By Spiro Zavos
June 7th 2008 @ 3:10am
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates..
---------------
We should applaud the IRB’s stance on the tackle and ruck
When I first saw the IRB statement about the tackle and the ruck needing to be refereed according to the law, my thought was that its timing was designed to help the NH teams playing this weekend in the SH by encouraging referees to prevent contests in the ruck and mauls and award plenty of penalties.
But if the referees actually abide by the IRB instructions, the Northern Hemisphere teams are the ones that should be penalised.
The reason for this is that, from what I observed from Magner Cup and Heineken Cup rugby, teams like Munster, Wasps, Ospreys and Leicester are very negative in the way they kill the rucks and mauls by throwing bodies across.
Hopefully, if these tactics are maintained by the national sides, the offending players will be penalised.
The reminder for referees to clamp down on teams picking the ball up in a ruck and starting a maul is also welcome.
Munster, particularly, do this all the time when they go into their slow-forward-flop routine.
The requirement to put the ball in straight is another reminder that is to be applauded.
This will affect teams with weak scrums, in particular the Wallabies, unless Robbie Deans can ensure a quick fix here.
It was noticeable in the Super 14 tournament that whenever the Australian teams scrum’s were under pressure, the feed was crooked, rather like a rugby league put-in (or should that be put-on).
So much for the theorising. It will be interesting to see how the IRB laying down the letter of the law to the Test referees actually works out in practice.
MEDIA RELEASE
IRB Confirms Tackle and Ruck to be Refereed According to Law The IRB today confirmed that, following agreement at the annual Council meeting in May, a Laws protocol letter was sent to all Member Unions stating that match officials at all levels of the Game must referee the Tackle (Law 15) and Ruck (Law 16) in accordance with the written Laws.The correspondence also addressed new protocols in other areas of Law and was accompanied with a DVD that further confirmed the requirements of Council.
All Unions were asked to ensure that the protocols were brought to the attention of national coaches, referee managers and IRB panel referees. The protocols apply to all international matches from June 1, 2008.
Law 15 - Tackle
It has become evident that players are going to ground over or on ball carriers which has become known as sealing off. On some occasions they remain in that position and fail to move away contravening Law. Furthermore players are going to ground or on top of players after a tackle thereby ensuring that the opposition cannot contest possession. Such actions are in breech of Laws 15.6 (g), 15.7 (c) and 15.7 (d).Referees are requested to be more vigilant in this area of the Game and to ensure that both teams are treated equally at the breakdown.
Law 16 - Ruck
It has become common practice for players to move the ball from rucks using their hands and to pick the ball up in a ruck to form a maul. It is also evident that players of the ball carrying team are being allowed to handle the ball in the ruck when defenders are being told to leave the ball alone.Law 16.4 (d) is to be refereed at all times and applied to both the attacking and defending teams.
Law 20 - Scrum Throw In
The IRB Laws Project Group (LPG) Scrum Working Party confirmed to Council the continual non compliance of scrum halves to feed the ball into the centre of the tunnel. Such action is in breech of Law 20.6 (d).Council endorsed a protocol whereby from June 1, 2008 onwards at the awarding of each scrum and prior to having the front rows go through the engagement procedure the referee is to remind the scrum half of his obligations and then ensure that he is positioned in the middle and standing square to the scrum prior to the feed.
Law 4 - Players’ Clothing
The Law in relation to inspection of players’ clothing is covered in Law 4.5 (a), (b) and (c). Regulation 12 governs what is and what is not allowed to be worn by players.Council endorsed the following protocol:
For all internationals from June 1, 2008 the practice of checking players clothing in the dressing rooms at the time of the stud check will continue.Furthermore the two assistant referees will then carry out another inspection of players clothing as the team assembles in the tunnel prior to going onto the field.
Any subsequent breech of Regulation 12 once the match commences will be dealt with under Law 4.5 (c) and the offending player will be ordered from the field.
