Definitive list of S14 law "application/views"

PeterH


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
709
Post Likes
0
I know they work to the same laws as us... :rolleyes:

But watching the games this weekend - I am confused as to what they are doing different is some cases...
Does anyone have a list of what they are concentrating on - cos my head was hurting at times when I would/wouldn't have blown (or stuck arm out)

Sorry - but it is confusing me

And - I was asked yesterday if we will be using them and if not - why not - by both coaches...
 

ExHookah


Argentina Referees in Argentina
Joined
Mar 2, 2005
Messages
2,444
Post Likes
1
+1 on this request, very interested to know.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
We watched a great DVD on the weekend put togther by the brains at SANZAR that exactly covered this. Not sure if a copy is available. I'll keep you informed.

Key things are:
1. tackler MUST totally release tackled player. No more of the Richie McCaw tackle-slide-get to feet while holding onto the tackled player

2. tackler MUST roll away. Benefit of doubt to attacking team. If you're trapped - bad luck. You shouldn't have got into that position

3. Arriving players can clean out even if they end up off their feet. Recycling of ball paramount.
 

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
There are several articles (work in progress) on the SA refs site, starting with this one. The Big Four are the Tackle, the Scrum, Offside and the Maul & Obstruction
 

TigerCraig


Referees in Australia
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
1,464
Post Likes
236
Interesting discussion here today about the situation of a "dominant tackler" - ie one who by good technique, or the fact that the tackled player surrenders, ends up driving the tackled player backwards and ends up on top of him.

If he is not given a reasonable chance to get away he is in effect being penalised for being too good.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...he-minor-details/story-e6frg7mf-1225832747457
 

Robert Burns

, Referees in Canada, RugbyRefs.com Webmaster
Staff member
Joined
Nov 10, 2003
Messages
9,650
Post Likes
7
Interesting discussion here today about the situation of a "dominant tackler" - ie one who by good technique, or the fact that the tackled player surrenders, ends up driving the tackled player backwards and ends up on top of him.

If he is not given a reasonable chance to get away he is in effect being penalised for being too good.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...he-minor-details/story-e6frg7mf-1225832747457
the old phrase 'if it were a hand grenade...' applies I think!
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,073
Post Likes
2,346
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Interesting discussion here today about the situation of a "dominant tackler" - ie one who by good technique, or the fact that the tackled player surrenders, ends up driving the tackled player backwards and ends up on top of him.

If he is not given a reasonable chance to get away he is in effect being penalised for being too good

I have always gone with Dickie's earlier answer.

2. tackler MUST roll away. Benefit of doubt to attacking team. If you're trapped - bad luck. You shouldn't have got into that position
 

dave_clark


Referees in England
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
4,647
Post Likes
104
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
3. Arriving players can clean out even if they end up off their feet. Recycling of ball paramount.

does this mean a return to bridging/sealing off?
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
does this mean a return to bridging/sealing off?

I don't think it ever left? (more the sealing off than the bridging)

Many of the junior teams (but not all) in my part of the colony seem to be coached to do it...and I'm afraid to say because it's seen on TV as common place (ie off feet cleaning out such as S14) the refs seem to let the juniors get away with it too. Frustrating to see as a coach when a team is getting that advantage to shut down a contest then when I ref and not allow off feet in the middle of a ruck I get bemused looks from coaches due to the apparent inconsistencies. Looks like that will continue to happen for another year!
 
Last edited:

Toby Warren


Referees in England
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
3,431
Post Likes
57
Oh rugby makes me laugh, 3 years ago the game has gone to far we need a contest for the ball let's all change to make it a contest again - horray they shout

change comes - oh the breakdown is a lottery how can attackers score points they justt kick, let's change back

Change comes - how long before 'This is justt rugby league we need the contest for the ball back

(repeat until we are all pensionable)

According to the S14 show on Sky in the Cant. v Reds game there was one turn over all game. I say bring back the old laws :chin:
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,073
Post Likes
2,346
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
There are several articles (work in progress) on the SA refs site, starting with this one. The Big Four are the Tackle, the Scrum, Offside and the Maul & Obstruction

So what they are effectively saying is that "we are going to referee to the LOTG". What a refreshing thought. :biggrin:


Does anyone think this action (below) should be enshrined in law? :clap:

Lawrence mentioned that in Saturday's match, François Louw was a tackler, he released the tackled player, clapped his hands and grabbed the ball. Clapping his hands was proof positive that he had released the tackled player.
 

