Picking up the ball - going to ground ??

[RUGBYBOOT]

Can I have some advice on this senerio please :

Blue attacking and form a ruck. Red player comes through the gate and drives through the middle of the ruck and kicks the ball.

Up to now I am happy that the player is legal and no issues.

At exactly what stage can that red player go to ground onto the ball ? and / or at what stage can he pick the ball up?

Thanks

Gary

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

I'm gonna say when the ball is 1m away from ruck. Although, W/O looking, no player may fall on a ball emerging from a ruck. I still say 1m will suffice, but am ready for correction.

That red player would best deal with situation by kicking it again

 

[Taff]

Trust me I'm not being aukward, but why would the Red player want to dive on the ball?

I'm not sure if the ball even needs to be 1m from the ruck. AIUI the second the ball is outside the imaginary "rubber band" around the ruck, the ruck is over so we're back in open play again ie Red can pick up the ball and run with it .... or welly it downfield.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I'm not sure if the ball even needs to be 1m from the ruck. AIUI the second the ball is outside the imaginary "rubber band" around the ruck, the ruck is over

LAW 16.4 OTHER RUCK OFFENCES
(e) A player must not fall on or over a ball as it is coming out of a ruck.
Sanction: Penalty kick

 

[Taff]

I'd have no problem with a PK for a player falling on the ball while "coming out of a ruck" ie it's not out yet so it's still in the ruck, but when it's past the imaginary rubber band, I would suggest it was fair game .... but I'm happy to be corrected / set straight by the more experienced refs. :chin:

 

[OB..]

I'd have no problem with a PK for a player falling on the ball while "coming out of a ruck" ie it's not out yet so it's still in the ruck, but when it's past the imaginary rubber band, I would suggest it was fair game .... but I'm happy to be corrected / set straight by the more experienced refs. :chin:

I don't think that can be right because there is already a law saying that a player must not handle the ball in a ruck. I think the problem is that if a player falls on the ball as soon as it emerges it constricts play, whereas the law makers want to open it up. Therefore you have to do something else first (even if it is only to wait until the ball is far enough away).

 

[Ian_Cook]

I'd have no problem with a PK for a player falling on the ball while "coming out of a ruck" ie it's not out yet so it's still in the ruck, but when it's past the imaginary rubber band, I would suggest it was fair game .... but I'm happy to be corrected / set straight by the more experienced refs. :chin:

TAFF

This is the hoary old debate about the length of a piece of string?

► In Law 15, how much time elapses before its no longer "immediate"?

► How far away is a player before they are no longer "near"?

► How at what point has the ball actually "emerged"?

The answer to all these, in the absence of definition in the Law, must ne down to the referee's judgement.

 

[Casey Bee]

Can I have some advice on this senerio please :

Blue attacking and form a ruck. Red player comes through the gate and drives through the middle of the ruck and kicks the ball.

Up to now I am happy that the player is legal and no issues.

At exactly what stage can that red player go to ground onto the ball ? and / or at what stage can he pick the ball up?

Thanks

Gary

Interesting subject matter for me as when I joined this forum this exact thing came up in discussion and I got in a right panic that this was some 'new' law that I'd never heard of and I was really lost on what to watch out for. I was imagining that a ball kicked out of a ruck couldn't then be dropped on by a player even if it had gone 10m!! I think the advice then was what you're really looking out for is players interfering with SH role... diving on the ball before it has had chance to be played. (There's basically same law for scrum)

As Ian Cook suggests, there are many variables and it has to be down to referee discretion. You used the word exactly just like I would have done! You want black or white clear decision making just like I would have wanted... but it doesn't work like that! Trust your instinct, if the ball has been kicked clear of a ruck then it's usually fair game. A waiting SH should be watching like a hawk anyway. If the ball is near back of ruck and SH half has been pounced on without getting a reasonable chance at playing (without him unnecessarily delaying) then probably PK or there'll never be a game played.
It's not easy and I'm the first one to 'demand' definitive answers to something I don't understand but there isn't always a clear answer, so I feel your pain!

 

[Rit Hinners]

All above seems correct.

As to a safe distance away from the ruck before you are allowed to fall on an emerging ball....

