Tackled players pops ball to an opponent.

[Balones]

Law 15.6(d) just says what I have said. When the ball is in the tackle or near it you have to come through the gate. It says nothing about what you do when it leaves the tackle area because it doesn't have to. Normal laws apply. I.e. the ball has been passed (left the tackle area by not being on the floor) or been picked up. (Player in possession.) The laws says that the tackled player can do three things when tackled. Release the ball - ball still in tackle. Place the ball (on floor) - ball still in tackle unless has exceptionally long arms! Pass the ball - tackle over. If it goes to a supporting player - well done, play on. If it goes to a defending player - tough, play on.

 

[ChrisR]

10.4(f) doesn't apply. As soon as a player engages an opponent in the tackle area to clear him off the ball a ruck has formed.

Ian's point is that under Tackle Law 15 the prohibition against side entry only refers to a player going for the ball. It is covered by 16.5(c).

 

[OB..]

So you would also agree that a clear, uneqivocal description in Law of the forward pass would help, when 95% of spectators are flabbergasted by the concept of momentum/relativity, and Dutch referees who do understand the concept want it unequivocal?

THe RFU made an unequivocal statement in1948. It really is about time the IRB followed suit. By posting a video explaining it ... oh, wait a minute.

 

[Ian_Cook]

10.4(f)

I'll see your 10.4 (f) and raise you a 15.7 (d)

 

[Pegleg]

Normal laws apply. I.e. the ball has been passed (left the tackle area by not being on the floor) or ...

You see this is the problem. This is not, at least I can't find it, in the law book. So what is your law justification for assuming it?

 

[Taff]

You see this is the problem. This is not, at least I can't find it, in the law book. So what is your law justification for assuming it?

Exactly. Whereas "near" IS defined .... as 1m.

The only question really is 1m from where?

 

[Balones]

You see this is the problem. This is not, at least I can't find it, in the law book. So what is your law justification for assuming it?

I will not deny that I would like to see the IRB clarify when exactly the tackle is over. It has been done (to a varying degree of success I admit) for the lineout, ruck and maul. What we have is a defined situation as to what is a tackle and tackle situation is and what players have to do when there is a tackle. Outside of that we have to make some assumptions; one being that outside of definition and actions permitted by players we have an open play situation. Without taking the position that I have outlined we would have an untenable situation for the referee. What would you (or any ref) do in the following scenario?

A tackle occurs. There is a very close support player. The ball carrier pops the ball to the support player. The ball only travels 600mm up from the tackle. (Easy height to catch.) Does an equally close chaser/defender then have to allow the support player to run two paces before tackling him because he is still in the tackle zone? According to some according to some previous comments, the defender would be offside. The defender cannot intercept the ‘pop’ and has to avoid the ball? I personally have never seen a referee prevent or penalise such actions. I believe the only thing a referee can do to keep credibility would be to interpret the law in relation to the tackle as I have outlined.

The whole problem revolves around the scenario looking wrong rather than being incorrect.

What about at junior level? Some players aren’t a metre tall in the first place!

Any law reference? No, my opinion has been based on discussing the matter with a couple of well-known international referees a few years ago. I’m desperately trying to find the written communications I had with them about the matter but since then I have changed computers several times and I cannot find the dialogue. That is the reason why I have delayed my response.

 

[Pegleg]

So, in short, you can't. I think you therefore, need to be a little less definite in your comments. In your opinion? Maybe right. Clearly? Clearly not!

I'd judge the situation as I saw it at the time. I've already stated my opinion on the matter in question. It does not matter what "looks right or wrong". We must strive for what IS right. I'd referee the situation with regard to what appeared clear and obvious to me at the time.

Would you regard a pass where the ball is still "near" to the "tackle" as being the same as a "released" ball that due to momentum of the tackle goes upwards in a similar trajectory? We've seen that some posters see a pass as leaving the tackle zone as soon as it leave the hands (so 5 cm) would it be the same for the released ball travels 10cm in the same direction?

