Ruck Law Trial 15.18

[jdeagro]

15.18: A player who is, or was part of the ruck may not play an opponent who is near it (within 1m), and who is attempting to play the ball away.

Recently, I experienced the following two scenarios regarding the new ruck law trial and am curious what you guys think?

1. A tackle contest (no ruck formed):

• A tackle occurred, immediate roll-away from the tackler
• Attacking team's scrummy comes in to pick the ball up off the ground (no other attacking players are present, scrummy is first one there)
• Before the attacking team's scrummy lifts ball off the ground from his tackled teammate, immediately a defensive player comes through the gate, and poaches ball from the attacking team scrummy's hands / from off the ground
• The defensive player did not engage or bind onto the scrummy, just directly stole the ball from his hands
• This was penalized under the new law trial 15.18

I would assume this normally should not be penalized given no ruck was ever formed?

2. After the ruck ended:

• A small ruck is formed
• Attacking team's scrum half lifts ball off the ground and out of the ruck
• Instead of immediately passing ball away, he then he takes a step backwards away from the ruck, with ball in hand (ruck is clearly over at this point and we have open play now)
• Attacking team's ruckers have left the ruck or have fallen to ground, so it is completely open as well
• Defending team's rucker then comes straight through the ruck that ended, and attempts to tackle the scrummy (who is again now standing with ball in hand and about a meter behind the ruck)
• This was also penalized under the new law trial 15.18

Thoughts on both instances?

 

[SimonSmith]

1. If there's no ruck, that's play on for me.

2. I can see the penalty.

 

[jdeagro]

1. If there's no ruck, that's play on for me.

2. I can see the penalty.

For #2 I can see it argued either way. But this specific wording is what has me wondering: "who is attempting to play the ball away.".

I figure if the scrummy takes so many actions to lift ball off the ground and step measurably backwards from the ruck with it in hand, not trying to pass it to his teammates, he isn't attempting to play it away. He's just playing it himself. Ball is already away from ruck now because surely it's open play at this point.

I don't mean to be pedantic but rather I think it's important to consider when do we agree the scrummy's opportunity to attempt to play ball away has ended? The reason being is because I see it not much different than a scrummy picking and going from the ruck then too. Of course we can't penalize the defenders from playing him in such a case when he's playing ball himself in a pick and go instead of playing it away, so I'd like to think this is similar in a sense?

 

[RemainingInTheGame]

Recently, I experienced the following two scenarios regarding the new ruck law trial and am curious what you guys think?

1. A tackle contest (no ruck formed):

• A tackle occurred, immediate roll-away from the tackler
• Attacking team's scrummy comes in to pick the ball up off the ground (no other attacking players are present, scrummy is first one there)
• Before the attacking team's scrummy lifts ball off the ground from his tackled teammate, immediately a defensive player comes through the gate, and poaches ball from the attacking team scrummy's hands / from off the ground
• The defensive player did not engage or bind onto the scrummy, just directly stole the ball from his hands
• This was penalized under the new law trial 15.18

I would assume this normally should not be penalized given no ruck was ever formed?

2. After the ruck ended:

• A small ruck is formed
• Attacking team's scrum half lifts ball off the ground and out of the ruck
• Instead of immediately passing ball away, he then he takes a step backwards away from the ruck, with ball in hand (ruck is clearly over at this point and we have open play now)
• Attacking team's ruckers have left the ruck or have fallen to ground, so it is completely open as well
• Defending team's rucker then comes straight through the ruck that ended, and attempts to tackle the scrummy (who is again now standing with ball in hand and about a meter behind the ruck)
• This was also penalized under the new law trial 15.18

Thoughts on both instances?

For #2, was the attacking team player onside when the ball left the ruck (i.e. behind last feet)? If not, then I think 15.18 applies - if onside then play on for me.

 

[Decorily]

You say the 9 was "about a meter" away. So it's down to the referee's discretion as to whether it was within a meter or not.

 

[jdeagro]

For #2, was the attacking team player onside when the ball left the ruck (i.e. behind last feet)? If not, then I think 15.18 applies - if onside then play on for me.