Super 14 tipping now live for sign-ups. Join now and invite your mates.
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(17)
Loading ...
Jerry said | June 7th 2008 @ 7:47am | Report comment
It is also evident that players of the ball carrying team are being allowed to handle the ball in the ruck when defenders are being told to leave the ball alone.>>>
I actually don’t have a problem with this, as long as it’s only done after the contest is effectively over. If teams aren’t allowed to ruck the ball back (which they are effectively prohibited fro doing these days) how the hell are they actually meant to clear the ball legally? Once a side - be it the attacking or defending team - has clearly won the breakdown/ruck battle, they’re being allowed to push the ball back with their hands. If it wasn’t allowed, we’d see loads and loads of rucks being blown up for the ball not being available. The refs just need to be decisive and clear about who has won the breakdown - this is what was happening in the S14 this year, as refs could afford to be decisive with their calls without being forced to award kickable penalties.
Harry said | June 7th 2008 @ 11:27am | Report comment
I hope the reference to players clothing is directed towards the armprotectors that seems to have become fashionable- Matfiled is a prime exmple. If a player has had recent injury that requires some protection thats fair enough, but to wear one permantly no.
Blinky Bill - Bellingen said | June 7th 2008 @ 12:42pm | Report comment
Come in Stillmissit - “The requirement to put the ball in straight is another reminder that is to be applauded.”
Where are you? This is your pet hate. Right?
So will the refs really ping a 1/2 back for not feeding it in straight? Nice thought. We shall see.
eric said | June 7th 2008 @ 1:33pm | Report comment
These directives are a month old, well before this weekends north-south clashes, so no conspiracy Spiro.
I have been coaching some juniors and had to explain the difference between the laws and what they saw on TV, which in the eyes of 16 year olds makes you look like an idiot. (I later learned that none of them can/do watch the S14 anyway, confirming my idiocy.)
I think the directives are spot on, and I don’t know how referees, north and south, developed a blind eye to those breaches.
Spiro Zavos said | June 7th 2008 @ 3:58pm | Report comment
The directives were officially released by the IRB on Thursday. But I take Eric’s point. This is why I’m hoping that they are not a licence to the referees to totally dominate the new Test season the way they did in the finals of the 2007 RWC. An earlier post made the excellent point that the ruck and maul has been quite well refereed in the Super 14 because the referees did not have to use the nuclear option of full-arm penalties.
Spiro Zavos said | June 7th 2008 @ 7:45pm | Report comment
This is being written some minutes after the NZ -Ireland Test. The All Blacks totally dominated the Irish pack but somehow Ireland got a crucial scrum penalty on the All Black goal-line which they converted into a try, and the majority of the penalties at the ruck and maul even though they were lying a player across their ball every rucjk and maul, playing the ball on the ground all the time, were offside virtually every ruck and maul and would not release when an All Black was tackled.
The referee was Chris White of England.
My fearless prediction is that if a SH referee does the Australia-Ireland Test at Melbourne, the Irish will be penalised off the park if they continue their obvious destructive/illegal tactics.
Sledgeandhammer said | June 7th 2008 @ 8:22pm | Report comment
I have mixed feeling about this. After watching today’s shute shield game on ABC tv between uni & woodies, a game in which the referee blew around 25 penalties (19 against Eastwood) and issued about 10 yellow cards, I can only think it will be a disaster. Why? Because even though it makes sense in theory, in practice it gives referees all the excuse they need to blow a team off the park. Referees are a bit like teachers, they like to have favourites - it makes their life easier. Some of the penalties in that game were simply lucdicrous and ruined the contest- the first televised club rugby game that has not entertained this season.
Dublin Dave said | June 7th 2008 @ 9:00pm | Report comment
This is being written about an hour after the NZ Ireland match in which Ireland had their best chance in ages to break their duck against NZ but once again came up short. Both teams took a perfectly plausible and sensible approach to the miserable conditions: the All Blacks by keeping it tight and picking and going at every opportunity; the Irish by kicking long and forcing errors in the NZ back three.
