Pick and Drive

[Iron_Lung]

Question for the law learned among us, to do with a situation resulting form tight forward play in and around the ruck.

Red attacking, blue makes a tackle and tackler rolls to the defending side of the with both tackled player and tackler lying parallel with the goal lines. Players drive in and ruck forms, no problems at this stage.

Immdiate pick and drive from forward who gets tackled by the pillar and driven down immediately behind the previous ruck. Red player cannot exercise the option to play the ball due to the tackler from the previous ruck preventing him from doing so by virtue of his position on the ground having not been able to move from the previous position. The blue player cannot roll away due to presence of red player who was tackled player at previous ruck.

First question, is blue player obligated to roll away if they were never part of subsequent tackle or ruck, and therefore are they liable to penalty? Second question, is it equitable to call unplayable and a scrum rather than penalize a player who had been positive in their actions, or is it his fault and therefore he should be penalized accordingly.

I hope that is clear, but if not I'll clarify in response to questions.

 

[Phil E]

First question, is blue player obligated to roll away if they were never part of subsequent tackle or ruck, and therefore are they liable to penalty?
Second question, is it equitable to call unplayable and a scrum rather than penalize a player who had been positive in their actions, or is it his fault and therefore he should be penalized accordingly.

Option 2 every time.

Unplayable, too many bodies on the floor, scrum down team in possession/going forward (red?)

 

[Dickie E]

would a dominant tackle constitute "going forward"?

 

[Davet]

Unplayable at the tackle, scrum, put in to side going forward.

 

[damo]

If a tackler has rolled away from his tackle and then another tackle is made from the next phase that falls on top of him it is hardly fair to penalize him.

Just blow up for unplayable and give it to the team going forward; presumably blue if the tackle drove the ball carrier backwards immediately before it became unplayable.

 

[Iron_Lung]

If a tackler has rolled away from his tackle and then another tackle is made from the next phase that falls on top of him it is hardly fair to penalize him.

Just blow up for unplayable and give it to the team going forward; presumably blue if the tackle drove the ball carrier backwards immediately before it became unplayable.

Not sure this is strictly true, a dominant tackle does not a turnover make, although it does increase the likelihood. I think you'd have to have more to go on than just the dominant tackle before you awarded the unplayable to the tackler's team. You see dominant tackles all the time, the turnover usually depends on the support at the ruck provided by both teams rather than the tackle itself.

Just a thought...

 

[menace]

a dominant tackle does not a turnover make..

I didn't know Yoda was a rugby referee too!

 

[Iron_Lung]

I think he's done U16's once or twice, but only as a favor to the club..

 

[Simon Thomas]

It isn't a law issue, but rather a management one. But if he is in the way and could have moved (like grease lightening) PK. If genuinely caught and unable to move then call it unplayable.

It is going to be a judgement call in each circumstance, and reflect the level of match you are reffing. But as a rule of thumb get players not just rolling, but away and back on on their feet too.

Current referees at all levels (including elite) cause problems for themselves by allowing the pile-ups, bodies on the ground and slow retiring players. I like to see a clear and clean tackle / ruck area.

By all means call it unplayable if it is genuinely is but be careful to not use it as a cop-out excuse for your lack of management of tackle / ruck. At L5 and on National Panel the assessors log all unplayables awarded by a referee.

 

[Dixie]

Not sure this is strictly true, a dominant tackle does not a turnover make, although it does increase the likelihood. I think you'd have to have more to go on than just the dominant tackle before you awarded the unplayable to the tackler's team. You see dominant tackles all the time, the turnover usually depends on the support at the ruck provided by both teams rather than the tackle itself.

Just a thought...

But you are calling it unplayable with a quick whistle because it is clear that no ball could emerge safely from the ruck. Consequently, you can't wait to see the ruck dynamic. If you do wait .... it'll be your fault that the blameless prone player gets seriously shoed, you have to YC/RC the shoe wielder and RC the guy who threw the first punch in retaliation.

So - a dominant tackle in the circumstances described does, in my book at least, make a turnover.

 

[Deeps]

...too many bodies on the floor, ...

I use this line or something similar e.g. 'No. More than 4 bodies on the floor...' having reminded skippers at the toss that the game is for players on their feet and being exacting in my requirements of players on the floor.