Players colliding contesting a ball in the air

[Ian_Cook]

in the guardian today it says there has been a secret email

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/apr/20/bath-worcester-premiership-match-report

"The upshot of it is, unless two people are in the air contesting, irrespective of whether someone is looking at someone or not, if that collision occurs when one person is on the floor, that person is getting a minimum yellow card."

Well, that pretty much confirms what I have said previously about this issue. I expect coaches to tell players to jump for the ball, even though they cant get to it before the opponent, in order to minimise the chance of being YC/RC. Its a recipe for disaster; sooner or later there is going to be a sickening collision that will end up with a player getting very badly injured.

If they are offside under the 10m law, then they must retire...immediately. Simply stopping and waiting to be put onside isn't good enough.

Yes, I agree.

However in practice, in the elite game at least, this almost never happens. Referees just say "Stop" to players ahead of the kick. I'm not saying this is right, just that this is what actually happens.

 

[Dickie E]

The invisible culprit was the Blue player (#7?) who obstructs the Red chaser and causes his contest of the ball to be upset.

Ian or others, do you have a view about the culpability of the obstructing Blue player?

 

[Taff]

Ian or others, do you have a view about the culpability of the obstructing Blue player?

Playing Devils Advocate here, but is he obstructing?

 

[Browner]

Williams pushed him outta the way, and his presence does nothing to remove blame from Williams. running back toward the ball landing area is perfectly legal, he has as much right to be there as the chaser .....if anything Williams pushes him illegally also.

He was always 2nd to the ball landing and thats all that matters.
RC
Reckless and dangerous.

 

[Dickie E]

Playing Devils Advocate here, but is he obstructing?

I thought he was. It appears to me that he is timing and adjusting his run with the sole purpose of getting in the way of the opponent. He even looks over his shoulder to line up the opponent.

 

[Browner]

I thought he was. It appears to me that he is timing and adjusting his run with the sole purpose of getting in the way of the opponent. He even looks over his shoulder to line up the opponent.

If I'm ahead of you , I can run where I choose , can't I ?

 

[Dickie E]

If I'm ahead of you , I can run where I choose , can't I ?

No. We see it on occasion at kick-offs where a player on the receiving team intentionally gets in the way of a player from the kicking team.

Here is an example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlyhWhl3mgU

 

[OB..]

If I'm ahead of you , I can run where I choose , can't I ?

No.

If you deliberately get in my way, you are obstructing. You need to have a legitimate reason for the line you take, and getting in my way if not one.

 

[Chogan]

He was always 2nd to the ball landing and thats all that matters.
RC
Reckless and dangerous.

Being second to the ball is drastically different to tackling a player in the air. In this case the red player tackles the man in the air eliminating his own attempts to contest for the possession of the ball. That is deliberate and dangerous.
The fact that you may be second and therefore not win the contest for the ball should not be a red cardable offence.

The difference between this and a non jump or miscalculated jumper's attempt at gathering possession is enormous.

 

[menace]

I would have blown my whistle well before the ball was even caught, for clear an obvious offside under the 10m Law. Red 2, 6, 7, 8 ALL advancing ahead of the kicker. They must stop or retire until either the kicker passes them, or an onside team-mate passes them.

Were you suggesting 2,6,7,8 were inside 10m where the ball was going to land? I'm not sure how you can say those players were 'clear and obvious' offside under 10m law? Yes they were offside in front of kicker, but the ball lands/caught about 5m past the 10m line side of blues half. Yet at the point of the kick most of those you mention were well outside 10m from where the player was waiting to catch the ball. 6 and 8 were couple of metres within their own halfway line, 2 was about 5m in front of half way and was actually running towards his own goal line and then turns (still offside, but not within 10 of where ball would land). Red #1 is borderline 10m, but #5 (enters at bottom right of screen) is the only clear an obvious inside 10m and not likely to be a danger to the catcher.

Therefore I think playing advantage for offside in front of kicker would have been ok to see what happened rather than blowing immediately.

