The talk prior to the start of the Super 14 is the breakdown, and after all is said and done, from what I have seen I believe we are moving in the right direction.
I think I want to start off with the fact that the ‘new’ laws at the breakdown are in fact, not new at all, but has been around for many a year now.
What has changed is the referee’s applying (in my view) these laws correctly for the first time.
Let’s cover the law itself first, or what has changed.
Now apart from quoting it verbatim the change from the referee’s point of view is that they will concentrate a lot more on the ‘Tackler’ than the ‘Tackled Player’ as they have been in the past. The same laws still apply, but there will now be little leniency showed to the ‘Tackler’ which in the past has been largely ignored.
So what does the law say?
We all basically know this but it says;
• In a tackle situation the ‘Tackled Player’ must be allowed to place the ball (in any direction). This he must do immediately.
• The ‘Tackler’ must first release the ‘Tackled Player’ before he is allowed to play the ball.
• The ‘Tackler’ must be on his feet before he is allowed to play the ball.
That is the short of it. Obviously not forgetting the other laws that goes with this like rolling away in the tackle, entering through the gate, no hands once a ruck has formed and no side entry.
What has changed now however from how this law was applied in the past, is that the referee’s will keep a very close eye on the tackler, and ensure that there is ‘daylight’ between him and the tackled player, before he is allowed to attack or play the ball. This will be the case even if the ‘Tackler’ never goes to ground but stay on his feet – he has to ‘release’ the tackler first before he is allowed to play the ball.
This is logical though, and frankly I am surprised it has taken so long to get the thieving, cheating bastards out of the game (read fetchers).
Just consider the actions when a tackle takes place…
Player A tackles player B, now the law states that player B has a right to place the ball (before anything else happens), however, since player A perfected their techniques in sliding over players never letting go of his arms, body or ball player B was never allowed to do what the law permits him to do.
Result, player A gets rewarded (penalty for player B hanging onto the ball) although it is in direct contravention of the law itself.
Fact is, fetchers never ever ‘released’ the tackled player as is required by law, which would have allowed him to place the ball.
The lawmakers also believe that this new law will allow for players to enter the ruck at a higher angle because there is no fetcher sliding over or lying on the tackled player – he has to completely release the player, get to his feet (if not already on it) and then play the ball. Support players will then be entering the ruck with have a higher shoulder over hips entry point.
Another positive thing about these law changes is that we will see the counter ruck make a comeback.
The tackle area will become a huge collision area again where players who stay on their feet will be rewarded and where quicker ruck ball will be the name of the game.
In many ways a lot of guys think South Africa will suffer, and yes we are not the best at quick recycling in this area but when it comes to big collisions and counter rucking, we could, and should be able to dominate this area provided our players learn to stay on their feet.
The result of the law change for me is simple.
We will see more quick ruck ball resulting in a quicker, more exciting game or brand of rugby as well as players now being forced to stay on their feet. However, this area will also become a haven for the guys who like the physical stuff
For once the laws are applied correctly, and for once we are moving in the right direction.
It is best summed up by Schalk Burger himself following Friday night’s game against the Sharks, where the Sharks dominated the tackled area in the first half and won a couple of balls through counter rucking with the Stormers pinned quite a bit.
Schalk said; “It was impossible to steal a ball tonight”, and rightly so – the idea of the game of union was always a fair contest for the ball, not thieving.
All that is left now, is to bring back rucking to get rid of players lying on the wrong side of the ruck…
elcamino
ROOILEEU
Tina
logan
Deon
Thomas_Bulls
garyj1-Bulls
Aldo
Amethyst
Methos The French Stormer
KingPaul
JT_BOKBEFOK!
trevormayhew
RUGGA_MIND
Pokkel
Quinn25
Marcel
namboer
moose
Jacques(Bunny)Somtimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits
Vernonimous
Pom in Joburg
Watte
niekie
Dante
Panther
Vetgesmeerde Blits
bryce_in_oz
Kozac
Blokkies
Number12_Lions
Brutus2
Lehe6
Estian Nortier
DavidS
johanleroux13
Morné
Tafelberg
pietstreak
Ollie
Koos
February 1st, 2010 at 10:02 am
All that is left now, is to bring back rucking to get rid of players lying on the wrong side of the ruck…
————————————————————–
Rugby is a game played by pissy’s and they will never bring back rucking.
