[Ruck] scrum half protection

[mugsey]

A ruck, with various players on the floor and standing around . Attacking scrum half has his hands on the ball which is still within the ruck about to lift and pass, and a member of the opposition comes through the middle (noone there to stop him), and takes the scrum half off the ball. I penalised him. I thought that if there was some air under the ball it would have been fine, but I felt that the scrum half had protection here?

 

[Decorily]

Unless I'm missing something it's play on!

 

[Zebra1922]

I’d be thinking how did the player come through the middle of the ruck whilst remaining bound and onside. I can’t see how it’s possible so I’d penalise.

 

[Decorily]

I’d be thinking how did the player come through the middle of the ruck whilst remaining bound and onside. I can’t see how it’s possible so I’d penalise.

OP states that there was no body there to stop him..... and does he need to be bound?

 

[Rich_NL]

Yep, law 15.7.

 

[chbg]

Yep, law 15.7.

Which enables him to bind to an opposition player. If the ruck was not over, then the ball was not out of the (ex-)ruck. Play on for me. The opposition must oppose if they want protection of the Law!

 

[Decorily]

Yep, law 15.7.

Refers to joining a ruck....not to what a player can do subsequently!

 

[Decorily]

The opposition must oppose if they want protection of the Law!

Indeed. ...why bother if the '9' cannot be challenged?

 

[belladonna]

OK so... non-ref head here

Yes but doesn't the 9 have special protection?

And, as the 9 isn't bound on, they are not part of the ruck, so tackling him/her before he/she has picked up the ball is not rucking, but is tackling a player without the ball.

As this seems to be a grey area is this why refs in the 6N manage this by telling players "no, no" when they can see they are about to flatten the 9 and get penalised?

 

[belladonna]

OK so... non-ref head here

Yes but doesn't the 9 have special protection?

And, as the 9 isn't bound on, they are not part of the ruck, so tackling him/her before he/she has picked up the ball is not rucking, but is tackling a player without the ball.

As this seems to be a grey area is this why refs in the 6N manage this by telling players "no, no" when they can see they are about to flatten the 9 and get penalised?

Sorry... overnight I realised that as the 9 has his/her hands on the ball they are in possession so the second part of my comment isn't valid. ::facepalm::

 

[Rich_NL]

Which enables him to bind to an opposition player. If the ruck was not over, then the ball was not out of the (ex-)ruck. Play on for me. The opposition must oppose if they want protection of the Law!

Requires, not enables.

Good or bad, the way it's reffed at high level is that if the ruck has collapsed and the ball is available to one #9, they are protected while they pass it away because no-one can "join". It's a case of continuity trumping contest.

If there's no 9 about to pass the ball, it can be picked up. So it seems the 9 (who's not in the ruck) keeps the ruck going

Edit: belladonna - the ruck is not over until the 9 lifts the ball, not just having hands on.

 

[belladonna]

Requires, not enables.

Good or bad, the way it's reffed at high level is that if the ruck has collapsed and the ball is available to one #9, they are protected while they pass it away because no-one can "join". It's a case of continuity trumping contest.

That ties in with what I've seen when watching.

If there's no 9 about to pass the ball, it can be picked up. So it seems the 9 (who's not in the ruck) keeps the ruck going

Oh the irony...

Edit: belladonna - the ruck is not over until the 9 lifts the ball, not just having hands on.

Thanks yes, I got that - until the ball is lifted the ruck is still in progress. What I was questioning was whether they would technically be "in possession" with hands on and ball on the ground? Although maybe being "in possession" isn't possible with a ruck in progress as it's not open play? And, still subject to protection until they pass it away, or make a break, or dither too long...

On a related note, I remember a ref allowing an arm slap on a #9 in one of the 6N matches, players appealed for taking out the #9 and the ref said "it was just the arm" so it was play on.

 

[GingerSeaMonster]

A ruck, with various players on the floor and standing around . Attacking scrum half has his hands on the ball which is still within the ruck about to lift and pass, and a member of the opposition comes through the middle (noone there to stop him), and takes the scrum half off the ball. I penalised him. I thought that if there was some air under the ball it would have been fine, but I felt that the scrum half had protection here?

Is this not just good counter-rucking by the defending player? The SH's team mates should have been stronger in guarding the ball.

Sounds like he has come through the gate so legal so far.

Has the SH got his hands on the ball? Yes so legal with regards to not tackling a player without the ball.

But we always hear don't play the 9 from the refs on telly.

Sounds like it was quite messy/chaotic after the player came through the ruck, if the team members of the counter-rucker didn't use the ball straight away, I would be tempted to re-start with a scrum to them as the original SH didn't use it from the ruck, and as he had hands on it was available to use.

Tough one, in the heat of the moment could be penalty for SH as he was taken out, or scrum to counter-rucking player's team as the SH didn't use it, that's if his SH didn't come in and use the ball.

 

[crossref]

it's customary to give a little bit of protection -- you don't want to end up in a game where every forward in both sides is focused on disrupting the 9 as he gets the ball out ... that wouldn't be fun

 

[irishref]

I'm genuinely in 2 minds on this one.

If an opponent is able to walk over the ruck and get to the ball unopposed - poor ruck defending and no obvious infringement.

However, I have a lot of sympathy for allowing the person in the scrum-half position the chance to get their pass away. And ball on the ground is still rucktime, regardless of hands on the ball or not.

We wouldn't allow an opponent in a ruck an opportunity to disrupt the pass by flapping their arms towards the ball, but in this scenario would a tackle by the opponent once the ball is off the ground be OK?

 

[Arabcheif]

Why give 9s special protection. We'd not give any other player the chance to pass it away. Player goes to ground to gather a loose ball, the contest starts straight away. There's no requirement to allow him to pass it away or get back up. So why treat 9s differently? For me rugby is a sport about contest, if there's no contest, there's no point.

If he's not had the ball in his hands, then fine, peep, penalty. But as long as he comes through legally and the 9 has the ball in hands, on or off the ground. Fair play.

 

[Decorily]

If an opponent is able to walk over the ruck and get to the ball unopposed - poor ruck defending and no obvious infringement.

Walking over a ruck is different to coming through a ruck.
A player stepping over a ruck is liable to be penalised for being offside.

 

[Blindside]

I get very confused with this because from my observation the actual 9 must be left but a player standing in for the 9 can be challenged particularly if he/she is a forward. I know this is not the law but it appears to be the reality of the law in its implementation?

 

[Not Kurt Weaver]

the fact that "scrum half protection" is a topic of discussion is indicative of the downfall

the only protection a scrum half should be afforded is a condom

I swear I once played a game referred to as rugby, but anymore I'm not sure