Rugby 101 - Know your rucks from your mauls!

sydthebeat · 26-11-2017 10:23pm

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

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

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

So if everyone falls over..... Does a ruck still exist?

Losty Dublin · 27-11-2017 12:23am

sydthebeat wrote: »

So if everyone falls over..... Does a ruck still exist?

If the ruck was formed before they all fell over then yes it does.

Dave_The_Sheep · 27-11-2017 2:42am

And if someone else on their feet comes in, they supercede all those on the ground and can do what they like?

You see it a lot where there's a ruck and somebody can opens the only protection off their feet and the ball is there with nobody on their feet protecting it. I don't understand why refs call hands off or "don't" in that case. Surely if everyone is off their feet then it's a free for all.

pickarooney · 27-11-2017 7:11am

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

And if someone else on their feet comes in, they supercede all those on the ground and can do what they like?

You see it a lot where there's a ruck and somebody can opens the only protection off their feet and the ball is there with nobody on their feet protecting it. I don't understand why refs call hands off or "don't" in that case. Surely if everyone is off their feet then it's a free for all.

If there's nobody there, including the tackled player, as they've all been cleaned out beyond the ball?

MJohnston · 27-11-2017 9:03am

I see that a lot with Ireland - they'll do too good a job of clearing out rucks when they have possession, and then the ball is left basically unprotected. Is that still in the ruck in that case?

Dave_The_Sheep · 27-11-2017 12:04pm

pickarooney wrote: »

If there's nobody there, including the tackled player, as they've all been cleaned out beyond the ball?

No I mean there's people there, but they're all on the deck. Tackler tackles player with ball, rolls away, they're both down. Someone comes in to try get hands on the ball, is dragged off his feet just to the side say, both them now on the deck. Nobody on their feet, can a player just pick up the ball at that point? I mean there's nobody on their feet protecting it.

purpleisafruit · 27-11-2017 12:13pm

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

No I mean there's people there, but they're all on the deck. Tackler tackles player with ball, rolls away, they're both down. Someone comes in to try get hands on the ball, is dragged off his feet just to the side say, both them now on the deck. Nobody on their feet, can a player just pick up the ball at that point? I mean there's nobody on their feet protecting it.

Ruck was formed when the 2nd player in was contacted by the attacking player attempting to protect the ball. Ruck is not over until it goes beyond the hindmost foot of players on the deck in my opinion.

27-11-2017 3:07pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

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

Quite often though it's reffed very loosely

sydthebeat wrote: »

So if everyone falls over..... Does a ruck still exist?

The way I see it, if you go off your feet while the ruck is a contest (i.e. a defender still has a theoretical chance of winning a turnover) you could well get pinged. If everyone ends up off their feet after the contest at the ruck is over then the ref will just let it go. I think this is probably right or else you'd have a penalty at every single ruck.

Losty Dublin · 28-11-2017 2:27am

MJohnston wrote: »

I see that a lot with Ireland - they'll do too good a job of clearing out rucks when they have possession, and then the ball is left basically unprotected. Is that still in the ruck in that case?

For the ruck to end, the ball has to move on or both teams players have to move away from it.

sydthebeat · 28-11-2017 8:29am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

For the ruck to end, the ball has to move on or both teams players have to move away from it.

How far beyond a ruck can a team push the offside line?

.ak · 28-11-2017 8:55pm

TBH it's really down to how the ref wants the game to flow, but technically speaking once you're off your feet in the ruck you're no longer in the game.

However, no Ref is going to let someone step over a load of prone players to play the ball because then it'll just be a mess.

To encourage positive play a ref will generally want to see a team shift the player past the ball before a defender can touch it, even if that means shifting a prone player back.

Then again some refs are sadistic bastards and once there's day light on the ball they'll call "ball out" and then it's a free for all...

Losty Dublin · 28-11-2017 9:55pm

.ak wrote: »

Then again some refs are sadistic bastards and once there's day light on the ball they'll call "ball out" and then it's a free for all...

That's libellously and defamatory talk, I'll have you know :pac:

delta_bravo · 06-12-2017 5:13pm

There was an old trick in the Rugby 08 games that if you got a penalty anywhere on the pitch you could go for a shot at goal and the opposition automatically went under the posts. You would then kick ten yards ahead of you with a grubber and sprint up the pitch to get ground.

