Jumping the tackler

[SimonSmith]

We're seeking absolutes here.

The answer is that leaving the ground to avoid the tackler may be considered dangerous, and if so penalized accordingly.

 

[ChrisR]

We're seeking absolutes here.

The answer is that leaving the ground to avoid the tackler may be considered dangerous, and if so penalized accordingly.

Your two sentences seem to be at odds: "Absolute" and "may". I agree with "may", not "absolute".

 

[OB..]

Your two sentences seem to be at odds: "Absolute" and "may". I agree with "may", not "absolute".

I think his point was that we should not be seeking absolutes.

 

[ddjamo]

and since we are not seeking absolutes - IMO - awarding a pk, disallowing the try and turning over possession for something that is not clear in law and did no harm is very harsh. definitely an ATP situation...but skip the "A" - in my book.

 

[didds]

and since we are not seeking absolutes - IMO - awarding a pk, disallowing the try and turning over possession for something that is not clear in law and did no harm is very harsh. .

Hence my three questions above really... because if you do not count a hurdle as a PK/FK/stoppage, then at some time, somebody will face a defender kicked in the head, or an attacker tackled in the air or tip-tackled-by-circumstance. So what's the call in those three scenarios if the hurdle itself is not a PK/FK/stop in play etc?

didds

 

[Rushforth]

Hence my three questions above really... because if you do not count a hurdle as a PK/FK/stoppage, then at some time, somebody will face a defender kicked in the head, or an attacker tackled in the air or tip-tackled-by-circumstance. So what's the call in those three scenarios if the hurdle itself is not a PK/FK/stop in play etc?

I don't see many hurdles, but I see a heck of a lot of tackles which are legal - just - but poorly executed (typically high without even smothering). For that matter, completely legal tackles can be dangerous too.

There is no law that I am aware of against hurdling, but definitely one against kicking an opponent in the face.

At grassroots level there will be players - particularly towards the end of a game - who tackle too high (or too low, as with the hurdler) due to tiredness. By "too high" I mean neither tackling the player to the ground, nor smothering the ball. Often the BC manages to offload (after all, he has not been clothes-lined) but I will immediately call "keep it lower" the first few times.

In the case of something much rarer, like hurdling, if there is no contact I agree with ddjamo above: skip straight to the "Tell" of ATP. But that is at grassroots level.

 

[didds]

I don't see many hurdles,

maybe because players think they will get PKd?

If it was comon knowledge that this would never be PK'd possibly the numbers would increase?

that all aside... it only has to happen once... so when it does happen the one time ever in your reffing career what do you call?

didds

 

[Rushforth]

that all aside... it only has to happen once... so when it does happen the one time ever in your reffing career what do you call?

If it happened to me, I would (perhaps incorrectly) assume that the player is unaware of the potential danger, and make sure to tell them that if they were to kick the potential tackler in the face they would probably not play until next season.

Note also http://www.irblaws.com/index.php?highlight=jump&domain=7&modified_form=2&mf_section=39 :

[LAWS]15.10
The referee may award a penalty kick to the opposition team where an infringement occurs in the following circumstances:
(a)
If the ball carrier jumps to avoid being tackled, or spins/swivels through 180 degrees. A side step is allowed.[/LAWS]

This is part of the non-contact laws (aka Tag Rugby).

If something is specifically illegal for non-contact, then surely the absence of any such law in contact gives us a clue?

 

[Browner]

This isn't difficult.

Dangerous Offences can be caused by the mistiming of a host of legitimate rugby actions....

Legal/illegal
Tackling/above the shoulder tackling
Fending/ clenched fist strike
Forearm push/forearm striking or elbow strike
Diving between two defenders to score / charging headfirst at a defender
Rucking the ball / stamping on a player
Kicking the ball in a ruck / not kicking a player
Lifting a player within a tackle / lifting the player and driving him to ground
Face palm / claw fingered eye poke
Saddle roll! / neck bending
Bind on a ruck / hitting ruck with shoulder
Bind on a maul / cheap ribshot of a mauling player
Arm swing around a player / swinging arm at a player
Jumping with an opponent to collect a high ball / jumping at an opponent trying to collect a high ball

Just add ...... Jumping to evade a player / jumping into or at a player with feet/knee/hip 1st

All of these actions require the exercise of reasonable care and judgement to ensure his opponent isn't hurt.
Opponents are invariably hurt whenever any person gets this wrong, it happens, and then we sanction depending on severity. We don't penalise any of the safe actions under a 'cotton wool' prevention programme.

Hurdling carries the same Risk v Reward methodology, its very difficult to do safely, which is why most players won't attempt it.

 

[didds]

I
If something is specifically illegal for non-contact, then surely the absence of any such law in contact gives us a clue?

So you are saying the iRB intends that players can hurdle others and potentially kick them in the head albeit accidentally?

I think its more likely they haven't even considered it for senior rugby, but the IRB have included this for tag rugby because they want to promote evasion and real skills and not clever methods to prevent tags being removed with some chance of success.



YMMV.

Meanwhile

If it happened to me, I would (perhaps incorrectly) assume that the player is unaware of the potential danger, and make sure to tell them that if they were to kick the potential tackler in the face they would probably not play until next season.

That's not answered the question I asked. i asked in attempting to hurdle someone the kick DID land. The tackler thus HAS been kicked in the head. Not narrowly missed to be told "Next time.... ". Or are you saying all 30 players get a free kick at an opponent per game but "Next time..." ?

didds

 

[didds]

Opponents are invariably hurt whenever any person gets this wrong, it happens, and then we sanction depending on severity. We don't penalise any of the safe actions under a 'cotton wool' prevention programme..

So you regard hurdling an opponent, leading with the feet as fundamentally and inherrently "safe practise"? I don't but of course you may .

didds

 

[didds]

In the case of something much rarer, like hurdling, if there is no contact I agree with ddjamo above: skip straight to the "Tell" of ATP. But that is at grassroots level.

And if contact is made?

You are also happy with tackling a player in the ir if the tackler "gets it right" ? And potential tip-rtackles if that contact is not made quite right?

didds

 

[Rushforth]

And if contact is made?

You are also happy with tackling a player in the ir if the tackler "gets it right" ? And potential tip-rtackles if that contact is not made quite right?

I refer you to post #25 of this thread as to your first question.

The only restriction on tackling players "in the air" is when the ball is being jumped for (from a kick is implied). A ball carrier is not "safe" because neither of his feet are touching the ground (note that the athletic definition of "walking" is that one foot must touch the ground at all times).

As for tip tackles, a player attempting to hurdle will have more reaction time and no risk whatsoever of being "spear-tackled". That said, I consider the issue academic until an example is shown.

 

[didds]

isn't hurdling a ruck illegal?

didds

 

[RobLev]

I refer you to post #25 of this thread as to your first question.

The only restriction on tackling players "in the air" is when the ball is being jumped for (from a kick is implied). A ball carrier is not "safe" because neither of his feet are touching the ground (note that the athletic definition of "walking" is that one foot must touch the ground at all times).

Not quite correct; 10.4(e) reads (where relevant):

[LAWS](e) Dangerous tackling....

A player must not tackle an opponent whose feet are off the ground.[/LAWS]

And 10.4(i), which you seem to be referring to, cannot imply "from a kick" (my underlining):

[LAWS]Tackling the jumper in the air. A player must not tackle nor tap, push or pull the foot or feet of an opponent jumping for the ball in a lineout or in open play. [/LAWS]

As for tip tackles, a player attempting to hurdle will have more reaction time and no risk whatsoever of being "spear-tackled". That said, I consider the issue academic until an example is shown.

 

[Browner]

So you regard hurdling an opponent, leading with the feet as fundamentally and inherrently "safe practise"?

didds

I dont think ive said " safe" , I've highlighted risks, the same as I have with many facets of play. Sometimes the dividing lines are quite marginal. Players generally keep away from the margins that result in them leaving the pitch with a card.

The vid Clip shows that it can be done safely, indeed even Elsons famous case didn't result in any injury to the defender, nor any card, in fact the defender ended up on top of Elson in a relatively strong grip position.

The argument that its 'always' dangerous isn't proven.

PS... Nevertheless, I'd rather have seen Elson YC for jumping into a defender knees 1st.

 

[ddjamo]

6 pages and counting......

 

[didds]

I dont think ive said " safe"

From your comment in #49

"We don't penalise any of the safe actions under a 'cotton wool' prevention programme.."

I did mistakenly slightly misquote you however, so - you regard hurdling an opponent, leading with the feet as a fundamentally and inherently "safe action"?

didds

 

[Dickie E]

I did mistakenly slightly misquote you however, so - you regard hurdling an opponent, leading with the feet as a fundamentally and inherently "safe action"?

didds

I would feel safer being hurdled in an attempted tackle than playing hooker in a scrum

 

[Ian_Cook]

isn't hurdling a ruck illegal?

didds

Nope, just jumping on top of one

The only restriction on tackling players "in the air" is when the ball is being jumped for (from a kick is implied). A ball carrier is not "safe" because neither of his feet are touching the ground (note that the athletic definition of "walking" is that one foot must touch the ground at all times).

I agree.

The Law was introduced with the intention of protecting players jumping to catch a ball directly after it has been kicked by either a team-mate or an opponent.

It was NOT intended to protect a ball carrier...

a. who jumps as an opponent tackles him.
b. who jumps to catch a pass.
c. from being tackled during the 15-20% of the stride time when the runner's feet are both off the ground (between the end of the swing phase and footstrike).
d. when diving for the try-line.
e. who jumps to catch a bouncing ball.

That the wording of the Law technically does protect the ball carrier in these scenarios is of no consequence. The referee has to make sense of the Laws and understand what they were intended to do. To apply 10.4 (e) to scenarios a. through e. would be the height of stupidity, and would essentially make the game of rugby unplayable.