TWOL - who is part of the tackle?

[crossref]

in this picture blue tackled red, and did not engage, so a TWOL is formed - a tackle with offside lines.

more red players have arrived to the tackle and bound on (more or less)

Q1 - which of the red players are 'part of the tackle' -- can you arrive at a tackle and become part of if it?

Q2 - is the ball out


https://www.dropbox.com/s/gjv7f9a9xist3wv/Screenshot 2019-02-09 12.06.00.png?dl=0

This is taken from SA Referees who discuss it here
https://www.sareferees.com/laws/view/2831402/

 

[Flish]

Saw this at the time, what more annoyed me was the red 9 was allowed to pull the ball back with his foot from halfway back on that conga line, he literally walked along the line, never behind the back foot (hindmost what not), if they want the advantage of that length of ruck / twol then they need to work the ball back legally

 

[Rich_NL]

For me, a metre back from the tackle I'm calling ball out.

 

[Dickie E]

and Q3 - does the ref call 'use it' at a TWOL? This ref certainly did.

 

[Zebra1922]

Well regardless of whether the joining players are part of the tackle, several in the chain are not bound so I'm calling ball is out and available to play.

In general I referee the TWOL as a ruck, therefore players can join the tackle area extending the area the ball remains within the tackle, but I want them bound properly or its either out or they are obstructing. And I call "Use it" which I believe is unpopular here but I haven't found a better management technique yet.

 

[crossref]

Well regardless of whether the joining players are part of the tackle, several in the chain are not bound so I'm calling ball is out and available to play.

Would you announce ball out ?

 

[CrouchTPEngage]

I would probably manage it with a "Bind fully!" warning first and , if no change, a "Ball out !" call soon after and a friendly chat/warning on the way to the lineout which normally follows a box-kick here.
I remember once getting feeback about allowing a number 8 at the scume to slip to a "hand-only" bind as he dribbled the ball at te base of a scrum. If you take the p1ss binding weakly then take the consequences.

 

[Zebra1922]

Would you announce ball out ?

Yes I would, and I do this at rucks. This is to be fair to everyone as the defending team will rarely be sure or know if/when you view the ball is out. Let’s the attacking team know to get a move as well as a burly defending will shortly be heading their way!

 

[Phil E]

The red players to the right of Blue 1 are not part of the tackle as they are not bound.
The ball is more than a meter from the tackle area, so tackle over, play on.

Is that out Sir?

Yes

 

[beckett50]

Agree with Phil E.

If asked then answer as you see it.

FWIW Blue #1 is offside and so cannot challenge the Red #9

'Showbiz' rugby :knuppel2:

 

[WoodyOne]

I agree with what seems to be the consensus here i.e. that the ball is out. So why bother joining a thread that is resolved?

Because I want to opine on what I think is a red herring about whether the chain of players binding on (or not) are 'part of the tackle'. 14.10 talks about "any player in the tackle or on their feet over the ball" which implies that player on their feet over the ball is not 'in the tackle': that's a role reserved for the tackled ball carrier and the tackler(s), the latter of which are defined by their bringing the ball carrier to ground, and going to ground with them (if they stay on their feet, they are simply an "other"). If the player over the ball isn't in the tackle then nor is anyone else who binds onto them.

So that centipede of players trying to give the 9 room for a box kick is irrelevant for defining the tackle area: as soon as they move the ball >c1m away from the actual tackle area, it's out.

Regarding Blue 1 and whether he is offside, it therefore depends on when he arrived in that position. If it was after the ball got to where we see it now, then I'd say he's fine.