Playing Not To Lose

[Taff]

Yes, I appreciate that; but what I don't appreciate is when the defenders successfully slow the ball down 15 times in a row and the attackers just wander around aimlessly with no options over the same bit of grass for 15 phases and then knock on, or someone gives a penalty away. Call me weird, but I just don't see where the entertainment value is in that.

What did Carwyn James say "Think about it. It's a thinking game boys". For every problem - there's an answer.

I reckon defense coaches will cotton-on to that tactic pretty quickly, and use the law to their advantage. If the ball carrier just picks up the ball, drives forward a foot or so, sets up a ruck, then drives forward a foot or so, sets up a another ruck etc etc, why don't defenders just hold off (ie they don't form a ruck or maul) then just nip round the back and nick the ball? There's no ruck or maul offside lines to worry about as we're still in open play. The ball carrier will be on the ground so will either have to get up, pass, push, place or release the ball to the opposition player on his feet. You either get the ball ... or a PK, or force them to pass the ball. Either way, you'll stop the endless cycle of timewasting rucks.

 

[4eyesbetter]

Thing is, they've got the attackers completely under control; why would they want to risk some broken play by forcing the issue when they can just keep the attackers going over the same blades of grass until they (the attackers again) make an error?

 

[TigerCraig]

I reckon defense coaches will cotton-on to that tactic pretty quickly, and use the law to their advantage. If the ball carrier just picks up the ball, drives forward a foot or so, sets up a ruck, then drives forward a foot or so, sets up a another ruck etc etc, why don't defenders just hold off (ie they don't form a ruck or maul) then just nip round the back and nick the ball? There's no ruck or maul offside lines to worry about as we're still in open play. The ball carrier will be on the ground so will either have to get up, pass, push, place or release the ball to the opposition player on his feet. You either get the ball ... or a PK, or force them to pass the ball.

Agree

Many times on pick & drive (esp at lower levels) the player with the ball just dives at the defenders ankles. He was never held and brought to ground, therefore he is a player that has chosen to go to ground. No offside lines, away we go.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I was still playing in those days, and at my low level there was never any such tactic. I don't remember it at international level either, though it would not be easy to detect, since I would expect it to go wrong quite often.

Well it was commonplace here. You only have to watch a few Super 12 games from the period 96-99 to see it happening.

 

[Dixie]

Agree

Many times on pick & drive (esp at lower levels) the player with the ball just dives at the defenders ankles. He was never held and brought to ground, therefore he is a player that has chosen to go to ground. No offside lines, away we go.

While I absolutely agree that Law 14 applies in such cases, there would be no offside lines if it was an effective tackle under Law 15 either. I guess you are saying that defenders can enter the "flop zone" from any angle - agreed.

 

[Taff]

While I absolutely agree that Law 14 applies in such cases, there would be no offside lines if it was an effective tackle under Law 15 either. I guess you are saying that defenders can enter the "flop zone" from any angle - agreed.

Why not? By "flop zone" I assume you mean where the BC just flops at the oppositions feet quickly followed by 1 or 2 support players expecting to form a ruck. There's no tackle (if the oppos hang off, the BC hasn't even been touched let alone "held") so there is no "gate" to worry about. If they hang back there can't form a maul or a ruck, so maul and ruck offside lines don't apply either.

As we're still in open play, there are no offside lines for the opposition - go where you like. In fact in this case, with a ball carrier going to ground the law favours the players on their feet.

 

[TigerCraig]

Problem is that in many cases there will be a penalty awarded on the "it looks wrong" principle

 

[Taff]

Problem is that in many cases there will be a penalty awarded on the "it looks wrong" principle

Fair point .... then "Prime" the ref first.

Ie a good captain or coach could check with him that your understanding of the law is correct. eg "Can I just check that there are no offside lines in open play ref. So if the ball carrier goes to ground and we hang back and don't form a ruck or maul, it's ok for us to go round and pick up the ball. Correct?" If the ref agrees with you and is half prepared for it, a "it just doesn't look right" PK should be avoided.