Rit Hinners

Facebook Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
935
Post Likes
0
3. Arriving players can clean out even if they end up off their feet. Recycling of ball paramount.

This I have trouble with. This leads to the elimination of any contest for possession and just piles more bodies on the takle location. I often see people leaving their feet before they even make contact with the opposition.



I don't think it ever left? (more the sealing off than the bridging)

Many of the junior teams (but not all) in my part of the colony seem to be coached to do it...and I'm afraid to say because it's seen on TV as common place (ie off feet cleaning out such as S14) the refs seem to let the juniors get away with it too. Frustrating to see as a coach when a team is getting that advantage to shut down a contest then when I ref and not allow off feet in the middle of a ruck I get bemused looks from coaches due to the apparent inconsistencies. Looks like that will continue to happen for another year!

Why has this been condoned? I've always felt that people off their feet are out of play as they are not allowed to participate. How can you legally bind to them? This disturbing habit of binding to people on the ground at the takle should be penalised as it prevents people off their feet from rolling away and/or regaining their feet.

As for bridging.... I wouldn't allow it either. To be on your feet you need to be in a posture that will support your own weight. Remove the body from under a bridging player and their nose would be in the mud, hence they are not on their feet.

So what they are effectively saying is that "we are going to referee to the LOTG". What a refreshing thought. :biggrin:


Does anyone think this action (below) should be enshrined in law? :clap:

Reffing according to the law? You bet.

Both sides of it. That which slows down play as much as that which speeds it up.
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Why has this been condoned? I've always felt that people off their feet are out of play as they are not allowed to participate.

No argument from me but as I say above...everyone sees it on TV at the highest levels when those cleaning out do so at such a force and speed that they often end up off their feet on top of the opposition (and ball is sealed off from them) and it is allowed to proceed. Those viewers then bring that to their games on the weekend and expect lowly refs to let it go cause the best refs let it go with the best players in the worl. It would certainly help if the top refs pinged it so that us lowly ones can do so too. Then teams would clean out "up" rather than clean out "down".

I will continue to ping juniors not trying to maintain feet and I guess just cop the barage from the side..and point to the tackle and ruck laws when queried.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,680
Post Likes
1,760
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
.....

3. Arriving players can clean out even if they end up off their feet. Recycling of ball paramount.

This is note entirely how I understand it.

Yes, players can clean out and end up on the ground as a consequence, but NOT of the fall over or near the ruck while doing so.

Law 15.7
(c) No player may fall on or over the tackled player.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

(d) No player may fall on or over the players lying on the ground after a tackle with the ball between or near to them.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

Still apply and are being enforced.
 

Rit Hinners

Facebook Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
935
Post Likes
0
This is note entirely how I understand it.

Yes, players can clean out and end up on the ground as a consequence, but NOT of the fall over or near the ruck while doing so.


What exactly is a "clean out"? I don't see it in the laws at all?

What I assume is referred to as a "clean out' is this annoying habit that has crept into the game of players behind the ruck launching theirselves into the air in an effort to knock an opponent away from the area of the ball. This is clearly an act of playing the man without the ball or an attempt to collapse the ruck.

16.5 d] If a player is in front of the offside line and does not join the ruck, the player must RETIRE behind the offside line at once. If a player who is behind the offside line oversteps it and does not join the ruck the player is offside.

The law clearly states that anyone beyond the offside line must join the ruck or retire and that anyone that steps over the line must join the ruck. Impacting an opponent and landing on the ground is NOT joining the ruck.
 

Dickie E


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
14,106
Post Likes
2,131
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
What exactly is a "clean out"? I don't see it in the laws at all?

A 'clean out' occurs after a tackle but before a ruck. It must be made on an opponent who is in the tackle zone (ie usually an opponent who is trying to gain possession of the ball) and must be made safely (ie use of arms, not high, etc).

After a ruck forms a player entering the ruck must be bound onto a team mate.
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,680
Post Likes
1,760
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
What exactly is a "clean out"? I don't see it in the laws at all?

I do

Law 15.7 (e) Players on their feet must not charge or obstruct an opponent who is not near the ball.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

so, conversely....

Players on their feet must MAY charge or obstruct an opponent who IS near the ball.