A question: Will this be enforce only in the SANZAR region all over, I saw the guy’s up north do not do it this way.
…and what happen when player A kick the ball and player B catch it and go straight to ground. With player A with him when he catch the ball?
February 1st, 2010 at 10:06 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 10:02 am:
With him or tackling (making contact) with him?
If tackled, same laws applies.
February 1st, 2010 at 10:10 am
Reply to Morné @ 10:06 am:
February 1st, 2010 at 10:10 am
Reply to Morné @ 10:06 am: question: Will this be enforce only in the SANZAR region all over, I saw the guy’s up north do not do it this way.
February 1st, 2010 at 10:15 am
GueSS BruSSow wiLL just up his value
But stiLL get pinged by slow visual input processing oFFicials!
February 1st, 2010 at 10:20 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 10:10 am:
Hard to say.
It is different competitions so the organisers of those competitions decide.
Remember there is no change to the IRB laws itself.
February 1st, 2010 at 10:22 am
Reply to Morné @ 10:20 am: so when they come and tour here in June we will have it back to free for all?
February 1st, 2010 at 10:23 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 10:22 am:
Again there is no change in the law.
It comes down to interpretation.
Last year there were two different sets of laws – ELV’s and old laws.
This is not the case here.
February 1st, 2010 at 11:09 am
Reply to Morné @ 10:23 am: I understand that, but if our ref’s blow you up if you do not release player, and they don’t then we have two sets of rules
February 1st, 2010 at 11:10 am
….a fetcher in S14 will be blown up so that he change his game and when we play the poofies from north they won’t
February 1st, 2010 at 12:07 pm
I cannot understand why the hell it took so long for them to just apply the law.
For years now we have seen the tackler not releasing the tackled player and then the latter gets penalised for holding on.
The refs are the ones that made it a grey area. The laws are pretty clear on it.
February 1st, 2010 at 12:14 pm
I would actually like to see them change the rule that the tackler must get to his feet and first get “onside” before being able to play the ball. In other words he must always come from the direction of his own try line
February 1st, 2010 at 12:17 pm
“All that is left now, is to bring back rucking to get rid of players lying on the wrong side of the ruck…”
We can only hope
February 1st, 2010 at 12:32 pm
So the team that will score
is the one that is capable
of driving OVER the ball
placed by their tackled
player?
Clearing rucks has never
been our strong point,
has it?
February 1st, 2010 at 1:13 pm
Reply to Boertjie @ 12:32 pm:
Not so much the attacking team, but definately in the sense you mention the defending team will look to do this, which is why I believe the ruck will become a numbers game and quite crowded.
One of our main issues with rucks and protecting our ball is overextending the clean, meaning they clean over the ball and leave the ball effectively exposed for the opposition to attack.
February 1st, 2010 at 4:27 pm
“no hands once a ruck has formed”
bwahahahahaha – you must be joking – is that STILL part of the Ruck-Laws ???
can’t be – I have net seen that applied in more than 3 seasons
February 1st, 2010 at 4:33 pm
With the skelm Aussies and their mates across the pond – we will see a HUGE increase in “player not held in tackle” insidents – bet on it
February 1st, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 4:33 pm: On the flip side their is also a law which state that if you are not held you can play on.
February 2nd, 2010 at 1:20 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 5:06 pm:
Yes – exaggertly – if not “held” in the tackle the ball-carrier may play on
HKGK
but
if “held” in the tackle the tackler will get punished.
I have yet to see or hear them clarify THAT
February 2nd, 2010 at 3:31 am
This may work in Saffer teams favour. We were never as good as the kiwis and wallabies in offloading prior to going to ground. Probably because of greater skills in this regard coming over from rugby league in the Antipodean countries.
If the refs apply the laws to protect the tackled player rather than the tackler it could even encourage our guys to abandon this kick and rush stuff that has beset Saffer teams. I hope so. Last year’s lack of attacking play might not drive spectators away at Loftus and a few other places but where there are competing codes like league and Ausssie rules (read Aus and NZ) it sure as hell has.
