Under 11's New Rules Of Play

[AntonyGoodman]

Thanks for the clarification.

Good to have your contributions

Thanks,

Antony

 

[Dan Cottrell]

Sorry to continue this thread...
I was coaching at a conference yesterday and still had to field these questions on the NROP (PS I am a big advocate)

1. U11s. What is a maul exactly?
"A maul is formed when the BC and T are joined by two additional players from either the defending or attacking team."
Does that mean it could be BC+T plus two defenders?
2. U11s. A ruck is formed of 2 v 2 players, but not 1 v 2 or 2 v 1, or 1 v 1?
3. The next arriving player must pass the ball away from a ruck. But if the ball is out of the ruck he can pick and go. So he could drag it out of the ruck with his foot. Now the ball is out and he can pick and go (m)iii.
4. At 10s or 11s. Both teams ruck, but the attacking team (say), drive over the ball and the opposition hardly engage, in fact conspire to hardly ruck at all. The opposition then step in and take the ball...my own interpretation is that the attack have a free go at the ball, but I think I might be taken to task for this one.

Who does one contact for the "official" line on this?

 

[didds]

seems to me that definition in 1) is mangled and does not necessarily reflect the laws of the game.

a maul to me would be attack1(BC)+D1+A2+D2

didds

 

[Phil E]

seems to me that definition in 1) is mangled and does not necessarily reflect the laws of the game.

a maul to me would be attack1(BC)+D1+A2+D2

didds

...................or ball carrier, plus one from each side.

[LAWS]A maul begins when a player carrying the ball is held by one or more opponents,
and one or more of the ball carrier’s team mates bind on the ball carrier.[/LAWS]

 

[Stormkahn]

Sorry to continue this thread...
I was coaching at a conference yesterday and still had to field these questions on the NROP (PS I am a big advocate)

1. U11s. What is a maul exactly?
"A maul is formed when the BC and T are joined by two additional players from either the defending or attacking team."
Does that mean it could be BC+T plus two defenders?
2. U11s. A ruck is formed of 2 v 2 players, but not 1 v 2 or 2 v 1, or 1 v 1?
3. The next arriving player must pass the ball away from a ruck. But if the ball is out of the ruck he can pick and go. So he could drag it out of the ruck with his foot. Now the ball is out and he can pick and go (m)iii.
4. At 10s or 11s. Both teams ruck, but the attacking team (say), drive over the ball and the opposition hardly engage, in fact conspire to hardly ruck at all. The opposition then step in and take the ball...my own interpretation is that the attack have a free go at the ball, but I think I might be taken to task for this one.

Who does one contact for the "official" line on this?

My 2p;

1) Yes (which will also certainly mean the defenders will get the ball one way or another).
2) By the letter of the law yes but...I have been advised that you should call ruck when there's any contest for the ball so 1v1 would count. The reason being that at this age group they just don't form clean rucks and by declaring it a ruck immediately you create a clear situation for off side etc. Otherwise it seems to end up a free for all most of the time. 8m holds an element of contradiction to because it implies a 2v0 is also a ruck.
3) If he's dragging it out he's not passing so blow your whistle!
4) If they rucked at all it's a ruck, as per 2 call a ruck immediately then the situation doesn't occur.

cheers,

Dave.

 

[AntonyGoodman]

Sorry to continue this thread...
I was coaching at a conference yesterday and still had to field these questions on the NROP (PS I am a big advocate)

1. U11s. What is a maul exactly?
"A maul is formed when the BC and T are joined by two additional players from either the defending or attacking team."
Does that mean it could be BC+T plus two defenders?
2. U11s. A ruck is formed of 2 v 2 players, but not 1 v 2 or 2 v 1, or 1 v 1?
3. The next arriving player must pass the ball away from a ruck. But if the ball is out of the ruck he can pick and go. So he could drag it out of the ruck with his foot. Now the ball is out and he can pick and go (m)iii.
4. At 10s or 11s. Both teams ruck, but the attacking team (say), drive over the ball and the opposition hardly engage, in fact conspire to hardly ruck at all. The opposition then step in and take the ball...my own interpretation is that the attack have a free go at the ball, but I think I might be taken to task for this one.

