Attacking tap penalty.

[Andy P]

hi, couple of questions about attacking penalties.

1. Attacking side opt to take the tap. S/h on the mark and the receiver and support players drop back 10 metres. The receiver and support charge, late tap by the S/h who off loads to the ball. This doesn't fit the description of a cavalry charge in the book but is simliar. Is this acceptable?

2. Attacking side have a set piece penalty.S/h taps, passes to a receiving player who turns and has supporting players bind on before contact by the defending team.

Am I correct in thinking,
a. this is okay if the defending team can make contact with the ball carrier but if the ball has moved back to another player protected by the initial receiver, before contact, it is a penalty against the attacking side for offside?
b. The first players from the defending team could go around the back of the attacking unit and compete for the ball as their first contact, as no maul has been formed but other defenders would then need to come in from the back foot as a maul has been formed.

 

[ddjamo]

both are penalties in my book...

1 - cavalry charge
2 - flying wedge/obstruction

 

[Dixie]

1 - penalty. Cavalry charge.

2 - penalty - flying wedge

Ddjamo, you'll often see slow ball dealt with in this way in English pro rugby (ho, hum - tedium reigns). SH marshalls a couple of big guys to stand off, passes the ball to one of them, others bind on and they charge into the massed ranks of the defence standing off the collapsed muck. Deadly dull, but not illegal, unfortunately. The only upside is that England get trounced when performing this tedium on the International stage, demonstrating its ineffectiveness. The difference between this and a Flying Wedge appears to be that the attack has less time to get up any momentum. It's probably an issue of dangerous play, rather than anything inherent in binding to a player before the contact situation.

 

[ddjamo]

1 - penalty. Cavalry charge.

2 - penalty - flying wedge

Ddjamo, you'll often see slow ball dealt with in this way in English pro rugby (ho, hum - tedium reigns). SH marshalls a couple of big guys to stand off, passes the ball to one of them, others bind on and they charge into the massed ranks of the defence standing off the collapsed muck. Deadly dull, but not illegal, unfortunately. The only upside is that England get trounced when performing this tedium on the International stage, demonstrating its ineffectiveness. The difference between this and a Flying Wedge appears to be that the attack has less time to get up any momentum. It's probably an issue of dangerous play, rather than anything inherent in binding to a player before the contact situation.

you mean like a pick and go with the support standing right behind the man doing the picking and driving on him?

 

[OB..]

It is true that before a maul is formed, defenders can approach the ball from any direction, as there is no offside line.

The Cavalry Wedge and Flying Charge were put in the Laws in 1996, and memory (I don't trust it!) tells me it was in response to a particular problem at the time.

I think it is more important to decide if the play is potentially dangerous than whether or not it fits the law book definition, which simply refers to "this type of attack".

 

[ddjamo]

so...O.B. and Dixie...you are saying you allow players to bind onto the ball carrier before the ball carrier has made contact with opposition? or in the question above - "turns" - I would imagine - turn, present, support binds on both sides...can you site law where this is allowed or disallowed? just for clarification...in the question above - I think he's asking more like pre-setting a maul?

 

[dave_clark]

ok, time to be simple and question option 1. as long as the ball is given to the front man who is charging, how does this differ to open play having multiple dummy runners? nobody is offside, nobody is taking any defenders out and therefore nobody is liable to be penalised?

unless it's written in the laws that no attacking player is allowed to move before the tap is taken?

 

[Emmet Murphy]

Dave - I believe the issue would be with regards to the attacking players having forward momentum before play restarted whereas the defenders would not have; in open play this is not the case. However, each situation needs to be judged on its own merits.

 

[dave_clark]

is this prohibited or does it fall under equity?

 

[Dixie]

so...O.B. and Dixie...you are saying you allow players to bind onto the ball carrier before the ball carrier has made contact with opposition?

Absolutely. A variant of this is specifically permitted during the lineout (lifting) and is copied in relation to receiving a high ball from a kick-off. It's a very common scenario from slow ball in exactly the way you describe: "you mean like a pick and go with the support standing right behind the man doing the picking and driving on him?"

ok, time to be simple and question option 1. as long as the ball is given to the front man who is charging, how does this differ to open play having multiple dummy runners? nobody is offside, nobody is taking any defenders out and therefore nobody is liable to be penalised?

unless it's written in the laws that no attacking player is allowed to move before the tap is taken?

The prohibition against the cavalry charge is indeed written into the laws. It doesn't seem to me important whether the ball is given to the first man or a later one - it is considered dangerous play. My own communication to the players, when a cavalry charge appears to be on the cards, is "no-one moves until he's tapped it". The difference compared to open play is that in the latter, the defence is not prevented from closing down the attack's options until the attack is ready to strike.

 

[dave_clark]

ah, looks like my understanding of a cavalry charge is lacking!

 

[Davet]

so...O.B. and Dixie...you are saying you allow players to bind onto the ball carrier before the ball carrier has made contact with opposition? or in the question above - "turns" - I would imagine - turn, present, support binds on both sides...can you site law where this is allowed or disallowed? just for clarification...in the question above - I think he's asking more like pre-setting a maul?

It's not disallowed. Unless this occurance is "dangerous" (YOU define dangerous in YOUR games).

Therefore it's legal.

 

[chopper15]

It is true that before a maul is formed, defenders can approach the ball from any direction, as there is no offside line.

The Cavalry Wedge and Flying Charge were put in the Laws in 1996, and memory (I don't trust it!) tells me it was in response to a particular problem at the time.

I think it is more important to decide if the play is potentially dangerous than whether or not it fits the law book definition, which simply refers to "this type of attack".

Wasn't it declared dangerous, OB, because the ball-holder, usually the hooker with his back to the goal-line, would tap the ball, keep hold of it and the charging fwds would pick him up and use him as a battering ram to go over the line? I well remember Cornwall using this ploy with . . . . damn . . .he's the present coach/mngr of Plymouth Albion used to hook for England?

I still can't understand why fwds don't use a lawful variant for a PK on the 5m line instead of kicking for a LO which they still have to contest for possession

As the man said, ' A ball in the hand is worth . . . . '!

 

[SimonSmith]

Graham Dawe?

 

[dave_clark]

I still can't understand why fwds don't use a lawful variant for a PK on the 5m line instead of kicking for a LO which they still have to contest for possession

as a former front row, i'll agree with you wholeheartedly

 

[chopper15]

Graham Dawe?

Thank you, Simon. It's that time of life!

 

[Andy P]

Thanks for the info. I've been away for a couple of weeks hence the delay.