Anyway on a slightly related matter if you have a penalty in say the opposition 22 and you have called a shot is it actually legal to just tap the ball forward, pick it up and resume play normally?

shrapnel222 · 06-12-2017 5:33pm

delta_bravo wrote: »

There was an old trick in the Rugby 08 games that if you got a penalty anywhere on the pitch you could go for a shot at goal and the opposition automatically went under the posts. You would then kick ten yards ahead of you with a grubber and sprint up the pitch to get ground.

Anyway on a slightly related matter if you have a penalty in say the opposition 22 and you have called a shot is it actually legal to just tap the ball forward, pick it up and resume play normally?

if the kicker indicates kick at goal, he has to kick at goal, and the opposition have to stand still

Shelflife · 06-12-2017 6:12pm

shrapnel222 wrote: »

if the kicker indicates kick at goal, he has to kick at goal, and the opposition have to stand still

Has to be a genuine attempt at goal.

Dave_The_Sheep · 07-12-2017 6:09am

O'Gara asked a ref about that mid-game I think, he basically asked - can I miss horribly - in an attempt to hit Horgan cross out on the wing (I think) after he'd opted for goal. Ref rightly told him to bugger off and take his genuine shot at goal. Might have been Owens but I honestly can't remember.

purpleisafruit · 07-12-2017 9:19am

delta_bravo wrote: »

There was an old trick in the Rugby 08 games that if you got a penalty anywhere on the pitch you could go for a shot at goal and the opposition automatically went under the posts. You would then kick ten yards ahead of you with a grubber and sprint up the pitch to get ground.

Anyway on a slightly related matter if you have a penalty in say the opposition 22 and you have called a shot is it actually legal to just tap the ball forward, pick it up and resume play normally?

All covered by Law 21.5 http://laws.worldrugby.org/?law=21.5&language=EN

Losty Dublin · 07-12-2017 9:42am

Dave_The_Sheep wrote: »

O'Gara asked a ref about that mid-game I think, he basically asked - can I miss horribly - in an attempt to hit Horgan cross out on the wing (I think) after he'd opted for goal. Ref rightly told him to bugger off and take his genuine shot at goal. Might have been Owens but I honestly can't remember.

Neil Jenkins pulled such a trick against Romania, I think in 1993. Quite rightfully it has since been removed from the Law Book.

connemara man · 07-12-2017 10:22am

So technically if a kicker was very good he could sky a kick towards the posts but in a way that it held in the air giving chasers time to get under to compete in the air

Quin_Dub · 07-12-2017 10:53am

connemara man wrote: »

So technically if a kicker was very good he could sky a kick towards the posts but in a way that it held in the air giving chasers time to get under to compete in the air

In Theory , yes.

There was a guy in Rugby league years ago that was well known for taking penalty attempts and deliberately aiming to hit them off the cross bar to allow his team regain possession and either score directly or at least get a new set of 6 tackles..

He pulled it off way too often for it to be fluke.

Shelflife · 07-12-2017 11:02am

connemara man wrote: »

So technically if a kicker was very good he could sky a kick towards the posts but in a way that it held in the air giving chasers time to get under to compete in the air

Why would you do that ? It’s a pen , if you’re at your 22m you kick for touch and go for the lineout, a garryowen makes no sense.

Shelflife · 07-12-2017 11:03am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

In Theory , yes.

There was a guy in Rugby league years ago that was well known for taking penalty attempts and deliberately aiming to hit them off the cross bar to allow his team regain possession and either score directly or at least get a new set of 6 tackles..

He pulled it off way too often for it to be fluke.

I think you mean on the last tackle he would aim for the posts to try and hit it.
If he had a pen the tackle count would be reset to zero anyway.

connemara man · 07-12-2017 11:11am

Shelflife wrote: »

Why would you do that ? It’s a pen , if you’re at your 22m you kick for touch and go for the lineout, a garryowen makes no sense.

But if you're 50 meters out and really trust your kick chase...

I know why you wouldn't but it's a fun hypothetical to think about

Quin_Dub · 07-12-2017 2:13pm

Shelflife wrote: »

I think you mean on the last tackle he would aim for the posts to try and hit it.
If he had a pen the tackle count would be reset to zero anyway.

Perhaps.. I've not watched a whole lot of league tbh..

22-01-2018 7:42pm

I should probably know this but if you're defending a maul and you manage to legally swim through it all the way to the ball carrier are you allowed tackle him to the ground?

Stheno · 22-01-2018 7:46pm

I have a question from the La Rochelle match yesterday.

In the first half near the try line Harlequins pulled down multiple rucks and were given a few warnings about that and coming in from the side and LAR kept being awarded scrums.

After the fifth or sixth instance of this the ref awarded a penalty and told LAR that they could just have a lineout if they wanted

Can a ref just decide to award a lineout if they feel like it?

Losty Dublin · 22-01-2018 8:47pm

Bridget Colossal Thunderstorm wrote: »

I should probably know this but if you're defending a maul and you manage to legally swim through it all the way to the ball carrier are you allowed tackle him to the ground?

Taking a maul down deliberately is illegal, IO, so the answer is no. On the wrong day it could earn you a ten minute break.

.ak · 23-01-2018 1:25am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Taking a maul down deliberately is illegal, IO, so the answer is no. On the wrong day it could earn you a ten minute break.

Doesn't seem to be reffed that way in most cases. I've seen loads of guys latch onto the ball, then just let their weight cause the ball carrier to go to deck and then they're awarded a scrum...

Also what's different to that then when you hold up a player in open play? Why am I allowed to bring that to deck when it's called a maul? Is it only legal when you've made contact with the initial ball carrier?

.ak · 23-01-2018 1:29am

Stheno wrote: »

I have a question from the La Rochelle match yesterday.

In the first half near the try line Harlequins pulled down multiple rucks and were given a few warnings about that and coming in from the side and LAR kept being awarded scrums.

After the fifth or sixth instance of this the ref awarded a penalty and told LAR that they could just have a lineout if they wanted

Can a ref just decide to award a lineout if they feel like it?

No, a kicker must kick to touch to be awarded a lineout from a penalty... So unless the ref was just suggesting if they wanted to kick for a lineout? i.e he wasn't budging on awarding something MORE for their scrums and suggested well tough, if you don't like it, take the lineout?

The only time the team get a 'choice' of lineout is if a loose ball from a knock on goes into touch, then in that case the team with the advantage have a choice of either lineout or scrum.

Losty Dublin · 23-01-2018 1:52am

.ak wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be reffed that way in most cases. I've seen loads of guys latch onto the ball, then just let their weight cause the ball carrier to go to deck and then they're awarded a scrum...

Also what's different to that then when you hold up a player in open play? Why am I allowed to bring that to deck when it's called a maul? Is it only legal when you've made contact with the initial ball carrier?

There is a difference between a maul naturally or accidentally going to ground and it been taken down wilfully. See here; looks okay on first view but play it twice and it's a clear pull down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCtMvAFCPCw

In the case of open play it's fine to bring a man to ground unless the ref calls for a maul. After that nature takes it's course.

.ak · 23-01-2018 2:14am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

There is a difference between a maul naturally or accidentally going to ground and it been taken down wilfully. See here; looks okay on first view but play it twice and it's a clear pull down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCtMvAFCPCw

In the case of open play it's fine to bring a man to ground unless the ref calls for a maul. After that nature takes it's course.

but we see open play mauls brought to ground immediately after the ref calls it a maul, why is that?

MJohnston · 23-01-2018 8:40am

.ak wrote: »

but we see open play mauls brought to ground immediately after the ref calls it a maul, why is that?

Presumably the choke tacklers suddenly stop supporting their body weight and it looks like a natural fall

sydthebeat · 23-01-2018 9:15am

A lot of it stems from the position on the field... It's not in the attacking teams interest to drop a maul five meters out, so the assumption is usually that the defenders bring it down.

Out field, if a player is held up then its the attaching teams responsibility to not only hold up the maul, but also to get it going forward. The defending team will quite often simply hold on and, with rigid legs, make it look as though the maul falls naturally. Turnover ball.

23-01-2018 11:49am

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Taking a maul down deliberately is illegal, IO, so the answer is no. On the wrong day it could earn you a ten minute break.

That's what I would have thought...

.ak wrote: »

Doesn't seem to be reffed that way in most cases. I've seen loads of guys latch onto the ball, then just let their weight cause the ball carrier to go to deck and then they're awarded a scrum...

Also what's different to that then when you hold up a player in open play? Why am I allowed to bring that to deck when it's called a maul? Is it only legal when you've made contact with the initial ball carrier?

But this is exactly why I'm asking. Seems to be a case of the refs sort of ignore the letter of the law in certain instances? I have sympathy for the held up in the tackle decisions, if the ball clearly isn't coming back out then while a colllapse might be illegal it really is just speeding up the inevitable.

Quin_Dub · 23-01-2018 12:16pm

Whilst clearly open to interpretation I think the difference is between "pulling it down" and "letting it fall down" or at least not doing anything to stop it falling.