1. If you take the rules literally, then I read this as any combination of four players (but no more than six).
2. This is just wrong, I would go with @Stormkhan and say any contest 1 vs 1 up to, but no more than, 2 vs 2 is a ruck.
3. Agree with @Stormkhan
4. Is a tough one in the adult game, here are the things that I am thinking apply for us:

[LAWS]U11 NRoP: 13. b)At the tackle, offside occurs at the time of the tackle where the offside line is the hindmost part of the tackled player and tackler. All the other players from the defending team must retire towards their own goal line until they are behind the hindmost part of the tackled player and tackler.[/LAWS]

[LAWS]IRB: 15.6 (d) At a tackle or near to a tackle, other players who play the ball must do so from behind the ball and from directly behind the tackled player or the tackler closest to those players’ goal line.[/LAWS] i.e. Must come through the 'gate'

So in your scenario (if I read it right): Red BC gets tackled by blue, next red player arrives and stands over the ball waiting to ruck but no blue player commits, so no ruck.

Blue can't just wander round the side and pick up the ball because of 15.6 (d) above, to contest the ball they must go through the 'gate' and engage in a ruck with the red player standing over the ball. Technically this red player over the ball could be called for obstructing, but in practice this never gets called as far as I can see.

Thanks,

Antony

 

[Browner]

My 2p;

1) Yes (which will also certainly mean the defenders will get the ball one way or another).
2) By the letter of the law yes but...I have been advised that you should call ruck when there's any contest for the ball so 1v1 would count. The reason being that at this age group they just don't form clean rucks and by declaring it a ruck immediately you create a clear situation for off side etc. Otherwise it seems to end up a free for all most of the time. 8m holds an element of contradiction to because it implies a 2v0 is also a ruck.
3) If he's dragging it out he's not passing so blow your whistle!
4) If they rucked at all it's a ruck, as per 2 call a ruck immediately then the situation doesn't occur.

cheers,

Dave.

Q? what is the point of the RFU (presumably deliberately??) varying the standard Law definition at U11, if some U11 practicioners merely ignore it and revert to the standard Maul/Ruck construction criteria , presumably some coaches/refs will still vary.... and this proliferates referee/player confusion ?:nono:

Either lobby the RFU to align to 'standard Law' or whistle to the variation ... Uniformity must surely be the aim on such a basic age level.

Or maybe preparing the u11s players for a lifetime of referee interpretation difference IS their learning ?!!? :shrug:

 

[AntonyGoodman]

I have asked for clarification through the club - I will wait and see what comes back.

Thanks,

Antony

 

[didds]

sorry Phil... yes, i agree. i got myself confused!

didds

 

[AntonyGoodman]

Q? what is the point of the RFU (presumably deliberately??) varying the standard Law definition at U11, if some U11 practicioners merely ignore it and revert to the standard Maul/Ruck construction criteria , presumably some coaches/refs will still vary.... and this proliferates referee/player confusion ?:nono:

Either lobby the RFU to align to 'standard Law' or whistle to the variation ... Uniformity must surely be the aim on such a basic age level.

Or maybe preparing the u11s players for a lifetime of referee interpretation difference IS their learning ?!!? :shrug:

I think it is clear that in some cases the RFU rules are just poorly written and not clear enough. I think as long as you talk to the opposition before the game about these sort of known points of potential difference, and agree how they are going to be reff'd, we are all ok. Just wish someone had proofed the rules properly before releasing them on us

Thanks to this forum I am building a list of 'discussion points' to have with opposition before the game(s) to make sure everthing is clear and agreed.

Thanks,

Antony

 

[Browner]

I think it is clear that in some cases the RFU rules are just poorly written and not clear enough. I think as long as you talk to the opposition before the game about these sort of known points of potential difference, and agree how they are going to be reff'd, we are all ok. Just wish someone had proofed the rules properly before releasing them on us

Thanks to this forum I am building a list of 'discussion points' to have with opposition before the game(s) to make sure everthing is clear and agreed.

Thanks,

Antony

Even with 'pre match' discussion, you will still get variable application based on coach/referee preference UNLESS you get countrywide uniformity.

Maul & Ruck looks clearly written, albeit they vary the standard law position, & to this end RFU regs should surely be followed at this age?!

 

[AntonyGoodman]

Maul & Ruck looks clearly written, albeit they vary the standard law position, & to this end RFU regs should surely be followed at this age?!

Do you think that they meant to say that no ruck is formed unless you have a 2 vs 2 contest for the ball? What is it called when you have a 1 vs 1? Is it even legal if it is not a ruck? Don't think this is what they meant at all. Happy to have it all confirmed by the RFU, or someone, but I can't see how this is even workable. Happy to hear how you think the breakdown might work.

