[Tackle] Clearout at the tackle

[Willehj]

Hi

Can anyone please direct me to the law tht allows clearout at the tackle?

You see players flying into the tackle area where a ruck has not been formed in an attempt to remove a player.

Fistly is this legal and if so what law governs what can and cannot be done by the defending player?

Thanks

Huw

 

[Rich_NL]

If you're thinking of top-flight rugby, what the laws say is not a good guide to what's allowed to happen.

There's no law allowing a clear out at the tackle, because the laws forbid or prescribe things. There's no law forbidding a clear out. There are laws against playing off feet, dangerous play, shoulder charging, diving over the ball... but the game is based on contest, so there's nothing stopping a player challenging at the breakdown.

 

[crossref]

Law 9 is what you are after, I think

 

[Phil E]

At a tackle any player on his feet can go for the ball. Alternatively a player may stand over the ball to guard it.

Any player who gains possession of the ball at a tackle, may in turn be tackled (Law 14.9.c)

Alternatively if a player from the opposition makes contact with the player gathering or guarding the ball then a ruck is formed at the instant they make contact, on their feet, over the ball.

So what you are describing could be a tackle or a ruck forming?

 

[Treadmore]

Hi

Can anyone please direct me to the law tht allows clearout at the tackle?

You see players flying into the tackle area where a ruck has not been formed in an attempt to remove a player.

Fistly is this legal and if so what law governs what can and cannot be done by the defending player?

Thanks

Huw

Are you referring to cases such what Red 7 does in this link ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDs6i5MzNco&feature=youtu.be&t=105

Though this tackle event was discussed wrt Dan Bigger, it is an example of a player going off their feet at a tackle to remove an opponent in this the tackler on the floor.

I consider this a blight on top flight rugby every team does it and seems to get away with it, except occasionally and when a 2nd team mate joins in. Because then it magically become sealing off.

/Rant

 

[MadRef77]

No issue with the clearing in the videoclip: as long as you go to the ground as a result of rucking against an opponent, I am fine with it. I don't see any sealing off there: blue had their change to go for the ball and got cleared out. A different beast is when supporting players dive straight into the tackle before any opponent had the chance to engage at all: that prevents any competition for the ball and must be penalised.

On a final not, I have many more issues in the videoclip with Red 10 coming blatantly from the side and allowing an insanely fast recycling that leads to a try.

 

[Treadmore]

No issue with the clearing in the videoclip: as long as you go to the ground as a result of rucking against an opponent, I am fine with it. I don't see any sealing off there: blue had their change to go for the ball and got cleared out. A different beast is when supporting players dive straight into the tackle before any opponent had the chance to engage at all: that prevents any competition for the ball and must be penalised.

On a final not, I have many more issues in the videoclip with Red 10 coming blatantly from the side and allowing an insanely fast recycling that leads to a try.

Red 10 discussion here

re that clearout...

The blue player (tackler) is making some attempt to comply with the law (moving away) but is still on the ground when "cleared-out". Thus there is no ruck formed from which they have gone to ground for you to be "fine with it". By allowing the action the ref has now also seemingly allowed a blue offside line back where red 7 has pushed blue 5: blue 9 clearly feels constrained by it and not able to compete for the ball.

Can I presume in 2017 you might have penalised under then Law 15 Tackle:

[LAWS]15.7 (c) No player may fall on or over the players lying on the ground after a tackle with the ball
between or near to them.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

Sadly, no such clearly worded law remains in the simplified new Laws, maybe WR don't care about it, though we still have 14.8.a & b (and 13.4) for a principle of staying on your feet when others and the ball are on the ground.

 

[crossref]

WR ponder this

https://www.irishtimes.com/sport/ru...-the-jackal-may-be-coming-to-an-end-1.4177509

 

[Jolly Roger]

I fully agree with the Irish Times report. Referees at all levels should apply the laws at the breakdown. Players should stay on their feet and the “crocodile roll” should be interpreted as going off feet as opposed to a fair clear out. Enforce entry through the gate and binding with an arm rather than making contact with the shoulder. No new laws are required just a return to the interpretation of existing laws as was the case about 10 years ago.

The rewrite of the laws has not helped.

 

[Decorily]

I fully agree with the Irish Times report. Referees at all levels should apply the laws at the breakdown. Players should stay on their feet and the “crocodile roll” should be interpreted as going off feet as opposed to a fair clear out. Enforce entry through the gate and binding with an arm rather than making contact with the shoulder. No new laws are required just a return to the interpretation of existing laws as was the case about 10 years ago.

The rewrite of the laws has not helped.

I wonder has the author ever refereed a game of rugby!

 

[SimonSmith]

I wonder has the author ever refereed a game of rugby!

Owen Doyle ex International referee? Director of Referee for the IRFU?

I think the answer might be yes.

 

[Decorily]

Owen Doyle ex International referee? Director of Referee for the IRFU?

I think the answer might be yes.

Well that scuppers my notion!!
Unfortunately link won't work for me so haven't seen the article!

 

[Jz558]

Who'd have thought that the answer to this mess could be found by actually enforcing the laws? Can't believe the answer has been staring us all in the face and yet no one suggested it previously.