USA Rugby Game Management Tackle

[woody]

Does anyone else see the top two scenarios on the left as eerily similar to the accepted sequence on the right? The message I get is if you drive the player already off his feet, everything is dandy.

 

[Phil E]

For me Pic 2 (on right) shows the red arriving player going off his feet. :nono:
The text says he has made the ball available, but who to?
Is it now a fair contest?

They are showing what we see on the TV , but this is not what the law states, or how we normally referee it.

 

[SimonSmith]

I'm not commenting. I daren't.

 

[Phil E]

I'm not commenting. I daren't.

Yes Minister

 

[scrumpox2]

The message seems to be if the player's action positively delivers clean ball his sin is forgiven.

 

[OB..]

For me, Blue is obstructing. He is not over the ball so a ruck does not form when the Red player binds on to him.

 

[Dickie E]

The message seems to be if the player's action positively delivers clean ball his sin is forgiven.

I'm OK with 2 on the right. Its what is called a forklift cleanout. Only way the blue player can be moved to make the ball available.

 

[SimonSmith]

Here we go...

My yardstick is "is safe competition for the ball being allowed or denied?"

The only ostensible difference I see between #2 on the right and the others is the head position, not where the weight is being carried.

I can guarantee one of thrtee things next week (I have this week off):
If I ping it: "Ref, it's allowed"
If I don't ping it, and he gets forklifted: "Ref, he's around my shoulders and neck"
If I don't ping it and there's no forklift: "Ref, he's off his feet. And the only way I can move him is by going high"

Damned if I do, damned if I don't. Thanks USA Rugby. Again. (side note: The last week, from a non refereeing rugby perspective, has not been a good one, and I'm venting)

 

[Phil E]

I can guarantee one of thrtee things next week (I have this week off):
If I ping it: "Ref, it's allowed"
If I don't ping it, and he gets forklifted: "Ref, he's around my shoulders and neck"
If I don't ping it and there's no forklift: "Ref, he's off his feet. And the only way I can move him is by going high"

Easy, Peasy....ping all three comments for dissent :biggrin:

 

[Bryan]

I agree with Dickie RE: The images on the right.

It's known as a "Low Clearout". If, by going to clearout an opponent who is low from the ground, a player goes off his feet to make contact and move the player off the ball in order to make the ball available, that player is liable to penalty if the clearout is unsuccessful and the player remains over the ball.

If the ball is made available, play on.

I agree that it is not supported in law. At all. Show me in law where it says "clearout" (it's called "Obstruction") and I can defend my position under law. For the team being I'll refer to "General accepted practices in the game".

 

[Ian_Cook]

Show me in law where it says "clearout" (it's called "Obstruction") and I can defend my position under law.

For me, Blue is obstructing. He is not over the ball so a ruck does not form when the Red player binds on to him.

I can't show you the word "clearout" but I can show you the Law which makes obstruction legal under those circumstances.

Law 15.7
(d) Players on their feet must not charge or obstruct an opponent who is not near the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

If you CANNOT obstruct opponents who are NOT near the ball, then it stands to reason that you CAN obstruct opponents who ARE near the ball, otherwise, there would be no reason for this Law, since

Law 10.1
(d) Blocking the ball. A player must not intentionally move or stand in a position that prevents an opponent from playing the ball.
Sanction: Penalty kick

would appear to have it covered.

It seems to me that 15.7 (d) is effectively a limited exception to 10.1 (d); limited in that it only applies in a tackle.

 

[OB..]

Ian - an over-subtle inference which IMHO is wrong. The negative does not necessarily imply the positive, particularly when the positive is clearly prohibited by Law.

15.7 (d) in fact says that the Blue player must not obstruct the Red player. It is indeed aimed at the illegal clear-out ie one that does not directly involve a ruck.