Off your feet
- Thread starter chrismtl
- Start date
chrismtl
Referees in Canada
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2013
- Messages
- 202
- Post Likes
- 35
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
The whole issue I brought up here wasn't that players sometimes went off their feet because the opposition had started a counter ruck but that players went off their feet BEFORE a counter ruck had formed. I've watched a few more games, and most of the time if there's no clear counter ruck the players stay on their feet. My main issue is when players are preventing a contest from occurring (which is the case in my example) and stuff like when a player has his hands on the ball for a poach and a player comes flying in with no attempt to stay on his feet and basically pulls a superman pose as he flies through a defender (and most of the time it's from the side on top of that). I feel like a proper counter ruck/poach should be rewarded, just like properly supporting your ball carrier will result in your team retaining possession. These guys spend hours practicing poaching and how to properly remove a player that's poaching the ball. In a match, there's absolutely no technique used to remove a poaching player, just brute force and speed and it's only because ref's allow it to occur. Having a guy going flying into a ruck, shoulder first and off his feet to make sure his team retains possession is a recipe for disaster.
Mr.Christopher
Referees in Canada
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2014
- Messages
- 37
- Post Likes
- 6
Hello fellow Quebec Chris!
:canada:
I think the issue with stuff like this all comes back to the issue of materiality. Does it negatively impact the flow of the game?
Let me ask you a question about another situation entirely. Two teams, red and blue, are at a lineout, with blue throwing in. Blue jumper goes up, but red decides not to put a jumper up. By what standard to you evaluate "not straight" on the throw? Is it the exact same standard you would if the throw was being contested?
Now I'm not saying that you allow a super crooked throw (i.e. the 2 throwing directly to the 9, crooked)... but if the throw slightly outside the jumper... I'm all for letting it go and getting back to open play.
I want to apply the same standard here at the ruck. If the first arriving "white" player just went right to deck over the tackled "white" player... yes, ding him for off his feet. If he made contact with a poaching or rucking player, then drove him back and then went down... I'd be inclined to let it go.
This can change somewhat depending how fast the game is. If you're reffing D2 Womens or D3 Mens in Quebec... you're generally have the ball coming out slower... and have more people piling into the ruck. If you're doing the D1 or SuperLeague First XV level... chances are you'll see a tackle, single man clear and the 9 moving the ball quickly. The defense here will be more focused on flat line defense than trying to counter ruck.... and you won't have the issue. Fast rucks either end before the players can do anything to screw it up... or the infractions are so blatant that it is simple to call.
Simon gave me some advice during an eval/feedback session... "don't be a policeman". Just because something is technically illegal doesn't mean that it matters or has an impact on the game. If a tackling player is slow in releasing the ball carrier.... but the attacking team immediately picks and goes.... while technically you COULD ding the tackler for "not releasing"... you never would because play is ongoing.
:canada:
I think the issue with stuff like this all comes back to the issue of materiality. Does it negatively impact the flow of the game?
Let me ask you a question about another situation entirely. Two teams, red and blue, are at a lineout, with blue throwing in. Blue jumper goes up, but red decides not to put a jumper up. By what standard to you evaluate "not straight" on the throw? Is it the exact same standard you would if the throw was being contested?
Now I'm not saying that you allow a super crooked throw (i.e. the 2 throwing directly to the 9, crooked)... but if the throw slightly outside the jumper... I'm all for letting it go and getting back to open play.
I want to apply the same standard here at the ruck. If the first arriving "white" player just went right to deck over the tackled "white" player... yes, ding him for off his feet. If he made contact with a poaching or rucking player, then drove him back and then went down... I'd be inclined to let it go.
This can change somewhat depending how fast the game is. If you're reffing D2 Womens or D3 Mens in Quebec... you're generally have the ball coming out slower... and have more people piling into the ruck. If you're doing the D1 or SuperLeague First XV level... chances are you'll see a tackle, single man clear and the 9 moving the ball quickly. The defense here will be more focused on flat line defense than trying to counter ruck.... and you won't have the issue. Fast rucks either end before the players can do anything to screw it up... or the infractions are so blatant that it is simple to call.
Simon gave me some advice during an eval/feedback session... "don't be a policeman". Just because something is technically illegal doesn't mean that it matters or has an impact on the game. If a tackling player is slow in releasing the ball carrier.... but the attacking team immediately picks and goes.... while technically you COULD ding the tackler for "not releasing"... you never would because play is ongoing.
chrismtl
Referees in Canada
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2013
- Messages
- 202
- Post Likes
- 35
- Current Referee grade:
- Select Grade
Another Quebec Chris on this forum! Good to see you here.
If you want to talk about the lineout situation, that's completely different. The defending team has the ability to contest should they want to and chose not to. Red never gained an advantage. However, if we were to transpose the off the feet situation and put it into the lineout situation, it would be the attacking team holding down the defending jumper so he never would have a chance to contest for the ball. Two completely different scenarios.
