[Tackle] Going to ground to gather ball Vs. tackled

[SimonSmith]

Good challenge. However, it's the player on their feet who makes it unplayable, not the player on the ground. Chances are that in wrapping, some part of the player's lower legs contact the gatherer, who is still on the deck - so 14.2 (a) Falling over the player on the ground with the ball. Failing that, I'll rely on 10.4 (m) acts contrary to good sportsmanship.

Not sure I follow Nigib.

Yes, if the approaching player falls onto the player on the ground, that's the penalty.
If he arrives and pulls the ball into the POTG without actively trying to strip it, that's the decision.

Can he straddle the POTGs legs? Yes.
Can he attempt to strip the ball? Yes.
If it doesn't come back, the referee has to make a decision - is it the fault of the approaching player, or POTG? Same sort of decision we have to make in the heat of the tackle/ruck transition.

I can see calls going both ways. Key point is that the referee has to be on the spot.

 

[ChrisR]

.... and, as this is not a tackle the opponent of the POTG can arrive and engage from any direction (given that he is onside).

 

[Nigib]

Not sure I follow Nigib.

Yes, if the approaching player falls onto the player on the ground, that's the penalty.
If he arrives and pulls the ball into the POTG without actively trying to strip it, that's the decision.

Can he straddle the POTGs legs? Yes.
Can he attempt to strip the ball? Yes.
If it doesn't come back, the referee has to make a decision - is it the fault of the approaching player, or POTG? Same sort of decision we have to make in the heat of the tackle/ruck transition.

I can see calls going both ways. Key point is that the referee has to be on the spot.

ok; so what I've seen and penalised this season is the player wrapping around the POTG, hands on the ball from either side trapping it against the POTG, trying to get a PK for the POTG not releasing. I've suggested the applicable law - but happy to be corrected if there's something more appropriate, or if there's a ruling somewhere that this type of player interaction is allowed.

If I see the POTG deliberately not releasing to a player on their feet then that is a penalty.

And agree it's a judgement call; and we have to be there to have credibility in whatever decision we give.

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Pegleg is absolutely right. If a player falls on the ball, an opponet may not play the player, but if he plays the ball, the player on the ground must release it.

In other words you cannot prevent him from getting up, but you can prevent him from keeping the ball when he does so.

If he tries to hold on to the ball when you are (legally) trying to take it, he can be penalised.

:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:
I am on record not only on here (and other websites) but also on a number of referee reports that it is indeed a myth.


Unfortunately, if you think the wording of the laws is the solution, you are mistaken. They contain gaps, ambiguities, and contradictions.

As Ian says, the man on the ground has legal options (not rights) that he can exercise. However "the game is to be played by players who are on their feet", and there is a gap: the law gives two things he can't do, but they don't spell out what he can legally do. The convention we use over here is that he can play the ball and thereby prevent the opponent from exercising any of his options, but if he plays the man to prevent him exercising them he is acting illegally. A panel referee told me years ago that he allowed a player to drag someone a short distance into touch but not to just hold his arms so as to prevent him playing or releasing the ball. Indeed if the jackler just tries to prevent release, he gets penalised rather than the man on the ground.

When my report criticises a referee for a law error, that report is seen by several senior members of the Society, who would quickly tell me if they disagreed.

Both statements in bold indicate "you have to let him up".

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

ok; so what I've seen and penalised this season is the player wrapping around the POTG, hands on the ball from either side trapping it against the POTG, trying to get a PK for the POTG not releasing. I've suggested the applicable law - but happy to be corrected if there's something more appropriate, or if there's a ruling somewhere that this type of player interaction is allowed.

If I see the POTG deliberately not releasing to a player on their feet then that is a penalty.

And agree it's a judgement call; and we have to be there to have credibility in whatever decision we give.

Let me try a go at more appropriate, Making the ball unplayable by going to the ground to gather the ball is against the spirit of the game. The POTG has no rights he can act immediately or get penalized. The arriving player has every right but falling down on the POTG.

PK against POTG, blocking the ball

 

[Nigib]

Let me try a go at more appropriate, Making the ball unplayable by going to the ground to gather the ball is against the spirit of the game.

Agreed

The POTG has no rights he can act immediately or get penalized.

Agreed

The arriving player has every right but falling down on the POTG.

Agreed
(I'm assuming your 'but' is 'except if he's' or similar in old english)

PK against POTG, blocking the ball

Only if that's what the POTG is doing.

My scenario is when the arriving player traps the ball against the POTG, thereby making the ball unplayable. PK against arriving player

 

[OB..]

Both statements in bold indicate "you have to let him up".

Rubbish.
You deliberately missed out the key bit:In other words you cannot prevent him from getting up, but you can prevent him from keeping the ball when he does so.


The claim from some people is that you cannot do anything until he gets up (with the ball if he wants). Why distort things?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

Rubbish.
You deliberately missed out the key bit:In other words you cannot prevent him from getting up, but you can prevent him from keeping the ball when he does so.

Sorry OB I do not find much clarity in this statement. This along with your phrase, The convention we use over here is that he can play the ball and thereby prevent the opponent from exercising any of his options, but if he plays the man to prevent him exercising them he is acting illegally., makes me believe the arriving player is not permitted to hold POTG on the ground and force him to release.

I find no law that agrees with that convention.

Rubbish.


[/COLOR]

The claim from some people is that you cannot do anything until he gets up (with the ball if he wants). Why distort things?

