happened. Also mentions that eligibility cannot come via step parents or foster parents.

who_me · 16-04-2017 6:46pm

Here's an odd one that just occurred to me watching the games at the weekend.

Refs are now calling 'tackle' if the tackled player in an attempted choke-tackle manages to get a knee to the ground. While I agree with having a defence against the choke-tackle, where does this come from? If the player is deemed "on the ground" and tackled, then the law states the tackler(s) must immediately release him and the tackled player must immediately release the ball - obviously neither of which are being enforced.

It seems sometimes refs enforce the 'spirit' of the rules rather than the letter. For instance: the laws state that a tackled player on the ground must immediately release the ball. It doesn't state he must release it immediately if and only if an opposition player is trying to rip it, yet that's precisely how refs are enforcing the law. I've never seen a tackled player pinged for slow release except when the opposition were challenging for the ball.

The Lost Sheep · 16-04-2017 7:22pm

who_me wrote: »

Here's an odd one that just occurred to me watching the games at the weekend.

Refs are now calling 'tackle' if the tackled player in an attempted choke-tackle manages to get a knee to the ground. While I agree with having a defence against the choke-tackle, where does this come from? If the player is deemed "on the ground" and tackled, then the law states the tackler(s) must immediately release him and the tackled player must immediately release the ball - obviously neither of which are being enforced.

It seems sometimes refs enforce the 'spirit' of the rules rather than the letter. For instance: the laws state that a tackled player on the ground must immediately release the ball. It doesn't state he must release it immediately if and only if an opposition player is trying to rip it, yet that's precisely how refs are enforcing the law. I've never seen a tackled player pinged for slow release except when the opposition were challenging for the ball.

Refs have been calling "tackle" only all the time. Teams are competing against "choke tackle" more these days. and a ref will call tackle to let players know that its not a ruck where offsides are different and entry is different for arriving players.

who_me · 17-04-2017 7:25pm

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Refs have been calling "tackle" only all the time. Teams are competing against "choke tackle" more these days. and a ref will call tackle to let players know that its not a ruck where offsides are different and entry is different for arriving players.

I'm talking about a specific example - where the tackled player is 'held up', but gets his knee to the ground and is hauled back up. If refs have been calling 'tackle' in that situation, it's new to me.

It's a weird situation since the ref has declared the player to be tackled and down, but he's on his feet, holding the ball, and being held onto by numerous players. He can't release the ball immediately and the tacklers too are typically given a lot of leeway in how long they can hold on, in comparison to a 'player genuinely on the ground' scenario.

Water John · 17-04-2017 9:57pm

If there was a subsequent scrum which side did he give to?
The player with the ball?

The Lost Sheep · 17-04-2017 10:03pm

who_me wrote: »

I'm talking about a specific example - where the tackled player is 'held up', but gets his knee to the ground and is hauled back up. If refs have been calling 'tackle' in that situation, it's new to me.

It's a weird situation since the ref has declared the player to be tackled and down, but he's on his feet, holding the ball, and being held onto by numerous players. He can't release the ball immediately and the tacklers too are typically given a lot of leeway in how long they can hold on, in comparison to a 'player genuinely on the ground' scenario.

Its a tackle and if hauled up it will depend on how long they stay up as it depends on how long what it will be next.
Its not a wierd situation. A player is deemed tackled when they have one or both knees on the ground.

Losty Dublin · 17-04-2017 10:49pm

who_me wrote: »

I'm talking about a specific example - where the tackled player is 'held up', but gets his knee to the ground and is hauled back up. If refs have been calling 'tackle' in that situation, it's new to me.

It's a weird situation since the ref has declared the player to be tackled and down, but he's on his feet, holding the ball, and being held onto by numerous players. He can't release the ball immediately and the tacklers too are typically given a lot of leeway in how long they can hold on, in comparison to a 'player genuinely on the ground' scenario.

A referee isn't calling that the tackle has been competed though. He is calling Tackle so both teams know that neither a ruck or maul has been formed yet; if a ruck or maul are formed then you'll hear a call for same. You may not hear it being called at social rugby levels but certainly at pro or higher levels the refs usually will call it.

On part of a player touching then leaving the ground under such circumstances, well the referee is asking for trouble to consider that a completed tackle as a release is nigh impossible. If the tackle is considered completed, only then you will hear the official call "Release" or "Roll away" or "hand off" or "away" or some such phrase.

It should be noted that such calls are made by referees to make the game flow smoother for all concerned, and not purely to adhere to some Law. Think of it as good housekeeping

Water John · 17-04-2017 10:55pm

Well refereeing rugby is a management process, not about a whistle.

Losty Dublin · 17-04-2017 11:01pm

Water John wrote: »

Well refereeing rugby is a management process, not about a whistle.

A former assessor, now departed the mortal touchline, once said to me that at the perfect game of rugby, the only lawful duties of the referee were to blow his whistle and note the scores as they happen and to time keep it all. How easy you make it for the teams depends on how much you talk to them and tell them what to do and not do before it's too late.

pickarooney · 29-04-2017 3:38pm

What exactly counts as held in the tackle and at what point does it become not releasing?

Losty Dublin · 01-05-2017 1:44pm

pickarooney wrote: »

What exactly counts as held in the tackle and at what point does it become not releasing?