Back to the ruck...No defender with half a brain will contest a ruck that looks like this for example:
View attachment 2921
The point is that the contest was taken away. There isn't 1 player in the world who could hit 3 guys lying on top of each other and push them off the ball. All it would take is 1 ref calling it right at the beginning of the game and then the players will all ruck properly. There are plenty of examples of players rucking properly in every match, but sometimes they choose to be lazy or cut corners, and they should be dinged for it. Here's a perfectly good example of a player who stays on his feet at the ruck and who could have easily hit the English defender and flopped down afterwards.
View attachment 2922
You can find tons of these situations in every international and top level match and almost just as many lazy players falling on rucks. There's absolutely no reason for it and the IRB should do something to crack down on it. What you see most of the time is not even an effort to stay on their feet and they just flop down instead, or hit a retreating defender as they flop. It's a player safety issue as well as I'm sure at some point there will be a bad injury because of something like this which happens many times a game.
View attachment 2923
I should point out that the player in this situation was accelerating and was out of position compared to the ball carrier, so he sped up and went head first into the English tackler(who was starting his motion to roll away) and was always shooting down. Also, while it looks like he might have been tripped, he wasn't.
I'll jump back quickly to your point about the lineout not being straight. Let's assume that at the Super League level the players are world class (they aren't), if the ball is thrown to the back jumper at the 15m line, then most of the time the ball will be well on it's way there before the players start to lift or jump. This is plenty of time for a defensive team to decide whether or not the ball can even be reached and then not bother putting anyone up. Should you still not call the not straight in this situation? My main point with that is every situation is unique on the rugby field and you have to ref it like that.
And if I finish with replying to your first comment of does it negatively impact the flow of the game? Maybe not, maybe it does, we can't know unless they stay on their feet. Every player at the top level is smart enough to know not to hit a ruck in that situation since they're just wasting energy. We can never know what would have happened if the defenders stayed on their feet. What it does do is negatively impact the image of the game and I can guarantee it will result in a serious injury at some point, if it hasn't already.
If you want to talk about the lineout situation, that's completely different. The defending team has the ability to contest should they want to and chose not to. Red never gained an advantage. However, if we were to transpose the off the feet situation and put it into the lineout situation, it would be the attacking team holding down the defending jumper so he never would have a chance to contest for the ball. Two completely different scenarios.
Back to the ruck...No defender with half a brain will contest a ruck that looks like this for example:
View attachment 2921
The point is that the contest was taken away. There isn't 1 player in the world who could hit 3 guys lying on top of each other and push them off the ball. All it would take is 1 ref calling it right at the beginning of the game and then the players will all ruck properly. There are plenty of examples of players rucking properly in every match, but sometimes they choose to be lazy or cut corners, and they should be dinged for it. Here's a perfectly good example of a player who stays on his feet at the ruck and who could have easily hit the English defender and flopped down afterwards.
View attachment 2922
You can find tons of these situations in every international and top level match and almost just as many lazy players falling on rucks. There's absolutely no reason for it and the IRB should do something to crack down on it. What you see most of the time is not even an effort to stay on their feet and they just flop down instead, or hit a retreating defender as they flop. It's a player safety issue as well as I'm sure at some point there will be a bad injury because of something like this which happens many times a game.
View attachment 2923
I should point out that the player in this situation was accelerating and was out of position compared to the ball carrier, so he sped up and went head first into the English tackler(who was starting his motion to roll away) and was always shooting down. Also, while it looks like he might have been tripped, he wasn't.
I'll jump back quickly to your point about the lineout not being straight. Let's assume that at the Super League level the players are world class (they aren't), if the ball is thrown to the back jumper at the 15m line, then most of the time the ball will be well on it's way there before the players start to lift or jump. This is plenty of time for a defensive team to decide whether or not the ball can even be reached and then not bother putting anyone up. Should you still not call the not straight in this situation? My main point with that is every situation is unique on the rugby field and you have to ref it like that.
And if I finish with replying to your first comment of does it negatively impact the flow of the game? Maybe not, maybe it does, we can't know unless they stay on their feet. Every player at the top level is smart enough to know not to hit a ruck in that situation since they're just wasting energy. We can never know what would have happened if the defenders stayed on their feet. What it does do is negatively impact the image of the game and I can guarantee it will result in a serious injury at some point, if it hasn't already.
Mr.Christopher
Referees in Canada
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2014
- Messages
- 37
- Post Likes
- 6
Having played at the Super League level in addition to reffing, I'll say that 9 times out of 10, the defensive team isn't taking their cue from the hooker, they're timing their jump to match when the attacking jumper goes into the air. That's why the attacking team moves their pods forward and backward... will have a dummy jumper possibly fake a jump in the first or second pod, etc... all in an effort to get the defenders to jump early and have to bring their jumper back down.... then the attackers pretty much get an unmolested throw-in.
And... when in doubt, the defensive team will put up their first jumper. Yes... attackers will attempt to lob the ball to the second pod or put it to the last man.... but more often then not, a good defensive jumper in the first pod will be sufficient to disrupt the attacking lineout. The hooker will try and throw either over or around the defensive jumper... and in the case of "around", you typically end up with a "not straight" call.
I can also tell you, 100%, that the decision to contest or not to contest the lineout is made before the defense approaches the line... it is not a split second decision while the ball is in the air.