The Dombrant push.

Decorily

Coach/Referee
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
1,556
Post Likes
423
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
So it's OK to latch on to the ball carrier and 'accelerate' them into contact but not push them!

Edit.... Obviously the referee is the final arbiter of fact and if they decide it's dangerous etc then so be it!
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,479
Solutions
1
Post Likes
439
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
Law 9.11 The primary Law on Dangerous Play.
 

Jarrod Burton


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
725
Post Likes
208
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
Law 9.11 The primary Law on Dangerous Play.
Would have thought that 9.7(c) "Do anything that may lead the match officials to consider that an opponent has committed an infringement." would be more applicable.

Either way, my opinion is WB overstepped the mark. The tackler set (comparatively) high, drove the shoulder towards Marler and wouldn't have changed their height in time anyway.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,035
Post Likes
1,775
tackler doesn't change his approach. Marler doesn't change his approach.

the push may have got Marler to the contact area a zillionth of a nano second earlier than otherwise.

My 2p. FWTW.

didds
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,479
Solutions
1
Post Likes
439
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
Would have thought that 9.7(c) "Do anything that may lead the match officials to consider that an opponent has committed an infringement." would be more applicable.

Either way, my opinion is WB overstepped the mark. The tackler set (comparatively) high, drove the shoulder towards Marler and wouldn't have changed their height in time anyway.
That was brought in to prevent feigning an incident, when players started copying f*******ers, e.g. falling when not touched, holding a part of the body that hadn't been hit.

A similar incident was refereed in the same way at about the same time (Women's 6-Nations?). Perhaps it has been suggested to senior referees to watch out for it and penalise?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
In that same game we confirmed that it is OK for an opponent to push a ball carrier
So. ..

The law is very confused
It's an offence to jump into a tackle, is it (or will it soon be ) an offence to suddenly accelerate into a tackle ?
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,035
Post Likes
1,775
and given its quite often mooted that intent should not be taken into consideration, black will bump/shove white #1 who will then as a result clatter into white #2 who is the ball carrier who will be propelled forwards by the impact form his team mate, and then will have a head clash with a black defender and that will be .... nothing ?

[ chopperesque scenario #3476 ]
 

buff


Referees in Canada
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
421
Post Likes
70
Current Referee grade:
Select Grade
There was apparently a directive...
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,479
Solutions
1
Post Likes
439
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
In that same game we confirmed that it is OK for an opponent to push a ball carrier
So. ..
But not to push a ball carrier into another person. That's the difference.
 

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,479
Solutions
1
Post Likes
439
Current Referee grade:
Level 7

chbg


Referees in England
Joined
May 15, 2009
Messages
1,479
Solutions
1
Post Likes
439
Current Referee grade:
Level 7
And elsewhere: "a directive from World Rugby that precisely that action is to be outlawed because of the inherent danger".

But possibly not in our games, because nothing has cascaded down ...?
 

Jarrod Burton


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
725
Post Likes
208
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
And elsewhere: "a directive from World Rugby that precisely that action is to be outlawed because of the inherent danger".

But possibly not in our games, because nothing has cascaded down ...?
What a f*cking joke WR is becoming with constant fiddling and pissing around the edges at professional level but keeping the rest of us in the dark.

If pushing a team mate into contact is considered dangerous how do they justify allowing a pre-bound teammate to come through with the BC?
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,805
Post Likes
3,145
What a f*cking joke WR is becoming with constant fiddling and pissing around the edges at professional level but keeping the rest of us in the dark.

If pushing a team mate into contact is considered dangerous how do they justify allowing a pre-bound teammate to come through with the BC?
And was this directive cascaded to the players ? Presumably not, otherwise they wouldn't have done it.
So it was a "gotcha"
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,035
Post Likes
1,775
If pushing a team mate into contact is considered dangerous how do they justify allowing a pre-bound teammate to come through with the BC?
This.

Its yet another case of decisions being made seemingly with no holistic thought process as to how that impacts other existing areas of the game.


Which then seem to end up with other attempted tweaks to overcome them - rather than just reject the initial change that broke everything.
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
478
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
What a f*cking joke WR is becoming with constant fiddling and pissing around the edges at professional level but keeping the rest of us in the dark.

If pushing a team mate into contact is considered dangerous how do they justify allowing a pre-bound teammate to come through with the BC?

IMHO there is significantly greater acceleration of the ball carrier from a push than a from a latched-on teammate.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,035
Post Likes
1,775
surely that depends on the push ?
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
478
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
In the instances I've seen at elite level, there is significantly greater acceleration of the ball carrier from a push than a from a latched-on teammate.

From a risk assessment perspective, there is potential for greater acceleration from a push that is sufficient to typically catch out a defender and thus higher risk of a bad outcome. I don't feel the latch-on scenario carries the same potential acceleration and risk, and therefore does not need to be considered the same (ie penalty offence). (Just my opinion.)
 

Jarrod Burton


Referees in Australia
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
725
Post Likes
208
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
In the instances I've seen at elite level, there is significantly greater acceleration of the ball carrier from a push than a from a latched-on teammate.

From a risk assessment perspective, there is potential for greater acceleration from a push that is sufficient to typically catch out a defender and thus higher risk of a bad outcome. I don't feel the latch-on scenario carries the same potential acceleration and risk, and therefore does not need to be considered the same (ie penalty offence). (Just my opinion.)
Fair enough re acceleration, but velocity only forms part of the momentum calculation. Using very rough figures, a 100kg guy running at 4m/s would have a momentum of 400kg.m/s Add another 80kg of latched on player that becomes 720kg.m/s. If we were trying to push to accelerate the BC you'd need to nearly double their speed to get that momentum change.
 
Top