Ball Carrier is legally tackled goes to ground, presents ball; leaves hand-on ball

Drift


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
1,846
Post Likes
114
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
There is though a point there; those saying that the jackler got cleared out before he could establish his rights to the ball have to be aware that the process by which he was cleared out was itself illegal.
Meh, I have only watched it in real time, didn't bother with the slow mo as you always see it differently in slow mo, and in real time I was more than happy with the clean out.
 

Drift


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
1,846
Post Likes
114
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I think we can all agree that this is a perfect example of a 50/50 call and IMO it's one you can let go. If you want to ping that PK then all of the other 50/50 ones throughout the game that look close are going to be needed to be pinged as well. By letting it go then you are encouraging a better contest to develop. By rewarding that jackler for a relatively weak steal (look how easy he gets blown off the ball) then the players are going to be expecting to be rewarded for that. If you don't reward him then the players know they need to be better and that way you will have a better contest for the ball.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I think we can all agree that this is a perfect example of a 50/50 call and IMO it's one you can let go. If you want to ping that PK then all of the other 50/50 ones throughout the game that look close are going to be needed to be pinged as well. By letting it go then you are encouraging a better contest to develop. By rewarding that jackler for a relatively weak steal (look how easy he gets blown off the ball) then the players are going to be expecting to be rewarded for that. If you don't reward him then the players know they need to be better and that way you will have a better contest for the ball.


^^^THIS!
 

Browner

Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
6,000
Post Likes
270
No, the guy on his feet needs to survive the first clean out to win possession of the ball
.

[LAWS].15.5 ( e)
If opposition players who are on their feet attempt to play the ball, and can survive a quickly executed clear out , then the tackled player must release the ball. [/LAWS]

Does this FLFY ??
 

Drift


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
1,846
Post Likes
114
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
.

[LAWS].15.5 ( e)
If opposition players who are on their feet attempt to play the ball, and can survive a quickly executed clear out , then the tackled player must release the ball. [/LAWS]

Does this FLFY ??

You don't think that red's support player arrived pretty quickly and cleared the man out?
 

Browner

Banned
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
6,000
Post Likes
270
I think we can all agree that this is a perfect example of a 50/50 call and IMO it's one you can let go. If you want to ping that PK then all of the other 50/50 ones throughout the game that look close are going to be needed to be pinged as well. By letting it go then you are encouraging a better contest to develop. By rewarding that jackler for a relatively weak steal (look how easy he gets blown off the ball) then the players are going to be expecting to be rewarded for that. If you don't reward him then the players know they need to be better and that way you will have a better contest for the ball.

Drift,
I can understand your general view, but aside from illegally dropping down onto the BC ( and not supporting own weight) I'm struggling to imagine how this jackaler could have done 'better' ? Any ideas?

The BC seemed to get himself semi-issolated, his support was certainly out of camera view.

(As I've said, maybe I cant stop seeing this with a backrowers bias )
 

RobLev

Rugby Expert
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
I think we can all agree that this is a perfect example of a 50/50 call and IMO it's one you can let go. If you want to ping that PK then all of the other 50/50 ones throughout the game that look close are going to be needed to be pinged as well. By letting it go then you are encouraging a better contest to develop. By rewarding that jackler for a relatively weak steal (look how easy he gets blown off the ball)

This is precisely my point. He wasn't easily blown off the ball. He evaded the attempt to clear him out; he was dragged off the ball by the neck.

then the players are going to be expecting to be rewarded for that. If you don't reward him then the players know they need to be better and that way you will have a better contest for the ball.

How does he do better than by getting his hands on the ball and avoiding the initial attempt to clear him out?

Oh, and I spotted that the "clear out" was actually a drag off at full speed; slowing it down merely confirmed my impression that the drag was at the neck/collar level.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
This is precisely my point. He wasn't easily blown off the ball. He evaded the attempt to clear him out; he was dragged off the ball by the neck.

Obviously this is a case of seeing what we want to see.

I see the cleaner grab the jackler by the collar of his jersey... not illegal
I see the jackler blown off his feet in a fraction of a second.

For the jackler to be legit, I want to see him remaining strong on his feet, one or both hands only on the ball, not falling to ground still holding the the tacked player by an arm.
 

ddjamo


Referees in Canada
Joined
Jun 29, 2008
Messages
2,912
Post Likes
135
^^^ c'mon man....I just watched it again real time. quick ball with barely a contest. again, real time.
 

RobLev

Rugby Expert
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
2,170
Post Likes
244
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
Obviously this is a case of seeing what we want to see.

I see the cleaner grab the jackler by the collar of his jersey... not illegal

The jackler wasn't a prop - his collar was above the line of the shoulders. According to the various threads on the subject on this august forum, hauling someone around by the collar is considered dangerous play; if in the course of a tackle, it's a high tackle.

I see the jackler blown off his feet in a fraction of a second.

As you say... I saw the jackler cause the cleaner-out to miss his clean-out, and the attempted cleaner-out end up dragging the jackler backwards by the neck and collar. I don't see any of that happening in a fraction of a second.

For the jackler to be legit, I want to see him remaining strong on his feet, one or both hands only on the ball, not falling to ground still holding the the tacked player by an arm.

For the clean-out to be legit, I want to see binding on the jackler preceding contact with any other part of the body, and I want to see the cleaner-out driving over the ball and driving the jackler off the ball. None of which happened.

I'd also add that there are more ways to kill a cat than drowning it with cream; if the cleaner-out takes a 5-10 metre run up at a jackler, then if the jackler is foolish enough to try to take the impact square on then he will get blown away. In this instance, that didn't happen.
 

Drift


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
1,846
Post Likes
114
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Drift,
I can understand your general view, but aside from illegally dropping down onto the BC ( and not supporting own weight) I'm struggling to imagine how this jackaler could have done 'better' ? Any ideas?

The BC seemed to get himself semi-issolated, his support was certainly out of camera view.

(As I've said, maybe I cant stop seeing this with a backrowers bias )

I'm an ex backrower as well and I am fine with not rewarding that.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
If something fresh pops up in this thread, can someone send me a PM?
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,687
Post Likes
1,773
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
For the clean-out to be legit, I want to see binding on the jackler preceding contact with any other part of the body, and I want to see the cleaner-out driving over the ball and driving the jackler off the ball. None of which happened.

I'd also add that there are more ways to kill a cat than drowning it with cream; if the cleaner-out takes a 5-10 metre run up at a jackler, then if the jackler is foolish enough to try to take the impact square on then he will get blown away. In this instance, that didn't happen.


As I said, you see what you want to see. I see this sort of scenario as play-on, all day, every day, at any level of the game. If unsure, I will err on the side of the team in possession at the contact.

You'll see a dozen or more of these in every match this coming weekend, and none of them will result in a PK. IMO, if you PK this, you come across to me as a jobsworth; looking for reasons to blow the whistle.

Personally, I would rather referees NOT look for ways to stop the game, because when they do, they make it all about them when it should be about the players... its their game, not ours!
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Personally, I would rather referees NOT look for ways to stop the game, because when they do, they make it all about them when it should be about the players... its their game, not ours!

what a load of weazle words
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,225
Post Likes
2,219
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Thats "weasel" :biggrin:

yes, thank you. Too heavy reliance on non-existent spell checker.

Did you know that there are weasels that have no colour other than black? Guess what they're called.

650301392.jpg
 
Top