Ruling 4, 2009 - tackle

[Rawling]

Firstly, apologies if this has been posted, but I can't see it.

On 11 May 2009 the international Rugby Board gave a ruling on play at the tackle, which is important and makes sense. It allows a player who started an action legally to complete that action.

The complete wording is as follows:

Law Ruling by Designated Members of Rugby Committee
Date: May 11, 2009
Ruling: 4: 2009

Ruling Request from the NZRU and ARU Law 15 and 16

Law 15 6 (b) states:
After a tackle any players on their feet may attempt to gain possession by taking the ball from the ball carriers possession.

Law 16.1 (b) states:
How can a ruck form? Players are on their feet. At least one player must be in physical contact with an opponent. The ball is on the ground.

Law 16.4 (b) states:
(b) Players must not handle the ball in a ruck.

When a player has complied with Law 15 6 (b), is on his feet and playing the ball after a tackle and is then joined by an opposition player on his feet so that the situation outlined in 16 1 (b) occurs, can the player who has complied with Law 15 6 (b) continue to play the ball with his hands or at what point does he have to release the ball?

This does not appear to be covered by Law.

Ruling

Law 15 6 (a) states: After a tackle, all other players must be on their feet when they play the ball.

Law 15.6 (b) reads: After a tackle any player on their feet may attempt to gain possession by taking the ball from the ball carriers possession.

Law 15 5 (e) states that: If opposition players who are on their feet, the tackled player must release the ball.

This indicates that after a tackle a player on his feet may play the ball.

Law 16 1 (b) states: How can a ruck form? Players are on their feet. At least one player must be in physical contact with an opponent. The ball is on the ground.

Law 16.1 refers to a player from each side in physical contact over the ball and implies that the ball is not in the possession of any player.

Providing a player from either side on their feet after a tackle comply with all aspects of Law 15 and have the ball in their hands prior to contact with an opposition player on his feet those players may continue with possession of the ball even if a player from the opposition makes contact with those players in possession of the ball.

Any other players joining the two players contesting the ball must not handle the ball in accordance with Law 16.4 (b). If the ball is not in possession of any player after a tackle and a ruck is formed players may not use their hands in accordance with Law 16.4 (b).

The Ruling is effective from 23 May for the start of matches in the June window and after the close of any domestic or cross border competitions

Firstly, I'm not sure why this is a ruck issue rather than a tackle issue - surely the same should apply to a player with his hands on the ball on the ground whether or not it's over a tackle.

Secondly, I like the ruling that such a player doesn't have to release the ball, but not that any other players must keep hands off. Surely it would just be better to say that a player with the ball in his hands but on the floor is in possession, and as such doesn't form a ruck when tackled. :sad:

 

[PaulDG]

Firstly, apologies if this has been posted, but I can't see it.

It has been posted, in fact, it's probably the most discussed thread on the site at the moment.

It's just that it's in an area of discussion that is "referees only".

Firstly, I'm not sure why this is a ruck issue rather than a tackle issue - surely the same should apply to a player with his hands on the ball on the ground whether or not it's over a tackle.

No, it's a ruck issue. The ruling is about what to do after the tackle when the "fetcher" has "hands on" but has not yet picked up the ball (he's only been there a fraction of a second...) and another player arrives to "clear out" and that creates a "ruck". (Two players on opposite sides, ball on the ground is the definition of a ruck.)

Now the reason discussion of this is in the referees area is that many of us (most definitely me included!) are trying to understand the full implications of the ruling. Some say it's no big deal, it just adds clarity. Others wonder if there are "unintended consequences".

In England, the RFU has told us it will publish guidance. The IRB has published videos which are supposed to illustrate what they expect to happen. But none of us has actually been trained on this yet.

We shall see..

 

[Rawling]

Ah, that's fair enough.

Since I'm finally taking my ELRA over the next week and a half, I look forward to seeing your discussion on this