Thanks,

Antony

 

[Browner]

Do you think that they meant to say that no ruck is formed unless you have a 2 vs 2 contest for the ball? What is it called when you have a 1 vs 1? Is it even legal if it is not a ruck? Don't think this is what they meant at all. Happy to have it all confirmed by the RFU, or someone, but I can't see how this is even workable. Happy to hear how you think the breakdown might work.

Thanks,

Antony

Anthony, we've had similar debates on other age grade regs..... Deliberate or inadvertent error...debate

Do I think the RFU spent time with the various focus groups concocting an age specific set of rules and then errored on the wording....no I don't.

I think it more likely that the want to phase the players towards the adult game gradually.

If the RFU confirm they've errored, then please inform us, its always possible (albeit I believe in this case its deliberate wording rather than error)

In the meantime, if the ball is on the floor then the prescribed number of players 8c says x2 from each side can try to push each other off it.....they won't know any different so it should be acheiveable, they can progress to 1x1 rucking and then to saddlerolling/collapsing when they are older !

 

[Stormkahn]

Q? what is the point of the RFU (presumably deliberately??) varying the standard Law definition at U11, if some U11 practicioners merely ignore it and revert to the standard Maul/Ruck construction criteria , presumably some coaches/refs will still vary.... and this proliferates referee/player confusion ?:nono:

Either lobby the RFU to align to 'standard Law' or whistle to the variation ... Uniformity must surely be the aim on such a basic age level.

Or maybe preparing the u11s players for a lifetime of referee interpretation difference IS their learning ?!!? :shrug:

All good points and I don't really have the experience to answer with confidence.

How do we feed back or lobby the RFU over this?

What I have seen so far is that you just don't get a nice clean 2v2 ruck, mostly it's less which means it's still open play.

With BC + T + 2 +2 you have nearly a 3rd of the team involved and generally they're smart enough to stay out. I have very rarely seen a ruck formed as per the nrop. Since its not a ruck players can run through from an onside position and pick the ball up?

Allowing rucks to be called for 1v1 clears up the situation for me.

Dave.

 

[AntonyGoodman]

Just to follow up with up you guys. I asked our local RFU to clarify some of these discussion points, they disagreed amongst themselves about the regulations

This has now gone to Twickenham, I will post back again when/if I get an update.

Thanks for everybody's input, it really helps for us newbies to get some alternative thoughts from all who have contributed here.

Antony

 

[AntonyGoodman]

So had the reply from HQ to clarify a few things, I am sure you will be receiving the updated rules via your club in the usual email chain manner

Scrum half must pass from the base of the scrum
[LAWS]12. g) Clarification Amendment – November 2014
The scrum half must pass the ball from the base of the scrum. He/She cannot run with the ball.[/LAWS]

Clarified the ambiguity question that Dan raised in this thread about free pass or scrum?
[LAWS]7. a) ii. A free pass is used: once forward momentum has been stopped and the ball has not been played away from the contact area.
Clarification Amendment – November 2014
Scrum at incomplete maul/ruck (not a free pass).[/LAWS]

For the ruck they have added this clarification:
[LAWS]8. m) Clarification Amendment – November 2014
Progression of actions for supporting players at ruck.
Up to two supporting players may:
i. Rip the ball from the ball carrier but must then pass the ball immediately to a team mate; or
ii. Pick up the ball and pass away from the contact area; or
iii. If a ruck is not formed, pick up the ball and run; or
iv. Join to form a ruck but must do so from their own side (i.e. from the direction of their own goal line) and drive over the ball, taking their immediate opponent away from the ball
At the back of a ruck the next arriving player must pass the ball to another player.[/LAWS]

The maul regulation still reads like this (my emphasis):

[LAWS]8. b) A “maul” is formed when the ball carrier and tackler are joined by two additional players from either the defending or attacking team. No more than 3 players from either side (including the ball carrier and tackler) can be involved in the maul.[/LAWS]

I notice that at the edited regulations at U10, U12 and U13 all read like this (my emphasis):

[LAWS]A “maul” is formed when the ball carrier and tackler are joined by one additional player from either the defending or attacking team. {insert line here about numbers allowed for the age group}[/LAWS]

I have gone back to the RFU with my thoughts on this maul question and will update again when I get something back.

Still, at least that clears up three of the questions we raised here

Thanks,

Antony