New Zealand won in the end, despite their world cup hangover, lack of overall confidence in the team from the supporters, question marks over the management and the loss of so many players to Europe for the same reason they always win against Ireland. Namely, they have a confidence in their basic overall superiority without descending to the self-defeating arrogance that frequently allows lesser teams to ambush supposedly more talented opposition. New Zealand have never taken Ireland for granted and they have never lost. Yet.
Ireland did well to hang in for so long but the All Black forwards had the edge in the rucks and mauls and that paid off eventually. There were few opportunities for running rugby but when the chances came, they took them.
The first All Black try came from one such opportunity when an Irish defence at sixes and sevens allowed Conrad Smith to make good ground before firing out a long pass to Sivivatu. It was a good bit forward but only the deeply ungracious would deny New Zealanders a bit of luck in that department given recent events!
Ireland hit back straight away, their try coming from New Zealand’s defence dithering over dealing with a long kick off in the greasy conditions and ceding a good attacking position inside their own 22. Some good improvisation from Ireland after a forward had knocked the ball backwards let the much maligned Paddy Wallace bamboozle two defenders and slip between them for a try.
For a long time after that the game was as tight as a drum with never more than a penalty between the sides. New Zealand held the whip hand though, being more aggressive in the rucks and mauls and being better led. O’Driscoll does not have the tactical astuteness to react to situations that makes a great captain. The world cup bore that out and so did this match.
For example, the All Blacks played the referee much better. White doesn’t stand at the back of a lineout, he stands at the side so he can’t see whether the ball is straight or not. New Zealand threw the ball straight over the heads of their men in the lineout and secured posession every time. Ireland didn’t and struggled. That’s not a whinge about the ref; that’s a whinge about the captain, or the pack leader. For small but vital technical issues like that it has to be a case of “When in Rome, do like the Romans.”
The turning point came with about 15 minutes left when stout Irish defending had led to a turnover at the breakdown on their own 22 in front of the posts and had been given the decision by the ref. Then stupid gobshite thicko Munster prop dumbass Marcus Horan reacted to a stray slap in the face (these things happen in rucks) with a deliberate forearm smash into the face of the perpetrator (these things should never happen in rucks, or at least not under your own posts under the nose of the bloody referee). Penalty reversed, All Blacks take the lead.
Immediately afterwards Carter, who on the evidence of his play hitherto would struggle to make the Connaught bench, redeemed his reputaton with a sublime break before slipping the ball to Maori sidestepper par excellence Nonu who again made astute use of the conditions by launching a dive with three defenders hanging on to him from somewhere just inside the 22 to end up sliding comfortably over the line to make the game safe. Timing is everything.
No doubt that the better side won and that it was a tight absorbing game played in awful weather. Ireland needed to be luckier than they were and to put a bit more faith in their backline. They never passed the ball down the open side once. If you have a one-dimensional game then you have to be dominant in that one dimension. And they weren’t.
New Zealand have the first win of the season under their belts. They will get better. As will the weather, hopefully.
ohtani's jacket said | June 8th 2008 @ 2:28am | Report comment
I appreciated the Irish giving us a real Test, but I don’t think they played a particularly smart game. They had a much better pack than us, they just didn’t use it. The game was won in the loose, however. Regardless of IRB e-mails, McCaw had an outstanding game.
Jerry said | June 8th 2008 @ 10:42am | Report comment
Ohtani - I disagree, the Irish pack got bullied out of the game. Except for some success picking up a couple of penalties with driving mauls (and one of which was a poor call as Thompson had actually got his hands on the ball and ripped it free rather than collapsing) the Irish pack didn’t dominate in any area. The scrum went backwards, the lineout coughed up ball, the All Blacks pick and drive was superior and the All Blacks defence turned the ball over when the Irish tried to initiate their own pick and drives.