February 2nd, 2010 at 5:10 am
Reply to Morné @ 1:13 pm:
I hope you are correct.
If they give too much advantage to the tackled player a turnover in this area may become impossible. In that case teams will opt for the low risk option.
One-off runners taking contact with less passing and no off-loads.
The defending team may stop wasting their energy competing at the ruck and just stand off to defend.
So we’ll end up with 20-phase, 20-pass plays that goes no-where.
February 2nd, 2010 at 6:45 am
I am sure their was about 150 penalty’s in the four VC games, but the tempo that these youngster played was impressive
February 2nd, 2010 at 8:03 am
And the cute rules go out the window the minute Goerge Smith gets tackled carrying the ball and when he gets released, leaps back to his feet and keeps running and the Antip[odean ref waves his amrs and shouts “play on!”
Crash go the cute rules…
February 2nd, 2010 at 8:11 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 5:06 pm: Reply to The Brand @ 1:20 am: Reply to DavidS @ 8:03 am:
You need to understand exactly what a tackle is I believe.
First rule and golden rule of rugby:
THE GAME IS DESIGNED TO BE PLAYED BY PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THEIR FEET!
If someone is not on their feet, you are not allowed to play the ball.
The tackled player has certain rights which supercedes this, provided he does so immediately.
This includes placing the ball, or passing the ball. (While still on the ground).
A TACKLE however is defined when the ball carrier is tackled (contact made), and BROUGHT TO GROUND by that player (tackler).
What you have at times with the; “He was not held” is that the interpretation is that although the tackler attempted to tackle the player (bring him to ground), contact in the process of the tackle (going to ground) was lost. Think of an ankle-tap.
The guy made contact with the ball carrier, but the guy only fell 2 meters further after losing his balance – this means he was not ‘held in the tackle’.
If the ball carrier is tackled (gone to ground) the only way he is allowed to play the ball, or carry on with the ball, is if he releases the ball, gets up and then plays the ball again.
Does this make sense to you?
February 2nd, 2010 at 8:12 am
Reply to out wide @ 3:31 am:
I think so too, looking at the Sharks on Friday their committment in the collissions at the ruck totally blew the Stormers off the ball – pity their backline had no fuckin clue what to do with it.
Reply to fyndraai @ 5:10 am:
Again I think this will benefit the more physical sides, which in my books mean, adv. SA.
February 2nd, 2010 at 8:58 am
Reply to Morné @ 8:12 am:
There-in lies the Sharks problem the last two seasons…
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:01 am
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 8:58 am:
Get Campo back I say…
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:02 am
Reply to Morné @ 9:01 am:
Don’t get me started again with the mess he left behind at DHS… and what a mess it was!
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:04 am
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 9:02 am:
Hehe,
I know he is not your favourite.
But there is no denying the Sharks backline looked a shit lot better when he was there…
You an old DHS boy?
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:06 am
Reply to Morné @ 8:11 am: I understand what you saying but in yesterday their was a player who was tackled in the Tukkies game, he went to his knees and protect the ball bay crouching over the ball. Came to his feet and played on. The other guys hand no change on playing that ball.
Another one was when a mandela player was holding the ball on the ground and the ref screamed release the ball but the guy who released was the Matie guy because they penalize the defending team the whole time. And then the ref said to him I ask the other guy to realize.
The only problem I have with this law is that it looked yesterday that the only way the defending team will get a ball is when the attacking team makes a mistake.
I think if a player is tackled the only player who should released him is the tackler. If a second defended is their he should be able to play the ball. We cannot have a player taking forever to place a ball.
