Held Up Over The Line ... Or Not?

[dfobrien]

Australia v New Zealand in the women's seven final in New York.

New Zealand 12 breaks for the line but is tackled from behind, and held up over the in-goal line. Ball clearly does not touch the ground. She retains possession for a considerable period of time, and rolls back into the field of play, eventually releasing the ball. A teammate picks it up and drops over the line and a try is awarded.

As always, I am not a ref, but ... this one looked odd to me. I'd have thought the ruling should have been either (1) held-up, so goalline dropout, or (2) not releasing, so penalty to Australia. I'd have gone for (2) since she held onto the ball for some time, even after she rolled back into the field of play, and there were defenders grappling for it. But I know things are different when players are over the goalline. So did the referee get this one right?

Around 2:19 on this video: Australia v New Zealand

 

[smeagol]

The referee (Kat Roche, whose accolades go without saying) is in a much better spot to see if the ball is in-goal. Given that the BC got back into the FoP to place the ball, I see nothing wrong with what happened, outside of Australia's poor ruck defense.

 

[Decorily]

Not sure how you think it should be a penalty for not releasing!

 

[didds]

the entire play from criossing the line on her back and rolling back to place the ball in the FoP was way ubnder 1 second and a fluid movement.

the subsequent goal line defence with a post on both sides was woeful!

 

[dfobrien]

Are we watching the same video? Tackle (infield) is 2:185 on the video, held up on her back in goal 2:19, ball eventually released 2:23 - that's between four and five seconds, and with defenders grappling for the ball throughout. Yes, Australia's defence, and potentially their jackalling, was woeful, but she held onto the ball for a LONG time. Seemed long to me in real-time, even before slowing it down. That's why I asked.

 

[Decorily]

Are we watching the same video? Tackle (infield) is 2:185 on the video, held up on her back in goal 2:19, ball eventually released 2:23 - that's between four and five seconds, and with defenders grappling for the ball throughout. Yes, Australia's defence, and potentially their jackalling, was woeful, but she held onto the ball for a LONG time. Seemed long to me in real-time, even before slowing it down. That's why I asked.

Not sure what you mean by 'grappling' but I don't see any legal jackler entitled to be rewarded!

 

[smeagol]

Are we watching the same video? Tackle (infield) is 2:185 on the video, held up on her back in goal 2:19, ball eventually released 2:23 - that's between four and five seconds, and with defenders grappling for the ball throughout. Yes, Australia's defence, and potentially their jackalling, was woeful, but she held onto the ball for a LONG time. Seemed long to me in real-time, even before slowing it down. That's why I asked.

The delay in the ball being released was because the tackler wasn't releasing the BC, which given the smart play of the BC to smoothly get back into the field of play, I'm fine with rewarding and see it as excellent preventative refereeing.

 

[Harry]

But in this case the player could PLAY the ball back to a team mate

 

[SimonSmith]

The delay in the ball being released was because the tackler wasn't releasing the BC, which given the smart play of the BC to smoothly get back into the field of play, I'm fine with rewarding and see it as excellent preventative refereeing.

If there isn't a tackle, is there a tackler with obligations?

 

[smeagol]

If there isn't a tackle, is there a tackler with obligations?

Once the BC goes back into the field of play and goes to ground, yes.

 

[Rich_NL]

Are we watching the same video? Tackle (infield) is 2:185 on the video, held up on her back in goal 2:19, ball eventually released 2:23 - that's between four and five seconds, and with defenders grappling for the ball throughout. Yes, Australia's defence, and potentially their jackalling, was woeful, but she held onto the ball for a LONG time. Seemed long to me in real-time, even before slowing it down. That's why I asked.

It's hard to see at the angle, to me she looks like she's trying to place the ball back (as part of the fluid movement) but is impeded from doing so by the tackler. Having said that, if the ref had blown up quickly for held up it would have been pretty uncontroversial.