Dave - I think the Irish tried spinning it out the backs in the first couple of minutes, but Wallace got something of a hospital and was hit hard by McCaw who turned the ball over. After that, they seemed to put that tactic away for the rest of the night.
Spiro Zavos said | June 8th 2008 @ 5:17pm | Report comment
In the Springboks-Wales game the English referee Dave Pearson ruled on the rucks and mauls the way Chris White should have in NZ-Ireland and penalised Wales out of the match. Butch James kicked 5 penalties in the first half. These penalties were against Wales, in them main, for deliberately lying on the South African side of the ruck. Ireland did the same thing but got away with it with the NZ halfback often having to force away Irish legs to get the All Blacks ball.
I loved Stephen Jones’ comment that Wales will have to have a talk to the officials about the penalty count, presumably to make sure a SH team doesn’t get the advantage of playing correctly in the rucks and mauls.
Jones and all the other British journalists, and Warren Gatland, were realistic enough to concede that the Six Nations champions were out of their depth with the Springboks.
ohtani's jacket said | June 8th 2008 @ 5:28pm | Report comment
Jerry — I thought the NZ pack did the job that was asked of them and Tialata deserves credit for switching sides, but i don’t think they were as strong in the scrummaging or as mobile around the park as previous Henry sides. The scrum held up, but Ireland simply didn’t take advantage of their pack. They kicked away too much ball. The one shot they got at the tryline, they broke us with ease. As for NZ’s pick and go, it amounted to nothing. We blew some great trying scoring opportunities from in close. The loose forwards were outstanding, but the tight five weren’t. If we play the same front row against the Boks, we’ll be killed.
bob said | June 8th 2008 @ 11:00pm | Report comment
Nobody really beleivved the promo’ that wales were physical… they’re not… they’re not too bad, but they are not a physical side. Just as Irelend don’t have much front row status.
So wales getting thumped was no surprise in the north… that the boks bullied them, was no surprise… they have none of the former hard men to deter the bullies… strong men are not enough against SA.
But the Ireland game could have gone either way, and jackets opinion is very accurate… but Tialata better not switch sides against England, because he will get hurt.
It’s interesting that the AB’s looked ordinary in the tight 5… ordinary by their own standards, that is. I’m sure they will hold up agaisnt any other pack in the world, except Englands, and argentinas.
The welsh held the boks okay at the scrum, which means the boks have lost something of the old power… so the AB’s don’t have to worry too much about boks, or the aussies… but i suspect the only platform England will get, will be made in the pack… and the centres will compete in a a huge battle… everywhere else on the field the england players available are too weak, small or light, and provided the AB’s hold on in the pack, their backs will run home their win.
But the front row, even the tight 5, must be of concern to Henry.
Just a Fan said | June 9th 2008 @ 3:52am | Report comment
Wales were something like 60kgs heavier in the scrum than SA…so theorically they should have shoved the Bokke back. The newbies in the squad did okay…really saw the great team work of Bakkies and Matfield though, the scrum improved hugely when Matfield came on…. Go Bokke!
eric said | June 9th 2008 @ 9:27pm | Report comment
Ok you Kiwi fans, if readers of the roar, or any one in the street in NZfor that matter, picked the All Blacks, and said to Richie McCaw, I can’t make it to training this week, will you prepare the team, would the team play worse than how they played on Sat night? I could select and coach better than Henry.
And, re the Boks/Taffies game, don’t worry about ruck.maul penalties, were the defensive lines ever on side? I reckon defensive lines being allowed to crib nearly a meter is the biggest blight on the game.
chris said | June 10th 2008 @ 8:13am | Report comment
Ruck and mauls should be banned,alongside scrums.
Longy said | July 8th 2008 @ 4:11pm | Report comment
Spiro can you send a copy of this memo to Stuart Dickinson and Paul Honiss please?
From their performanced last weekend, it is obvious they did not receive it. To see the French half-back standing at the rear of the ‘muck’ looking around wondering what to do the game comes to a grinding halt and then they do it again and again and again … is this rugby?