Meant to reply to this the other day, sorry.

When you've (legally, of course.) tackled and have brought the player to the ground, this is what is considered a completed tackle as you have grounded the player and held him down. We often hear the referee call "Not Held". This is when a tackler hasn't brought a player to the ground and completed the tackle or even when a player goes to ground; a ball carrier is then free to stand up again provided that a ruck hasn't formed over them.

Where it becomes not releasing is if the tackler prevents the tackled player from rolling away or regaining his footing or from playing or placing the ball. In essence this means letting go off the player once the tackle is completed. For the tackled player, they must place or play the ball and move away or at least not interfere with oncoming players.

Practically speaking, if you are interfering with the oppositions attempts to play while while on the ground then a ping will come within a few seconds depending on where and when and what you're up to.

.ak · 01-05-2017 4:05pm

We had a bizarre interpretation of that in our final in div11 last week (apart from that he was very good, good communication and kept the game flowing), our player was being held up, he got his knee to deck but the defending team refused to release him - the ref shouted release, tackle complete, they did not release so he blew the whistle, only he gave THEM the penalty. Our captain asked if he could clarify the decision, and the ref said 'Your player didn't release the ball. Same as a tackled player on the ground must release the ball.' The mind boggled a bit, because surely the player must be given the opportunity to place the ball, and surely the tackler must release the player when the tackle is complete, especially if attacking the ball. On further clarification he said "All players must release at the same time, both tackler and carrier." Bit of a head scratcher. In fairness he pinged them for the exact same thing 10 minutes later.

He also pinged me for something, which I'm not sure if it was right or not... They have the ball, run into our midfield, get held up by ONE player, he tries to turn his body and present the ball back if a maul starts, at this point only two players are in contact, so I run around and tackle the ball, then their players bind on to me, I'm effectively stopping transfer of the ball. He pings me because he said I was on the wrong side, but in my head there's neither a ruck or a maul here, so no offside, just a tackle in progress, I can join the tackle from any angle - am I right or wrong there?

Shelflife · 01-05-2017 4:23pm

On the first point the ref was wrong, the tackler must release the player with the ball first and then the ball carrier must release/place the ball. the tackler cant prevent the ball carrier from releasing the ball.

On the second point if the player is held up then there is no tackle, no ruck. If theres only two involved there can be no maul so therefore its open play so play on and you can join in the manner that you did.

You cant have a tackle in progress, you have a tackle or open play there is no in between.

Losty Dublin · 01-05-2017 9:41pm

Shelflife wrote: »

On the first point the ref was wrong, the tackler must release the player with the ball first and then the ball carrier must release/place the ball. the tackler cant prevent the ball carrier from releasing the ball.

.

But the player still has got to release the ball. Just cos he can't place it on the ground doesn't mean that you can still hang on to the ball; you can hand it over or pop it or have it ripped away. Situations arise when the tackled holds on and the opposition have to rip and make contact with the tackled, primarily because he hasn't released it. I'm perhaps seeing it from the refs POV here but even still...

Shelflife · 01-05-2017 10:39pm

I'm assuming that the tacklers where trying to hold him up, he gets his knee to the ground but the tacklers don't release and continue to try to hold him up.

If a tackle is called , the tacklers and tackle assists must release, when they release the tackled player must then release the ball.

From a refs POV as well

Losty Dublin · 01-05-2017 11:47pm

Shelflife wrote: »

I'm assuming that the tacklers where trying to hold him up, he gets his knee to the ground but the tacklers don't release and continue to try to hold him up.

If a tackle is called , the tacklers and tackle assists must release, when they release the tackled player must then release the ball.

From a refs POV as well

Shall we go upstairs on this one?

helimachoptor · 24-06-2017 9:40am

Even though i've been a rugby fan for a long time, I have no idea why advantage lasts so long, can anyone explain?

sydthebeat · 24-06-2017 9:50am

helimachoptor wrote: »

Even though i've been a rugby fan for a long time, I have no idea why advantage lasts so long, can anyone explain?

Knock on advantage usually lasts one phase, and will be called over if there's no significant loss of ground within that time.

Penalty advantage is different in that it lasts until there's a clear and obvious advantage.. That can take more time to develop, therefore lasts much longer.

Dave_The_Sheep · 26-11-2017 10:01pm

Question. My understanding is that the ball is out of a ruck if it goes past the hindmost foot of players in the ruck. Does that include only players on their feet or also those who are on the deck?

sydthebeat · 26-11-2017 10:12pm

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Question. My understanding is that the ball is out of a ruck if it goes past the hindmost foot of players in the ruck. Does that include only players on their feet or also those who are on the deck?

Only players on their feet are considered part of the ruck.

Quite often though it's reffed very loosely

The Lost Sheep · 26-11-2017 10:22pm

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

Question. My understanding is that the ball is out of a ruck if it goes past the hindmost foot of players in the ruck. Does that include only players on their feet or also those who are on the deck?

Ball is out of a ruck once it passes hindmost foot of all involved in the ruck and that includes those on the deck

sydthebeat wrote: »

Only players on their feet are considered part of the ruck.

Quite often though it's reffed very loosely

You have to be on your feet to form and play the ball in a ruck but if not on feet you can still be part of a ruck

Rugby 101 - Know your rucks from your mauls!

Comments