 

[Decorily]

It's hard to see at the angle, to me she looks like she's trying to place the ball back (as part of the fluid movement) but is impeded from doing so by the tackler. Having said that, if the ref had blown up quickly for held up it would have been pretty uncontroversial.

Indeed it wouldn't have been controversial at all (presumably!) but neither is this call in my opinion.

 

[Dickie E]

Same, same but different, today.
Player tackled just short of tryline and makes to lay the ball back. Team mate drives into breakdown resulting in tackled player over the tryline. Grounded ball for a 5 pointer

 

[didds]

Same, same but different, today.
Player tackled just short of tryline and makes to lay the ball back. Team mate drives into breakdown resulting in tackled player over the tryline. Grounded ball for a 5 pointer

thats interesting!

so if the team mate makes contact with the tackled player - is that not effectively off his feet in that contact?

DEFINITIONS

World Rugby Passport - Definitions

passport.world.rugby

"Off feet Players are off their feet when any other part of the body is supported by the ground or players on the ground."

Or if the team mate makes contact with a defender who has grasped the tackled player and thus drage the tackled player in goal when driven backwards...
PK advantage to attackers

"14.8 Other players must:
a. Remain on their feet and release the ball and the ball-carrier immediately."

Meanwhile of course tackled players must release the ball "immediately"

Tackled players must immediately:
14.7a. Make the ball available so that play can continue by releasing, passing or pushing the ball in any direction except forward. They may place the ball in any direction.

PK advantage to defenders as the tackled player must have not released/passed etc the ball to end up in goal with it.

My guess is its easier to just award the try under PK advantage for 14.8

 

[Blackberry]

Haven't seen the video, but talking generally: once the ball is over the try line some of the laws cease to count, for example the must release ones. So the player was fine hanging onto the ball, the ref would be deciding if it was going to be playable, then the very clever player (supported by the equally switched on referee) rolled back into the field of play at which point it was game back on. Am I reading this right?

 

[Dickie E]

Haven't seen the video, but talking generally: once the ball is over the try line some of the laws cease to count, for example the must release ones. So the player was fine hanging onto the ball, the ref would be deciding if it was going to be playable, then the very clever player (supported by the equally switched on referee) rolled back into the field of play at which point it was game back on. Am I reading this right?

Ok. So ball in goal with defender & attacker both holding onto it. Strong attacker drags ball and defender back into FoP. Does defender now need to release ball?

 

[Marc Wakeham]

If we have had enough time for the "hokey cokey" to begin, I'm calling unplayable and making a call depending on where the ball is when I blow.

 

[shebeen]

Hard to see how both TMO and ref justify this game saving tackle in the final minute as legitimate. Black7 clearly has knee on the ground, at a time Infront of the line, and leaning on a player in the field of play.

Time is 5 minutes in this clip

Don't want to single an official out, but this is another questionable one to this TMO- quick Google and you'll find a lot of controversial calls to his name.


Once again it's an inconclusive grounding so becomes a huge call which is a guess, and they return to on field unsighted decision. HU:GLDO is really ruining games in my humble opinion. (Yes attacking teams should stop rolling the dice with it as a tactic). WR seem happy with it, but it places so much scrutiny on officials.

 

[Decorily]

Hard to see how both TMO and ref justify this game saving tackle in the final minute as legitimate. Black7 clearly has knee on the ground, at a time Infront of the line, and leaning on a player in the field of play.

Time is 5 minutes in this clip

Don't want to single an official out, but this is another questionable one to this TMO- quick Google and you'll find a lot of controversial calls to his name.


Once again it's an inconclusive grounding so becomes a huge call which is a guess, and they return to on field unsighted decision. HU:GLDO is really ruining games in my humble opinion. (Yes attacking teams should stop rolling the dice with it as a tactic). WR seem happy with it, but it places so much scrutiny on officials.

A quick Google to find controversial calls.....sure!

 

[Flish]

I see Black 7 kneeling on the line, so in goal, in any other scenario touching the line is in goal, a try, touch etc so I’ve got no problems calling him as in goal and all appropriate law changes that brings?