In the Bledisloe Cup game in the weekend there were two decisions that left me scratching my head at the time. After watching them again, I was still left a bit unsure of whether they were right or not. In fact I am so unsure about them I tried to make a video of the incidents to discuss with you fine gentleman. (It was my first attempt at making a video and it didn't quite come out right, but it is good enough to see the incidents in question.)
The two decisions occur when the All Blacks had solid forward momentum at a ruck, and they blew past the Wallaby players in the ruck and then the ruck collapsed on the ground well past the ball. The referee penalised for players going off their feet. I felt that these decisions were a little harsh because in both cases the players had attempted to stay on their feet, and they only fell over once the opposition had been blown away. I think this is particularly true in the second case.
Now to quote the relevant laws as I see it:
16.2 JOINING A RUCK
(d) All players forming, joining or taking part in a ruck must be on their feet.
Sanction: Penalty kick
16.3 RUCKING
(a) Players in a ruck must endeavour to stay on their feet.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(c) A player must not intentionally collapse a ruck. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick
I submit that the players in both instances did not breach any of these laws. When the joined the ruck they were on their feet. I do not think in either instance they went off their feet intentionally; rather what happened was a natural result of the opposition being blown away. I say that both were instances of positive play where the intention was to drive past the ball and win it. From my point of view if we penalise these actions we come dangerously close to shutting off the contest at ruck time because players falling over is often an inevitable result of winning a ruck.
I think the second one is particularly bad, since in the first one the halfback picked the ball up while he was arguably part of a ruck.
I am genuinely interested in hearing what people think.
The two decisions occur when the All Blacks had solid forward momentum at a ruck, and they blew past the Wallaby players in the ruck and then the ruck collapsed on the ground well past the ball. The referee penalised for players going off their feet. I felt that these decisions were a little harsh because in both cases the players had attempted to stay on their feet, and they only fell over once the opposition had been blown away. I think this is particularly true in the second case.
Now to quote the relevant laws as I see it:
16.2 JOINING A RUCK
(d) All players forming, joining or taking part in a ruck must be on their feet.
Sanction: Penalty kick
16.3 RUCKING
(a) Players in a ruck must endeavour to stay on their feet.
Sanction: Penalty kick
(c) A player must not intentionally collapse a ruck. This is dangerous play.
Sanction: Penalty kick
I submit that the players in both instances did not breach any of these laws. When the joined the ruck they were on their feet. I do not think in either instance they went off their feet intentionally; rather what happened was a natural result of the opposition being blown away. I say that both were instances of positive play where the intention was to drive past the ball and win it. From my point of view if we penalise these actions we come dangerously close to shutting off the contest at ruck time because players falling over is often an inevitable result of winning a ruck.
I think the second one is particularly bad, since in the first one the halfback picked the ball up while he was arguably part of a ruck.
I am genuinely interested in hearing what people think.
Last edited: