[Ruck] no more 1 man ruck ?? thoughts

Christy


Referees in Ireland
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
527
Post Likes
60
Current Referee grade:
Level 1
Clarification in Law by the Designated Members of Rugby Committee
Clarification
2 – 2018
Union
ARU
Law Reference
Law 15 – Amended Ruck Law (Trial from Jan, 2018)
Date
April 17, 2018
Request
I refer to your recent correspondence with Rugby AU General Counsel Mr. Patrick Eyers regarding Rugby AU’s request for clarification of World Rugby’s Law Variation Trial with respect to Law 16, Amended Ruck Law (Law 15 as of 1 January 2018): “A ruck commences when at least one player is on their feet andover the ball which is on the ground (tackled player, tackler). At this point the offside line is created. A player on their feet may use their hands to pick up the ball as long as this is immediate. As soon as an opposition player arrives no hands can be used.”
Specifically, Rugby AU is seeking clarity on its understanding that the Law creating offside lines when the first arriving player gets over the ball was intended solely to address the “no offside lines at a tackle” issue, and that it wasnot intended to modify the way the ball was contested at the breakdown. That is:


•the first arriving player from the defending team can always go directlyfor the ball with hands if there is a window to do so; and
•(b) if the player has to drive an attacking player away first in order toaccess the ball, then no hands can be used.


Rugby Australia is seeking a formal World Rugby Law clarification on the above to help aid a broader understanding of this trial law and its application across the game.



Clarification of the Designated Members of the Rugby Committee
Your assumptions in all three questions are correct ie:
1)The Law creating offside lines when the first arriving player gets over the ball wasintended solely to address the “no offside lines at a tackle” issue, and that it wasnot intended to modify the way the ball was contested at the breakdown
2)The first arriving player from the defending team can always go directly for theball with hands if there is a window to do so
3)If the player has to drive an attacking player away first in order to access the ball,then no hands can be used.
Addendum


The Fifteens Law Review Group met on Monday 16 April and agreed to bring the Ruck law trial into full law. They also agreed on the following simplified and more logical wording of the law:
Offside lines are created when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball, which is on the ground. A ruck is formed when at least one player from each team are in contact, on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground.
It is hoped that this revised wording will help resolve the questions that you raise.
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,094
Post Likes
2,358
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
Seems sensible; and it's how most people referee it.
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,094
Post Likes
2,358
Current Referee grade:
Level 8

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
Ok well perhaps I misread you but

- Clarification 2018/2 contradicts RFU guidelines you quoted
- so I think it's unlikely that 2/18 represents the way most referees reffed it, at least not in England , where one imagines most refs followed RFU guidelines

(I am unclear whether you were or were not following the guidelines yourself. I thought you were , happy to be corrected)
 
Last edited:

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,094
Post Likes
2,358
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
The guidance given by the RFU was the same as the guidance notes from World Rugby.

The clarification from WR seems at odds with their own guidance notes issued at the time the trial was started.

However, practically the clarification is how most people seemed to end up reffing it, including at Premiership level. Or perhaps it's how the players ended up playing it? As a tackle with offside lines? Which negated the need to referee it at all apart form monitoring the offside lines and entry through the gate.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
I agree with that summary.
But then I am confused as to why you advised everyone to follow the guidelines, which no one was any longer following.

Anyway it's all moot now . We have a new clarification
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,094
Post Likes
2,358
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
I agree with that summary.
But then I am confused as to why you advised everyone to follow the guidelines, which no one was any longer following.

Anyway it's all moot now . We have a new clarification

Why would I advise people to NOT follow RFU Guidelines?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
Why would I advise people to NOT follow RFU Guidelines?

When they are old, and accepted practice has moved on ?

And now, of course , when WR change the laws
 
Last edited:

OB..


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Oct 7, 2004
Messages
22,981
Post Likes
1,838
Offside lines are created when at least one player is on their feet and over the ball, which is on the ground. A ruck is formed when at least one player from each team are in contact, on their feet and over the ball which is on the ground.
It has been claimed that the first player to arrive must step over the ball in order to set the offside lines. However since it is not realistic for two competing players to both step over the ball (second usage above) it seems to me the phrase merely means something like "above the ball" - and not necessarily even directly above.
 

Christy


Referees in Ireland
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
527
Post Likes
60
Current Referee grade:
Level 1
I think the wording , when it gets into new law books is now a more clear picture of , how to create an off side line following tackle / tackled player . ( and more importantly the message is just that IT CREATES AN OFF SIDE LINE ONLY ,,,,,,BUT IT NOW DOES NOT CREATE A RUCK My understanding is that you still need to step over ball , if you want to create an off side line . But where as this use to form a 1 MAN RUCK ,,,,IT NOW DOES NOT ..This will help players & refs realise that you can still jackle ball & not get pinged because a 1MAN RUCK HAD FORMED ..I agree with phil e ,,this is how most players & refs played it out . But there has also been a lot of confusion around same by coaches / players & some refs
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
Why would I advise people to NOT follow RFU Guidelines?

also - in post 31 I said I was pretty sure we had guidance to treat it not as a ruck, but as a tackle with offside lines

Indeed, but I feel sure we also had cascaded something along the lines of #11

We know now that - like me - you also ref it as a tackle with offside lines

As you say on this thread so does everyone else
Seems sensible; and it's how most people referee it.


But back in march you kept shtum and said you didn't know anything about that

If that is the case I don't have any record of it in my 2017 law trials folder.



I don't understand how that was helpful....
 

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 think the wording , when it gets into new law books is now a more clear picture of , how to create an off side line following tackle / tackled player . ( and more importantly the message is just that IT CREATES AN OFF SIDE LINE ONLY ,,,,,,BUT IT NOW DOES NOT CREATE A RUCK My understanding is that you still need to step over ball , if you want to create an off side line . But where as this use to form a 1 MAN RUCK ,,,,IT NOW DOES NOT ..This will help players & refs realise that you can still jackle ball & not get pinged because a 1MAN RUCK HAD FORMED ..I agree with phil e ,,this is how most players & refs played it out . But there has also been a lot of confusion around same by coaches / players & some refs

also - in post 31 I said I was pretty sure we had guidance to treat it not as a ruck, but as a tackle with offside lines

We know now that - like me - you also ref it as a tackle with offside lines

As you say on this thread so does everyone else

But back in march you kept shtum and said you didn't know anything about that

I don't understand how that was helpful....

shatnerWTF.gif


"Over the ball" does NOT mean you MUST have stepped over the ball in ANY sense in the English language. If you are on the ground and I am standing over you, does that necessarily mean I must have stepped over you? Of course it doesn't!!

[rant]Its precisely this kind of miring of discussion in meaningless trivia that has driven me to not bother posting here as often as I used to. I just can't be arsed getting involved in the endless, tedious discussion of irrelevant minutiae, indulged in by some of the newer members here. Nor can I be bothered with the way some members continually look for ways reinterpret laws make them mean things that were never intended.[/rant]
 

Taff


Referees in Wales
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
6,942
Post Likes
383
Clarify something something for me.

If the first man at the scene gets his hands on the ball (creating offside lines but no Ruck) is he allowed to keep his hands on the ball once there is an opponent in physical contact ie once a Ruck has formed?

It used to be that a Jackler could keep his hands on the ball as long as he got his hands on the ball before the Ruck was formed. Has this now been dropped? :chin:
 

Ian_Cook


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

If the first man at the scene gets his hands on the ball (creating offside lines but no Ruck) is he allowed to keep his hands on the ball once there is an opponent in physical contact ie once a Ruck has formed?

It used to be that a Jackler could keep his hands on the ball as long as he got his hands on the ball before the Ruck was formed. Has this now been dropped? :chin:

[LAWS]LAW 15 RUCK

11. Once a ruck has formed, no player may handle the ball unless they were able to get their
hands on the ball before the ruck formed
and stay on their feet. [/LAWS]

Breakdown turnovers are difficult enough to get now. Without this, they would be impossible!
 

Christy


Referees in Ireland
Joined
May 25, 2016
Messages
527
Post Likes
60
Current Referee grade:
Level 1
shatnerWTF.gif


"Over the ball" does NOT mean you MUST have stepped over the ball in ANY sense in the English language. If you are on the ground and I am standing over you, does that necessarily mean I must have stepped over you? Of course it doesn't!!

[rant]Its precisely this kind of miring of discussion in meaningless trivia that has driven me to not bother posting here as often as I used to. I just can't be arsed getting involved in the endless, tedious discussion of irrelevant minutiae, indulged in by some of the newer members here. Nor can I be bothered with the way some members continually look for ways reinterpret laws make them mean things that were never intended.[/rant]

Hi ian ..my post just to be clear is not at all antagonistic or do i seek to make any meaningless comments ...im surprised & disappointed if you have taken them on board that way ..


I see you are in new zealand ,,im in ireland .
I put up post in a positive scripture with view of concurring that the law re wording , for me any way is a welcome ..

In irfu land , we have been pushed to watch the alain rowland new laws video .( have you seen it ,,as its an official world rugby video )
Of which the new 1 man ruck was only created & off side lines are only created if a player steps over the tackle area , which is the ball ....he even goes on to say that if you dont step over the ball ,,there is in fact no off side line acheived .

Quoting english language is not necessary relevant to quoting rugby laws ..
Im not sure where your going with same ..

Ill not take your post personally ,,so please dont take mine as anything else as than a member simply looking to reach out ..
Take care now ..
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,811
Post Likes
3,149
shatnerWTF.gif


"Over the ball" does NOT mean you MUST have stepped over the ball in ANY sense in the English language. If you are on the ground and I am standing over you, does that necessarily mean I must have stepped over you? Of course it doesn't!!

[rant]Its precisely this kind of miring of discussion in meaningless trivia that has driven me to not bother posting here as often as I used to. I just can't be arsed getting involved in the endless, tedious discussion of irrelevant minutiae, indulged in by some of the newer members here. Nor can I be bothered with the way some members continually look for ways reinterpret laws make them mean things that were never intended.[/rant]

was that supposed to be directed at me ? I have hardly posted about stepping over the ball, apart from to say that Alain Rollands video is (as I understand it) regarded as going off piste

it's generally been a lot less angry while you were away !
 

Ian_Cook


Referees in New Zealand
Staff member
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
13,680
Post Likes
1,760
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
was that supposed to be directed at me ? I have hardly posted about stepping over the ball, apart from to say that Alain Rollands video is (as I understand it) regarded as going off piste

Its directed generally.... you just happened to post at the wrong time

Your tit-for-tat attack on PhilE over who said what is exactly the sort of trivial points-scoring "trying to win the internet" crap I'm talking about... It was unnecessary and it achieved nothing.

it's generally been a lot less angry while you were away !

Perhaps that's because you don't have anyone here to hold discussion up to the standards required. I hope you realise that we have lost a LOT of excellent contributors and/or very experienced referees such as Simon Thomas, Deeps, ex-Lucy, DaveT, DrStu, SimonGriffiths and Bryan from this forum, and I have a fairly good idea why. These losses have immensely diminished the value of this forum .

Perhaps I'll just stay away, and then you can have free reign to do whatever you like.
 
Top