If a player is clearly seen to pull the maul down then penalty , but there are many other ways to "allow" it to collapse as other have said , you plant your feet and let the forward/backward momentum make you fall over for example

FrannoFan · 26-01-2018 4:25pm

Just on the maul discussion.

If a maul goes to ground players don't have to roll away. ball is unplayable and a scrum results.
2 questions
can a player adjust his position on the ground once a maul goes down to block the ball or do you have to lie where you fall

also can a player hold onto the ball once on the ground? i would have thought you had to release but have seen players keeping a hand on the ball preventing a 9 playing it and a scrum being awarded

Quin_Dub · 26-01-2018 4:36pm

FrannoFan wrote: »

Just on the maul discussion.

If a maul goes to ground players don't have to roll away. ball is unplayable and a scrum results.
2 questions
can a player adjust his position on the ground once a maul goes down to block the ball or do you have to lie where you fall

also can a player hold onto the ball once on the ground? i would have thought you had to release but have seen players keeping a hand on the ball preventing a 9 playing it and a scrum being awarded

For a Maul - You don't have to release the ball nor do you have to roll away once it collapses. I don't think you can significantly move your position but most players close to the ball will do their best to block the ball if they are a defender.

In terms of holding on to ball , generally whether it's a tackle or ruck most referees will allow the attacker to keep a light hold the ball to keep it stable , but as soon as an opposing player looks to play it, if you continue to hold you'll get penalised

LeinsterDub · 30-01-2018 4:14pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

For a Maul - You don't have to release the ball nor do you have to roll away once it collapses. I don't think you can significantly move your position but most players close to the ball will do their best to block the ball if they are a defender.

In terms of holding on to ball , generally whether it's a tackle or ruck most referees will allow the attacker to keep a light hold the ball to keep it stable , but as soon as an opposing player looks to play it, if you continue to hold you'll get penalised

Doesn't it depend ? If the initial player is taken to ground and still has the ball the maul has ended and a tackle has occurred. Rolling away and releasing must occur.

sydthebeat · 30-01-2018 4:25pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Doesn't it depend ? If the initial player is taken to ground and still has the ball the maul has ended and a tackle has occurred. Rolling away and releasing must occur.

nope.

A maul ends and play continues when:
The ball or ball-carrier leaves the maul.
The ball is on the ground.
The ball is on or over the goal line.

so the player can be on the ground, but the ball not... defending players need not move away and turnover occurs as teh ball is not made available immediately.

there is a great example in the WR laws site:
http://laws.worldrugby.org/videos/laws/1176.mp4

LeinsterDub · 30-01-2018 5:25pm

sydthebeat wrote: »

nope.

A maul ends and play continues when:
The ball or ball-carrier leaves the maul.
The ball is on the ground.
The ball is on or over the goal line.

so the player can be on the ground, but the ball not... defending players need not move away and turnover occurs as teh ball is not made available immediately.

there is a great example in the WR laws site:
http://laws.worldrugby.org/videos/laws/1176.mp4

So the "it's a tackle now release" command should only get issued when a maul hasn't formed?

Quin_Dub · 30-01-2018 5:56pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So the "it's a tackle now release" command should only get issued when a maul hasn't formed?

Correct - generally if the player is off the ground with multiple players attached for more than a few seconds the referee will call maul , then no one needs to release anyone. But if the ball carrier gets a knee to ground in those 1st few seconds even if only for a split second, he calls "tackle" and everybody needs to let go.

This is why referee communication is critical - If they don't call "Maul" , "Tackle" etc. there is significant confusion on the part of the players and things go wrong.

The underage team I coach had a game a few weeks ago with a referee that did not communicate at all in general play. Never told the players if he was seeing a ruck or maul or a tackle etc. Only blew his whistle.

The result ?

38 Penalties and 33 scrums in the game as virtually every single tackle/breakdown resulted in a whistle..An utterly ruined game for both teams.

sydthebeat · 30-01-2018 6:34pm

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So the "it's a tackle now release" command should only get issued when a maul hasn't formed?

two things here.....
first thing is, as quin dub says above... a ref may see a ball carrier get to ground with players around him..... a knee is all it takes, and call "tackle"... therefore defending players need to leave it go and roll away.

second thing..... a maul can turn into a ruck..... if the ball carrier gets the ball to ground ie is in a position to present it..... then what started as a maul, becomes a ruck and again, defending players must allow the ball to be played ie they cannot reach out and grab the ball and pull it back in. you see this happen sometimes when a maul gets to ground but the attacking players can clear the defenders to expose the ball... this has to happen immediately though.

more often than not though, defending players will work in tandem with one holding up the ball carrier and the second targeting the ball. when this happens and the maul collapses the defending players do not have to release the player or the ball if its up off the ground (which the guy targeting the ball will ensure)

turnover ball

purpleisafruit · 31-01-2018 9:46am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Correct - generally if the player is off the ground with multiple players attached for more than a few seconds the referee will call maul , then no one needs to release anyone. But if the ball carrier gets a knee to ground in those 1st few seconds even if only for a split second, he calls "tackle" and everybody needs to let go.