As OB says, the intention seems to be to get the ball away from one pile of bodies before placing it under another. So, using your string/rubber-band definition of the area that a ruck exists... If you can fall on the ball and your body not be within the the area of the ruck you're pretty safe. Seems to be about NKW's meter.

Now, why you would not pick up a ball before it got that meter away from the ruck, I haven't a clue.

 

[Taff]

Believe me I can see the logic of making the ball available but we have other laws to protect that, as all defending players who are not involved in the ruck have to be behind the back foot. That should give the SH a good chance of getting it away. Last year we were told to strictly enforce the offside lines to give the SHs this time.

We assume the ball winning side have "rights" but defenders have rights too, and contesting for the ball once it's out of a ruck is one of them. Why should we penalise an alert defender (who came from an onside position) for pouncing on a ball 6" out of a ruck just because a SH is too slow to get it away, especially as the alert defender would have had to cover about 2-3 metres before he even got to the ball. If the ball is pounced on by an offside player, that's a different matter and loitering with intent is a PK offence. :wink:

.. Now, why you would not pick up a ball before it got that meter away from the ruck, I haven't a clue.

The only situation I can imagine is where a slow SH is hovering over the ball but not quick enough to get it away. If an oppo (again coming from an onside position) can get there before it's been passed, kicking it could easily be classed as dangerous so human nature is to dive on it to secure it.

 

[Dixie]

We assume the ball winning side have "rights" but defenders have rights too, and contesting for the ball once it's out of a ruck is one of them. Why should we penalise an alert defender (who came from an onside position) for pouncing on a ball 6" out of a ruck if a SH is too slow to get it away especially as the alert defender would have had to cover about 2-3 metres before he even got to the ball.

because Law 16 requirs you to do so - same as every other occasion on which you blow your whistle. Let's consider the applicable ruck laws:

No rucker may touch the ball with his hands: 16.4(b)
Ruckers on the ground must move away from the ball, and not interfere with it coming out: 16.4(d)
Ruckers must stay on their feet: 16.3(a)
Ruckers must not intentionally fall or kneel in a ruck: 16.3(b)

So given this group, how many ways can we ping someone who falls on the ball while it is within the rubber band? I count 4 PK's without the need for 16.4(e). So what is the purpose of 16.4(e)?

You could argue that it is there to prevent a non-rucker from falling on the ball within the ruck "rubber band". Possibly - but any player from the non-ball winning side would have to be offside to to do that, so the provision only applies to the ball-winning side. And I'd argue that any non-rucking player from the ball-winnign side falling on the ball while it is in the ruck (i.e. in front of the back foot) is also offside - rendering 16.4(e) otiose. So if 16.4(e) applies within the rubber band, it is merely duplicating existing law, which already penalises the offence. That to me is a strong indicator that it applies outside the rubber band - i.e. in open play in the immediate aftermath of a ruck. Any other interpretation makes it a meaningless law.

 

[Taff]

... So what is the purpose of 16.4(e)? You could argue that it is there to prevent a non-rucker from falling on the ball within the ruck "rubber band".

I understood it was there to stop a rucker ie a player in the ruck falling on it when he could see it had been won by the other side; but I can see that's covered by 16.4(d). :chin:

As you say, any non-rucker would have to be in an offside position to be able to fall on it anyway.

 

[GeorgeR]

I have been having this debate with my 16 yo son ever since I pinged him for it a few weeks ago. His defense (he has a good knowledge of the laws) was that I was the first to ping him for it!! Thankfully the debate was after the match and in the car

 

[Phil E]

I have been having this debate with my 16 yo son ever since I pinged him for it a few weeks ago. His defense (he has a good knowledge of the laws) was that I was the first to ping him for it!! Thankfully the debate was after the match and in the car

Should have made him walk home for dissent after the final whistle :biggrin:

 

[Davet]

As you say, any non-rucker would have to be in an offside position to be able to fall on it anyway.

Any non-rucker from the non-ball-winning side, was Dixie's opinion.

Although even then - opponent at front of ruck, bound on the side of it legally - ball squirts out a few inches, on his side - he drops on it. Not offside, but guilty under 16.4.e