Collapsing Rucks

[crossref]

Given that the Law says you can't collapse a ruck, and you must endeavour to stay on your feet, why do we allow players to perform judo rolls and similar, where you take both your opponent and yourself to ground ?

That's the question Ben Ryan asks Nigel Owens .. who doesnt half waffle on in response ..

In reality there is no good answer , other than "we don't enforce that Law" which is not really available to Nigel

He will go into politics won't he ?

This passage reminds me a lot of the sort of discussions we have here on this site

From 42.30 here


Brian and Ben discuss the big talking points in the Premiership, and get stuck into who should and shouldn't be on the plane to Japan for England next year - with Ben standing by his belief that England will not win the World Cup with George Ford at fly half. We

* duration: 56:10, Played: 48:02

* Published: 08/10/2018 20:39:39

* Episode Download link (77 MB): https://dts.podtrac.com/redirect.mp...8_Full_Contact_Episode_Comp_MIXED_mixdown.mp3

* Show Notes: https://telegraphmediagroup.podbean...h-should-go-to-the-world-cup-not-george-ford/

* Episode feed: Brian Moore's Full Contact - https://telegraphmediagroup.podbean.com/feed/

 

[SimonSmith]

They don't enforce it because they've been told not to - simple as that. And he can't say that.

I disagree with it. But TPTB have it mandated, and thus it goes.

 

[Flish]

I have pinged this, was a 1:1 ruck and second man in from one team rolled his opponent out which in essence destroyed the ruck (just the rollers team mate and the ball left). Explained why and what he could have done and all was good. Possibly a more difficult sell when the ruck remains after and players expect to be allowed to do this though.

 

[crossref]

They don't enforce it because they've been told not to - simple as that. And he can't say that.

I disagree with it. But TPTB have it mandated, and thus it goes.

Where the conversation got all rugbyrefs is the passages where NO tried to explain that the Law doesn't really mean what it appears to, and it is in fact completely consistent with the way that it is reffed ...

 

[Christy]

Thank fully i dont see it in games i ref .
The little guy is very rarely going to roll a big guy .
The big guy doesnt need to roll a little guy , he will simply push him backwards .

Where the both guys are equally matched , the cavalry usually arrive & they tend to push forwards ..

I do however think rolls should be banned .
As its dangerous to guy being rolled .

 

[Jolly Roger]

I see this quite a lot. I hate it but do not feel that there is anything that I can do as it seems to have been accepted as a means of binding and clearing out.
If I could make one change to the game it would be changing this interpretation across the global game.
No2 would be pro refs enforcing players staying on their feet.

The damage being done to the game at all levels by pro refs permitting anarchy at the breakdown is a common rant of mine..........

 

[Rich_NL]

Crocodile rolls done properly aren't dangerous - I've done them on hard floors as a warm-up drill for wrestling. I guess it's accepted in the pro game because they're not so fussed about people staying on their feet and want to keep the ball moving - it clears people away from the ruck area, whereas collapsing downwards kills the ball and leads to a scrum.

In the Netherlands, croc rolls are specifically banned for youth grades (as is squeezeball), implying that they're sanctioned for adult matches. Without further clarification, I'd allow them (safely); grabbing a shirt and dragging someone facefirst over the ruck I'd blow up.

 

[crossref]

Crocodile rolls done properly aren't dangerous - I've done them on hard floors as a warm-up drill for wrestling. I guess it's accepted in the pro game because they're not so fussed about people staying on their feet and want to keep the ball moving - it clears people away from the ruck area, whereas collapsing downwards kills the ball and leads to a scrum.

In the Netherlands, croc rolls are specifically banned for youth grades (as is squeezeball), implying that they're sanctioned for adult matches. Without further clarification, I'd allow them (safely); grabbing a shirt and dragging someone facefirst over the ruck I'd blow up.

Ben Ryan listed several career ending injuries that happened either from a roll, or after players have been forced into the ground and then had a joint trodden on .

He was maintaining that it is a clear safety risk , and put up a good case

 

[Rich_NL]

You can find very many more examples of career ending injuries from tackles, and more again from scrums. I doubt that's compelling evidence for a ban.

 

[crossref]

You can find very many more examples of career ending injuries from tackles, and more again from scrums. I doubt that's compelling evidence for a ban.

It's already banned !
Collapsing the ruck and going off your feet are against the Law .. partly to keep the game going, partly for Safety reasons

Ben is arguing for enforcing the Law

 

[Rich_NL]

My point was, banning on safety grounds doesn't rely on a few journalistic anecdotes. Done properly, there's a lot less risk of head injury than conventional rucking, for example. The question may be whether it can reliably be coached and done properly, as is assumed for tackles, and whether referees can reliably identify a good from a bad roll. As to keeping play going, I think it's tolerated precisely because it doesn't stop the game, taking players away from the ball/ruck area.

I understand that the laws in place don't allow them, but it's common practice and even implicitly sanctioned by some local rules. Either the law should change to explicitly ban/allow them, or there should be clear guidance to refs and coaches that the current laws are good and they're not allowed. There's no point having a law honoured only in the breach; at least here, I think it would be weird to see it penalised at any reasonable level of rugby.

 

[crossref]

It would definitely be helpful if the Law corresponded to how refs are told to ref

 

[Zebra1922]

It would definitely be helpful if the Law corresponded to how refs are told to ref

But are we told to ref this way or do we just allow it as this is what's allowed on TV?

No-one at any Society meeting I have ever been to has said this is allowed (although they've not said it's illegal either). Anyone else received specific guidance from their Society that this is acceptable and if so what was the justification?

 

[Rich_NL]

Here it's mentioned in the youth variations that it's banned for U18 rugby. If that's a variation, the implication is clear.

 

[mcroker]

This is relevant https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/rugby/rugby-news/dangerous-issue-thats-now-overtaken-15141825

Personally I think the bigger safety issue is what seems to be a huge number unpenalised non-bind clearouts, and players flying into a ruck off their feet.

 

[crossref]

Here it's mentioned in the youth variations that it's banned for U18 rugby. If that's a variation, the implication is clear.

Not to me ?

 

[SimonSmith]

I suspect:
If it's a specific variation for U18, then it implies that it is OK for over 18

 

[crossref]

Oh right

But 16.15

Players must not:
Pick the ball up with their legs.
Intentionally collapse a ruck or jump on top of it.
Intentionally step on another player.
Fall over the ball as it is coming out of a ruck.
Kick, or attempt to kick, the ball out of a ruck.

 

[mcroker]

The IRB (as it was then) did issue a law clarification explicitly permitting body rolls in 2014, but as there have been many law changes since caution is probably advised using something so old.

"In terms of ruck clearouts using “head rolls” and “body rolls”, this is not specifically referenced in Law. However, Law 10.4 (e) regarding dangerous play and misconduct should be applied to both the tackle and clear out... body rolls are permissible but head rolls should be penalised."

source - https://laws.worldrugby.org/?domain=10&clarification_era=upto&year=2014&clarification=1004

Whilst there are a number of similar articles asserting croc rolls to be dangerous but I have yet to see any evidence other than specific incidents presented. The RFU are pretty hot on player welfare, and generally seem pretty data driven - neither the RFU Community Community Rugby Injury Surveillance and Prevention (CRISP) report or the much older 2011 world rugby reports call out croc rolls as a source of injury - in fact both barely mention rucks due to the much lower injury occurrence by contrast with tackler, tacked player and running. That said times change and the new tackle zone entry has definitely altered player behaviour at the ruck so a refresh would be very interesting to see.

references:
https://www.englandrugby.com/mm/Doc...on_Report_2016_17_FINALforwebsite_Neutral.pdf
https://playerwelfare.worldrugby.org/?documentid=78

 

[crossref]

Are they dangerous ? Some might be, others aren't
Are they in contravention of 16.15 ? Yes.