[6N] Ireland v England

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#82
I'm happy. NH acting SH as he wasn't bound in and therefore not a participant.....but it's not a ruck so I am guessing who he could be bound on to in that instance.
Well my question was what if it was a ruck? If NH is not bound, he's not the SH (the SH is obviously behind him with his hands on the ball), NH is offside AND handling the ball in the ruck.
I appreciate you believe it was only a tackle, I'm not so sure the referee would agree which makes me scratch my head even more as to why he allowed it.
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#83
Well my question was what if it was a ruck? If NH is not bound, he's not the SH (the SH is obviously behind him with his hands on the ball), NH is offside AND handling the ball in the ruck.
I appreciate you believe it was only a tackle, I'm not so sure the referee would agree which makes me scratch my head even more as to why he allowed it.
It wasn't a ruck and to call it such is hypothetical and I can't "magic in" someone for NH to bind to which would then make him, "handling in the ruck"/ or offside obstruction or whatever, when Care touches the ball, NH with his hands still on it.

As for the next phase I haven't as yet checked so reserve judgement.:D
 

Camquin

Rugby Club Member
#84
With a replay, a microscope and the law book I think it is just a tackle, and good play.
In a match I would have probably have blown for offside and not spotted the trip.
That might be one of the many reasons why I am not a top level referee
 

crossref

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/england.p
#85
I wonder if the referee had not quite decided, in his own mind, whether it was a ruck or a tackle.. Because it didn't seem to matter..
.. Until, unexpectedly, it did matter!

Hence a moment of hesitation and uncertainty so that he neither blows nor calls play on..

.. and is probably not too much inclined to worry about what caused the fortunate stumble, which meant that, luckily, it didn't matter again.

Or maybe that is the sort of thing that happens only to grass roots refs, and not to top class ones :)
 

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#91
Did NH play the ball from behind the ball?


(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.
Sanction: Penalty kick
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#92
(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.
Sanction: Penalty kick
.........not expressing a view then. Or are you just lighting the blue touch paper?:)

.......happy myself to commit so far as I am allowed, not clear and obvious that he didn't, so play on.
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#93
I haven't seen the video but...

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.
Sanction: Penalty kick


... doesn't say that the other players must enter directly behind the ball, only behind the ball, which means anywhere on their own side of the ball within the limits of the width of the tackled player and the tackler.
.

 

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#94
I haven't seen the video but...

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.
Sanction: Penalty kick


... doesn't say that the other players must enter directly behind the ball, only behind the ball, which means anywhere on their own side of the ball within the limits of the width of the tackled player and the tackler.
.

I know what you're saying. You are saying that 15.6(d) describes how a player enters the tackle zone i.e. through the gate.
But once again, perhaps a poor choice of phrasing, can also be taken to mean that a player must be behind the ball to play it (i.e. between the ball and his team's DBL) by this, "...other players who play the ball must do so from behind the ball.....",
 

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#95
.........not expressing a view then. Or are you just lighting the blue touch paper?:)

.......happy myself to commit so far as I am allowed, not clear and obvious that he didn't, so play on.
No, I had meant to include the Law text in my previous post.
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#96
He Capture.JPG

....just about summarises the situation at the point tackle complete. NH relatively static but in contact with JL as he goes down so already in the tackle area and his hind foot in between JL's outstretched legs.

Far side MV playing the man without the ball as has been suggested elsewhere.
 
Last edited:

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
#97
View attachment 3543

....just about summarises the situation at the point tackle complete. NH relatively static but in contact with JL as he goes down and his hind foot in between JL's outstretched legs.

Far side MV playing the man without the ball as has been suggested elsewhere.
It's an interesting scenario worthy of discussion at Society/Association meetings.
From the still frame you have posted, I don't think anyone would argue that 20W's entry wasn't legal. It's his actions after he moves ahead of the ball that raise questions along with 17W's clear out that starts before the tackle, Green player on the floor "tripping" 20W and from memory, a Green player falling on 20W when he is on the ground??(not sure about the last one so will need to relook at video).

For me, the situation falls into that old category of "If it looks wrong, it probably is".
 

ChuckieB

Rugby Club Member
#98
It's an interesting scenario worthy of discussion at Society/Association meetings.
From the still frame you have posted, I don't think anyone would argue that 20W's entry wasn't legal. It's his actions after he moves ahead of the ball that raise questions along with 17W's clear out that starts before the tackle, Green player on the floor "tripping" 20W and from memory, a Green player falling on 20W when he is on the ground??(not sure about the last one so will need to relook at video).

For me, the situation falls into that old category of "If it looks wrong, it probably is".
for me MV,s clear out looks in that category but I am fine with NH. On balance then it becomes a penalty which we never now tend to see.

- - - Updated - - -

It's an interesting scenario worthy of discussion at Society/Association meetings.
From the still frame you have posted, I don't think anyone would argue that 20W's entry wasn't legal. It's his actions after he moves ahead of the ball that raise questions along with 17W's clear out that starts before the tackle, Green player on the floor "tripping" 20W and from memory, a Green player falling on 20W when he is on the ground??(not sure about the last one so will need to relook at video).

For me, the situation falls into that old category of "If it looks wrong, it probably is".
for me MV,s clear out looks in that category but I am fine with NH. On balance then it becomes a penalty which we never now tend to see.
 

Ian_Cook

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/newzealan
#99
I know what you're saying. You are saying that 15.6(d) describes how a player enters the tackle zone i.e. through the gate.
But once again, perhaps a poor choice of phrasing, can also be taken to mean that a player must be behind the ball to play it (i.e. between the ball and his team's DBL) by this, "...other players who play the ball must do so from behind the ball.....",
I don't think so.

Why does the law say directly behind the player but not directly behind the ball?

To me, in this context, behind the ball means from anywhere across the field that is behind the ball, then a further limitation is the width of the tackler and tackled player on the ground.

AIUI the Gate....




A green player entering at "B" is "behind the ball" and "directly behind the the tackler closest his goal line" therefore he is entitled to play the ball from where he is standing. He does not have to move over to "A" to be directly behind the ball. The Law does not require that.
 

The Fat

<img src="http://www.rugbyrefs.com/flags/australia
I don't think so.

Why does the law say directly behind the player but not directly behind the ball?

To me, in this context, behind the ball means from anywhere across the field that is behind the ball, then a further limitation is the width of the tackler and tackled player on the ground.

AIUI the Gate....




A green player entering at "B" is "behind the ball" and "directly behind the the tackler closest his goal line" therefore he is entitled to play the ball from where he is standing. He does not have to move over to "A" to be directly behind the ball. The Law does not require that.
I think you have misinterpreted my first response to your post. As you say, the Law says from behind the ball and not DIRECTLY behind the ball. As you say, " behind the ball means from anywhere across the field that is behind the ball", and I agree with this statement.
What I'm questioning is that 20W ends up in front of the ball when he plays it. Is that allowed?
Incidentally, if a green player entered the tackle zone along the path of the red arrow nearest "A", he would be behind the ball but would not be entering from directly behind the tackled player or the tackler closest to those players’ goal line. So why the need to stipulate "behind the ball" when talking about a player's entry? Coming from "directly behind the tackled player or the tackler closest to those players’ goal line" would cover all of that. That is why I threw it out there that the phrase, "other players who play the ball must do so from behind the ball", might be specific to a player's position when he actually plays the ball and not necessarily refer to his entry.
Just throwing it out there for further discussion.