This is why referee communication is critical - If they don't call "Maul" , "Tackle" etc. there is significant confusion on the part of the players and things go wrong.

The underage team I coach had a game a few weeks ago with a referee that did not communicate at all in general play. Never told the players if he was seeing a ruck or maul or a tackle etc. Only blew his whistle.

The result ?

38 Penalties and 33 scrums in the game as virtually every single tackle/breakdown resulted in a whistle..An utterly ruined game for both teams.

If you can give that feedback to the referee's society, it would definitely help. 38 penalties is a ridiculous amount at any level. Must have been the most frustrating game ever.

Quin_Dub · 31-01-2018 10:17pm

purpleisafruit wrote: »

If you can give that feedback to the referee's society, it would definitely help. 38 penalties is a ridiculous amount at any level. Must have been the most frustrating game ever.

Absolutely.. Blew the whistle 71 times in a 70 minute game, utterly destroyed it for everyone there.

And this was an U18 club game featuring 7 or 8 players involved with either Provincial or National panels so not exactly a poor standard of player.

He was actually being assessed in the game would you believe... Neither he nor the assessor were willing to have any kind of conversation after the game with either set of coaches..

I totally understand that referees are human and makes mistakes etc. (I referee regularly myself) but it was an utterly frustrating experience..

Losty Dublin · 01-02-2018 12:22am

purpleisafruit wrote: »

If you can give that feedback to the referee's society, it would definitely help. 38 penalties is a ridiculous amount at any level. Must have been the most frustrating game ever.

You are absolutely wasting your time contacting the referee society so spare yourself the time.

The Lost Sheep · 01-02-2018 12:25am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Absolutely.. Blew the whistle 71 times in a 70 minute game, utterly destroyed it for everyone there.

And this was an U18 club game featuring 7 or 8 players involved with either Provincial or National panels so not exactly a poor standard of player.

He was actually being assessed in the game would you believe... Neither he nor the assessor were willing to have any kind of conversation after the game with either set of coaches..

I totally understand that referees are human and makes mistakes etc. (I referee regularly myself) but it was an utterly frustrating experience..

Referee nor assessor should be have any kind of conversation like you are suggesting after the game.
Can you PM me the sides who played the game?

Quin_Dub · 01-02-2018 12:40am

The Lost Sheep wrote: »

Referee nor assessor should be have any kind of conversation like you are suggesting after the game.
Can you PM me the sides who played the game?

Why would/should they not chat with coaches after a game?

I would regularly speak to a referee after a game to discuss the game.

Not to argue with them, but to get insight into their interpretation of things to allow me to better prepare my players for future games.

If they were being penalised a lot at the breakdown for example I'd want to get feedback from the ref on what he was seeing so that I could improve things in terms of body position etc.. "paint a better picture" I think is the current phraseology..

The Lost Sheep · 01-02-2018 12:50am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Why would/should they not chat with coaches after a game?

I would regularly speak to a referee after a game to discuss the game.

Not to argue with them, but to get insight into their interpretation of things to allow me to better prepare my players for future games.

If they were being penalised a lot at the breakdown for example I'd want to get feedback from the ref on what he was seeing so that I could improve things in terms of body position etc.. "paint a better picture" I think is the current phraseology..

There is looking for feedback but if coach is getting angry/wants to rant why would/should an official have to deal with that?

Questions fair enough but all too often that doesnt happen.

Losty Dublin · 01-02-2018 12:50am

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Why would/should they not chat with coaches after a game?

I would regularly speak to a referee after a game to discuss the game.

Simply put, referees are there to just referee the game. We aren't paid to be there and we certainly aren't rewarded or incentivised to analyse the game for either team. By all means it's nice if you can but it's not part of our deal, sorry.

I'm sure Lost Sheep will have a different take on this.

Stheno · 01-02-2018 12:52am

How do you become a referee?

Rugby 101 - Know your rucks from your mauls!

Comments