Sorry I don't quite understand the question. Did you mean to ask if the defending team player was onside instead?

From the attacking team's perspective, there was a ruck, and an attacking scrummy who pulled the ball out of the ruck (from an onside position).

 

[jdeagro]

You say the 9 was "about a meter" away. So it's down to the referee's discretion as to whether it was within a meter or not.

Yea, I realize that can complicate the matter. I'm less curious about the "within 1m" distance part of the law and more so just the specifics of "attempting to play ball away".

Even if the scrummy was within 1m still, but wasn't actively trying to play ball away, it sounds like they're fair game now? If yes, then the next question is, what is considered "attempting to play ball away"?...would a scrummy just standing there with ball in hand in open play no longer be attempting to play it away?

 

[RemainingInTheGame]

Sorry I don't quite understand the question. Did you mean to ask if the defending team player was onside instead?

From the attacking team's perspective, there was a ruck, and an attacking scrummy who pulled the ball out of the ruck (from an onside position).

Yes, correct- defending! (Apologies for the error)

 

[SimonSmith]

For #2 I can see it argued either way. But this specific wording is what has me wondering: "who is attempting to play the ball away.".

I figure if the scrummy takes so many actions to lift ball off the ground and step measurably backwards from the ruck with it in hand, not trying to pass it to his teammates, he isn't attempting to play it away. He's just playing it himself. Ball is already away from ruck now because surely it's open play at this point.

I don't mean to be pedantic but rather I think it's important to consider when do we agree the scrummy's opportunity to attempt to play ball away has ended? The reason being is because I see it not much different than a scrummy picking and going from the ruck then too. Of course we can't penalize the defenders from playing him in such a case when he's playing ball himself in a pick and go instead of playing it away, so I'd like to think this is similar in a sense?

Some scrum halfs - Mike Phillips, say - take at least one step before passing.

 

[jdeagro]

Yes, correct- defending! (Apologies for the error)

No worries!

Defending player was part of the ruck, so was onsides for the entirety of the ruck and after the ruck ended and open play began. Once open play began and the scrummy was standing upright with ball in hand, about a meter behind the previous ruck, that's when the defender came through the space that was previously a ruck, to go for the scrummy.

 

[RemainingInTheGame]

No worries!

Defending player was part of the ruck, so was onsides for the entirety of the ruck and after the ruck ended and open play began. Once open play began and the scrummy was standing upright with ball in hand, about a meter behind the previous ruck, that's when the defender came through the space that was previously a ruck, to go for the scrummy.

So for me, in this example it's about if they were part of the ruck or not.

If the player was not part of the ruck, and behind the ruck and onside when the ball came out of the ruck then for me it's play on but if if they were part of the ruck, then I'd penalise them.

I think there is also a view on how long we consider them as 'attempting to play the ball' as per your and Simon's comments, but this would only apply to those in the ruck, as if not part of the ruck and onside, then once the ball is out they can move forward and play the clearing player.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

Scenario 1 was not a ruck so Ruck law does not apply. FROM THE DESCRIPTION the referee was wrong. I'm guessing theirinterpretation was that is was a ruck.

Scenario 2 I'd be inclined to playon. How much time does the 9 want? However. seeing the scenario for real may changre my mind

 

[jdeagro]

So for me, in this example it's about if they were part of the ruck or not.

What if they were originally part of the ruck, then left the ruck and retired to an onside position not in the ruck, then 10 seconds later the scenario I described occurred (in regards to how the scrummy pulled ball from the ruck)?

Since the law says "A player who is, or was part of the ruck"

For me, I wouldn't focus as much attention on who was in the ruck and when, because I think the management on that in regards to this law can get silly easily. I'd prefer just to judge it on who's currently in the ruck, if the scrummy was actually still playing the ball out vs playing the ball themselves.

 

[RemainingInTheGame]

Since the law says "A player who is, or was part of the ruck"

I think this should be interpreted as 'was part of the ruck just before they played the clearing player' rather than 'a player who was ever in the ruck'.

If they are part of the ruck, leave, get onside behind the last feet and then only move past the last feet when the ball is out then I'd play on.