That is my understanding of the myth, however, I thought it, and still do, think it is "must let him up with the ball in hand".

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

My scenario is when the arriving player traps the ball against the POTG, thereby making the ball unplayable. PK against arriving player

The POTG made a decision to go to ground. That decision should include time to get to feet, or a method to release, or a method to pass or knock ball backward, Failure in these areas is making ball unplayable. If it is a true stalemate, scrum attacking (not covered by law) I really think it is POTG fault as he went to ground knowing alternatives. It is one helluva bearhug if a player is on his feet, and he is able to control POTG without applying bodyweight akin to falling on a player 14.2

 

[Nigib]

The POTG made a decision to go to ground. That decision should include time to get to feet, or a method to release, or a method to pass or knock ball backward, Failure in these areas is making ball unplayable. If it is a true stalemate, scrum attacking (not covered by law) I really think it is POTG fault as he went to ground knowing alternatives. It is one helluva bearhug if a player is on his feet, and he is able to control POTG without applying bodyweight akin to falling on a player 14.2

you haven't seen this in a game? the player wrapping arms round makes no attempt to take the ball, just gets hands on, then pulls. POTG can do nothing. It's happened in each of my last two games. Pinged the 'wrapper' each time, no complaints.

 

[SimonSmith]

Yes - it's being coached to High School kids now

 

[Dickie E]

WTF are you talking about?

[LAWS]10.4(f) Playing an opponent without the ball. Except in a scrum, ruck or maul, a player who is not in possession of the ball must not hold, push or obstruct an opponent not carrying the ball.
[/LAWS]

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

[LAWS]10.4(f) Playing an opponent without the ball. Except in a scrum, ruck or maul, a player who is not in possession of the ball must not hold, push or obstruct an opponent not carrying the ball.
[/LAWS]

Did you just validate a myth? The POTG is not carrying the ball. We have to let him up with the ball in hand. Brilliant. Thanks Dickie E

There it is Nigib, That is correct call. POWB

- - - Updated - - -

Yes - it's being coached to High School kids now

Poor coaching as per Dickie E post

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

you haven't seen this in a game? the player wrapping arms round makes no attempt to take the ball, just gets hands on, then pulls. POTG can do nothing. It's happened in each of my last two games. Pinged the 'wrapper' each time, no complaints.

what was your secondary signal? Doesn't matter. Dickie has solved it.

 

[Ian_Cook]

ok; so what I've seen and penalised this season is the player wrapping around the POTG, hands on the ball from either side trapping it against the POTG, trying to get a PK for the POTG not releasing. I've suggested the applicable law - but happy to be corrected if there's something more appropriate, or if there's a ruling somewhere that this type of player interaction is allowed.

My concern with this view is that POTG is very likely to have intentionally positioned himself over the ball. Examples of the way I see this done are..

Player goes to ground on his side next to the ball, grabs it and rolls over belly down on top of it
Player goes to ground on his belly next to or behind the ball, grabs it and pulls it under himself

For mine, the POTG is trying to buy time for his support to arrive by preventing any opponent from quickly stripping the ball. If the POTG does this, he is making the ball unplayable; his infringement is prior to any infringement the POHF might commit by wrapping his arms - the POTG should be PK.

 

[Dickie E]

Did you just validate a myth? The POTG is not carrying the ball. We have to let him up with the ball in hand. Brilliant. Thanks Dickie E

That isn't quite how I'd see it. IMO while the POHF can't interfere with the POTG (for instance, can't drag him into touch) he can play the ball and thereby probably legally prevent the POTG from getting up with the ball. Once POHF gets a grasp on the ball, POTG must let it go.

 

[Nigib]

My concern with this view is that POTG is very likely to have intentionally positioned himself over the ball. Examples of the way I see this done are..

Player goes to ground on his side next to the ball, grabs it and rolls over belly down on top of it
Player goes to ground on his belly next to or behind the ball, grabs it and pulls it under himself

For mine, the POTG is trying to buy time for his support to arrive by preventing any opponent from quickly stripping the ball. If the POTG does this, he is making the ball unplayable; his infringement is prior to any infringement the POHF might commit by wrapping his arms - the POTG should be PK.

Fair point. And if I thought this is what happened, I would ping the POTG.

 

[DocY]

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned 14.2.

I know the POHF isn't falling, but surely the intention of this law is to prevent the POHF unfairly stopping the POTG exercising his options - the equivalent of the tackler having to roll away.

I agree it's a bit of a grey area, mind (and I suspect everyone on here would give the same decision in any clip of such an incident were shown), but I think we can all see the difference between what Ian's describing and what Nigb is.

 

[Nigib]

I'm surprised nobody's mentioned 14.2.

I know the POHF isn't falling, but surely the intention of this law is to prevent the POHF unfairly stopping the POTG exercising his options - the equivalent of the tackler having to roll away.

I agree it's a bit of a grey area, mind (and I suspect everyone on here would give the same decision in any clip of such an incident were shown), but I think we can all see the difference between what Ian's describing and what Nigb is.

14.2 (a) can certainly apply, particularly where the POHF has knees/below in contact with POTG, so is then deemed going to ground.

 

[tim White]

As a ref; Blow sooner rather than later before someone does something very naughty. I suspect i might call 'unplayable' the first time this happened, I might well take a different view later- but tell the players what you expect ; reward the positive, penalise the negative.