This is the Law that gives players arriving at the tackle the "authority" to "clean out" players near the ball. Note that it is Law 15, so its the tackle. This does not apply to a ruck, where arriving players must bind to either an opponent or a team-mate.

For the last few years, players who "clean out" opponents near the ball (especially at the showbiz end of the game) have been allowed to go off their feet when doing so, even though the Law says they must not.

What the SANZAR referees have done is to say, "OK, we aren't going strictly enforce this, but we are going limit the circumstances under which a player can go off the feet."

As long as they go to ground without contravening...

Law 15.7
(c) No player may fall on or over the tackled player.
Penalty: Penalty Kick

(d) No player may fall on or over the players lying on the ground after a tackle with the ball between or near to them.
Penalty: Penalty Kick
....then they will not be penalised, i.e., they have recognised materiality... a player going off their feet who is not having a material effect on play doesn't need to be PKd.

IMO, this is an eminently sensible approach.
 
Last edited:

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,680
Post Likes
1,760
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
I know they work to the same laws as us... :rolleyes:

But watching the games this weekend - I am confused as to what they are doing different is some cases...
Does anyone have a list of what they are concentrating on - cos my head was hurting at times when I would/wouldn't have blown (or stuck arm out)

Sorry - but it is confusing me

And - I was asked yesterday if we will be using them and if not - why not - by both coaches...


Here is the "definitive list" of the four key areas as outlined by Lyndon Bray

1. Tackled Ball:
“The tackler, once hitting the ground in the tackle, must release the ball and the ball carrier. This gives the ball carrier a chance to ‘play the ball’, and will tidy up the tackle-ball area which has previously been weighted towards the tackler.

“As well, any player involved in helping make a tackle, who is in contact with the ball carrier when he is taken to ground, must then release the ball, before then attempting to contest possession, even if he is on his feet.

“This ensures that in Super 14, we are truly refereeing the Law at the tackle, and it provides the ball carrier with his rights, having been tackled. After this tackle, any player then on his feet, in a position of strength (his side of the tackle) may then contest possession.”

2. Scrum engagement:
“The scrum engagement must follow a true sequence, starting with all props required to touch, on the touch call. Props must also have their head and shoulders above their hips, and then hit straight on engagement.

“This enhances the chance of the scrum being contestable, and to stay up resulting in less resets.”

3. Players in front of the kicker:
“Players will be forced to comply with standing still or retiring in relation to being in front of the kicker. This will see referees calling for a player to stop advancing – if he continues to advance, he will be penalised and players must retire from within 10m of the receiver of a kick – otherwise an immediate penalty will be given where these players look to contest the kick.

“The objective is that this will improve the time and space for players to counter attack, when receiving kicks in general play, and reducing some of the aerial ping pong people we have been seeing in rugby.”

4. Formation of the maul:
“At the time that a maul is formed, players supporting the ball carrier will not be allowed to obstruct the opposition. This is intended to at least make the maul defendable at the set up stage.”

Bray was quick to point out that these were not changes to the existing laws of the game, but mere clarifying the interpretation of the laws.
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
For the last few years, players who "clean out" opponents near the ball (especially at the showbiz end of the game) have been allowed to go off their feet when doing so, even though the Law says they must not.

What the SANZAR referees have done is to say, "OK, we aren't going strictly enforce this, but we are going limit the circumstances under which a player can go off the feet."

As long as they go to ground without contravening...


....then they will not be penalised, i.e., they have recognised materiality... a player going off their feet who is not having a material effect on play doesn't need to be PKd.

IMO, this is an eminently sensible approach.

Thanks IanC

Here we have been told to consider near the ball as a "table top" distance from the ball..(Ie about a metre from the ball) - if the clean out is on a man outside the metre then it's playing the man without the ball and liable to penalty.

My point about it occuring is that I often see "clean outs" and off their feet a second or so after the ruck. In juniors here the problem is a ruck has been formed and the kid just drops to cause a seal off...and then wonder why I ping them for off their feet (ie "but I was cleaning out sir??" )

But thinking about it - i would still like to see clean outs stay on their feet (isn't that how rugby is supposed to be played?) but accept that momentum and force may cause a 'trip'..so i'm looking for intent to maintain feet I guess. just see too many dives if you ask me.
 
Last edited:
Top