AIUI you would only blow straight away if
[LAWS](c)
When a player who is offside under the 10-Metre Law charges an opponent waiting to catch the ball, the referee blows the whistle at once and the offside player is penalised. Delay may prove dangerous to the opponent.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

Otherwise play advantage. But I have no problem blowing immediately if you think advantage is unlikely to accrue. Why pfaff about hoping for advantage to come when, like here it was probably unlikely with onside players bearing down on him.

The guy that actually tackled the catcher was onside, IMO?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Ian or others, do you have a view about the culpability of the obstructing Blue player?

Firstly, yes, I think he is running a line intended to obstruct, and he even glances around at one point to make sure of what he is doing.

Secondly, the line he runs makes it difficult for the Red player (who is going to challenge for the ball) to see the Blue defender and time his run to jump. He also takes the "run-up" space away from the Red chaser.

In the absence of Red being offside under the 10m law, and if I'd seen it in real time I would PK that Blue player for obstruction.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Were you suggesting 2,6,7,8 were inside 10m where the ball was going to land? I'm not sure how you can say those players were 'clear and obvious' offside under 10m law? Yes they were offside in front of kicker, but the ball lands/caught about 5m past the 10m line side of blues half. Yet at the point of the kick most of those you mention were well outside 10m from where the player was waiting to catch the ball. 6 and 8 were couple of metres within their own halfway line, 2 was about 5m in front of half way and was actually running towards his own goal line and then turns (still offside, but not within 10 of where ball would land). Red #1 is borderline 10m, but #5 (enters at bottom right of screen) is the only clear an obvious inside 10m and not likely to be a danger to the catcher.

I'm suggesting that they were well ahead of the kicker and continued to advance.

[LAWS]11.1 OFFSIDE IN GENERAL PLAY
(a) A player who is in an offside position is liable to sanction only if the player does one of three
things:
• Interferes with play or,
• Moves forward, towards the ball or
• Fails to comply with the 10-Metre Law (Law 11.4).
A player who is in an offside position is not automatically penalised.
A player who receives an unintentional throw forward is not offside.
A player can be offside in the in-goal.
(b) Offside and interfering with play. A player who is offside must not take part in the game.
This means the player must not play the ball or obstruct an opponent.
(c) Offside and moving forward. When a team-mate of an offside player has kicked ahead,
the offside player must not move towards opponents who are waiting to play the ball, or
move towards the place where the ball lands, until the player has been put onside.[/LAWS]

As has been argued on here before, you can PK for offside under the 10m law before the ball lands, but I agree, 11.4 may not apply after you have seen where the ball actually lands.

Any way you slice it, 2, 6, 7 and 8 continued to move forward while in an offside position, and had the tackle in the air not happened, those players could easily have gained from their infringing if Blue had decided to counterattack to their left.

 

[Dickie E]

Firstly, yes, I think he is running a line intended to obstruct, and he even glances around at one point to make sure of what he is doing.

Secondly, the line he runs makes it difficult for the Red player (who is going to challenge for the ball) to see the Blue defender and time his run to jump. He also takes the "run-up" space away from the Red chaser.

In the absence of Red being offside under the 10m law, and if I'd seen it in real time I would PK that Blue player for obstruction.

So if we forget about the offside business, would the obstruction mitigate the incident of the player being taken out in the air? Or would you reverse the decision because of the danger factor?

 

[Ian_Cook]

So if we forget about the offside business, would the obstruction mitigate the incident of the player being taken out in the air? Or would you reverse the decision because of the danger factor?

Both are Foul Play, but the tackle in the air is Dangerous Play, so I think its fair enough to penalise that

The Red chaser could have been smarter and made it obvious that he was being obstructed by hitting the Blue obstructing player hard enough to knock him over.

If I'm ahead of you , I can run where I choose , can't I ?