The law makers have not specifically said that a pass leaves the tackle zone before it has traveled past "near". So why treat the pass differently they do not. Until they do clarify others will have different opinions to you. Neither of you can claim their opinion is right with such gusto.

 

[Dickie E]

So, in short, you can't. I think you therefore, need to be a little less definite in your comments. In your opinion? Maybe right. Clearly? Clearly not!

Indeed. Post #65 24 hours ago kicked off with:

It is very clear and simple.

LOL

 

[Browner]

If i see the ball 'passed' out of/on completion of/immediately following a tackle, then I'm pleased.

As my slide ruler [used to calculate arrival angles and distance from the epi centre ( wherever that is???) of the tackle ] can then be put back into my pocket for now !

 

[Ian_Cook]

Again, I go back to this, and I want someone of the other side of the debate from me to answer this

What if the tackled player pops the pass to a team-mate running in support, right next to the tackle, not in the gate, and less than 1m away?

Are you going to ping him for side entry?

 

[Pegleg]

It would depend on whether or not I felt the ball had left the tackle area and if I felt it had not, whether or not it was clear and obvious. In al probability it would not be C & O so probably not.

 

[damo]

Again, I go back to this, and I want someone of the other side of the debate from me to answer this

What if the tackled player pops the pass to a team-mate running in support, right next to the tackle, not in the gate, and less than 1m away?

Are you going to ping him for side entry?

Good luck with selling that to the captain.

 

[Ian_Cook]

Good luck with selling that to the captain.

That is exactly what I was thinking. Not only will you not be able to sell that to the captain, I doubt if you'll be able to sell it to your assessor either.

If you wouldn't PK the team-mate, how can you justify PKing the opponent in the same situation.
Remember, 15.6 (d) applies to all "other" players from both teams.

 

[ChrisR]

Again, I go back to this, and I want someone of the other side of the debate from me to answer this

What if the tackled player pops the pass to a team-mate running in support, right next to the tackle, not in the gate, and less than 1m away?

Are you going to ping him for side entry?

A tackle is akin to the Big Bang. In the sub-nano seconds following the event it's difficult to see what exactly happens and the Laws of rugby, like the laws of physics, get a little clearer as the event unfolds.

The ball is frequently offloaded before the tackle is complete so no tackle law applies. In Ian's scenario I would not see it as a side entry besides the fact that it would be difficult to be within 1m and not be in the gate.

The tackle laws do two things: They attempt to clean up what would otherwise be a total pileup and they give a tacit advantage to the team going forward. Therefore, the teammate of the BC can enter the tackle area going forward whereas the defenders have to go past the tackle and come back thru the gate to contest. I think that is a just reward for going forward.

And that brings up a different scenario. A kick fielded by an isolated player with all his teammates if front of him and a chaser from the kicking team makes the tackle. Would you PK the catchers teammate if he came back thru the wrong side of the gate to take the pop pass? I think you would have to.

Is there an emoticon for Chopperesque?

 

[Ian_Cook]

Is there an emoticon for Chopperesque?

 

[OB..]

It does not matter what "looks right or wrong". We must strive for what IS right.

Since we are arguing about what IS right, that is effectively impossible.

When the law is unclear, the referee's only options are to do (a) what is widely accepted (if known); or (b) what seems to make sense to him.

As an assessor I would note the problem and include it in my report as a problem in the hope of authoritative advice.

 

[Pegleg]

Surely we strive, when we referee, to make the right call not what looks right. Surely that is a given. Of course it is not always possible so to do. However, we should not default into making calls to "please the crowd". I'd rather make what I feel is the right call and, if required, have the chance to discuss it with the assessor and those more senior than I. That way I'll learn and develop.

 

[Rushforth]

Surely we strive, when we referee, to make the right call not what looks right. Surely that is a given.

Surely what we think is right is what we think looks right?

 

[Rich]

Play on. Good call. Move on.... Nothing to see here...