Just to emphasise OB's reply

[LAWS]10.1 OBSTRUCTION
(b) Running in front of a ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of
a team-mate carrying the ball thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball
carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

Being in front does not give you additional rights.

You are entitled to run a support line for your own ball carrier. You are NOT entitled to run a line across in front of an opponent in order to prevent him from getting to the ball, the ball carrier or a potential ball carrier.

 

[crossref]

[LAWS]10.1 OBSTRUCTION
(b) Running in front of a ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of
a team-mate carrying the ball thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball
carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

hmm.. so if it's an interception and a 70m sprint to the line, and I am a supportting team mate of the sprinting ball carrier, running behind the ball --... I am allowed to obstruct the chasing defence, on the grounds that the 10.1 (b) doesn't apply, as I am behind the ball?

I don't thnik so.

 

[RobLev]

[LAWS]10.1 OBSTRUCTION
(b) Running in front of a ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of
a team-mate carrying the ball thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball
carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

hmm.. so if it's an interception and a 70m sprint to the line, and I am a supportting team mate of the sprinting ball carrier, running behind the ball --... I am allowed to obstruct the chasing defence, on the grounds that the 10.1 (b) doesn't apply, as I am behind the ball?

I don't thnik so.

I'd suggest that "in front of" can be taken as relative to the positions of ball-carrier and intended tackler, but if not: Law 10.1(c):

[LAWS]Blocking the tackler. A player must not intentionally move or stand in a position that prevents an opponent from tackling a ball carrier.[/LAWS]

 

[Ian_Cook]

[LAWS]10.1 OBSTRUCTION
(b) Running in front of a ball carrier. A player must not intentionally move or stand in front of
a team-mate carrying the ball thereby preventing opponents from tackling the current ball
carrier or the opportunity to tackle potential ball carriers when they gain possession.
Sanction: Penalty kick[/LAWS]

hmm.. so if it's an interception and a 70m sprint to the line, and I am a supportting team mate of the sprinting ball carrier, running behind the ball --... I am allowed to obstruct the chasing defence, on the grounds that the 10.1 (b) doesn't apply, as I am behind the ball?

I don't thnik so.

If you are a team-mate of the ball carrier, running a support line and you are running in a position to receive a pass, looking towards your team-mate to see when that pass might come, you're fine. If I see you look around for a possible tackler, and upon seeing one, I see you change your line to get in the way of that tackler such that you are blocking him from tackling the ball carrier, I'm going to ping you for obstruction.

 

[crossref]

I agree. So we can't get too hung up on the precise wording of the Law which would seem to suggest that you can only be obstructing if you are in front of the ball.

 

[Browner]

So, OB Dickie etc... You would have PK'd the no7 blue, if you'd had the whistle ?

Everyone knows his line of running is deliberate, but sometimes its tough, to take a zero tolerance approach means you'd likely blow for every high kick in every match .... Really?

In my head it has to be more C&O than that, and the you tube clip was a good example (thks) to do otherwise will make you the centre of attention and put you in a difficult place for the next screen pass etc..where defenders routinely have to amend their line of run .....and what about the guy stood at the side of the ruck when the scrum half is about to box kick .....ping him as well....he's only there to make it further for an opponent to run round him to get to the SH ?!!?

Chogan,
I'm saying that Williams was always going to be second on that instance, and as such he needed to recognise that rather than continue through the blue jumper. Its not a RC for arriving 2nd, it is if you endanger the 1st arriver who is in the air already.

You can usually tell who is jumping for the ball and who isnt .

Williams wasn't. So all onus of safety rests on his shoulders. : )

 

[Dickie E]

So, OB Dickie etc... You would have PK'd the no7 blue, if you'd had the whistle ?

Yes

You can usually tell who is jumping for the ball and who isnt .

Williams wasn't. So all onus of safety rests on his shoulders. : )

I believe there is a reasonable argument that the actions of the Blue #7 (which I view as illegal) distracted Williams both mentally & physically and that directly led to the dangerous tackle.