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:19 am
Reply to Morné @ 8:11 am: Morne it makes perfect sense… I just haven’t seen it applied as you so succinctly detailed it…
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:21 am
Reply to Morné @ 9:04 am:
Lol… nope ironically a Westville old boy… where Hugh has done such exceptional work over the last few years… albeit I’d hardly qualify that as a S14 head- coaching position…
My dislike is not for his person (but he is notoriously disliked by his peers) but his disastrous track record at DHS leaving them high and dry after extortional investment by parents… and getting regular 60 nil snottings by the time he threw in the towel…
Let’s face it… he has never made any lasting contribution to Australian rugby on a coaching level, not even recently with their 7′s side…
Sharks’s have not looked good since they erred away from their 15 man attack game-plan… smashing rucks with relentless pick and drives and counter-attack from all over the paddock… which made them one of the most unpredictable of the S14 teams and difficult to nullify… ironically coinciding with Plumtree’s 10 man rugby…
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:22 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 9:06 am:
First paragraph.
If he did not lie on top of the ball and did not hold onto the ball, he was doing nothing wrong.
He can be cleaned off the ball then.
Second paragraph, that was a player’s mistake, players will need to adapt and know the laws.
Third paragraph.
I disagree, it will suit as as the tackled situation will become more physical, which is what we are good at.
Last paragraph, that is actually the case, the second and third players reaching the tackled area will be allowed to attack the ball – the adaptation to the law is only relevant to the tackler, not other players joining the ruck.
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:25 am
Reply to DavidS @ 9:19 am:
True and cannot argue that.
What is encouraging is that a very strict referee evaluation has been put in place this year too – refs will not escape bad performances or inconsistent performances.
BTW I am trying to get a time with Watson for you and you can ask him about this yourself.
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 9:21 am:
For my money guys like Waylon, JPP, Ruan and Brad matured under Campo as backline coach – ironically all hitting a bad patch once he left…
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:36 am
Reply to Morné @ 9:22 am: paragraph.
If he did not lie on top of the ball and did not hold onto the ball, he was doing nothing wrong.
He can be cleaned off the ball then
——————————————————-
You are not allowed to clean a player on the ground or dive on him. On the knees is on the ground!!
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:46 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 9:06 am: Which turns it into league
I think old Vool Waugh is wrong btw
Worst affected will be him and Smith and the Kiwi fetchers
The Kiwis and us have the physicality to counter ruck over the ball… the Aussies are nancies…
My personal view is that they should just damned well let the players get hands in and even play on the ground and be damned
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:46 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 9:36 am:
Well if he is not in contact with the ball no cleaning is required, simply take it.
February 2nd, 2010 at 10:18 am
Reply to DavidS @ 9:46 am: Cannot agree with you more fetcher will become redundant, forwards will be big and strong again and Bulls will relish in these new laws.
February 2nd, 2010 at 10:20 am
…again they try to counter SA Teams and again they played in our hands
February 2nd, 2010 at 10:37 am
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 10:18 am:
Fetcher does not have to be the tackler… in fact in most cases they aren’t but the first to arrive at the tackle point and snaffle off the tackled player having placed the ball (or hanging on)…
This won’t change…
February 2nd, 2010 at 10:41 am
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 10:37 am: Ja but if you look at where the most turnover take place it is where the guy gets tackled. Ref’s is gonna be so frantic about this law that they gonna blow the guys out of the park.
In Stormers game one from each side was yellow carded, yesterday in almost every game a guy got yellow carded because of this new look at this law
February 2nd, 2010 at 11:07 am
This part of the Law is clear to me – and NOW the referees are actually attempting to apply the Law
The second part of the ruck Law is also very very clear.
NO hands on the ball when the ruck is formed.
Applicable to BOTH teams !!!
Thus we ask – when is a ruck deemed formed (this is the crux)
when one player each from opposition binds over the ball on their feet.
That brings us to the following.
Ball carrier is tackled – he places the ball – tackler jumps up, release ball-carrier – and attempts to play the ball – one oppo player “binds” onto previous tackler BEFORE he lifts the ball OFF the ground = ruck = penalty.
This application of the clear Law I have not seen in THREE years !!!
Now if previous tackler is fast enough he might lift the ball OFF the ground before “Bind” happens – then
one of two scenarios
1 – new tackle may be made
2 – maul may be created
thus when odes a tackle become a maul ???
February 2nd, 2010 at 11:19 am
Reply to The Brand @ 11:07 am:
Yeah I agree your first point… don’t know what all the fuss is about…
Other than, as you stated ‘what constitutes a ruck’… and since rucking has long gone the way of the dinosaur… what I would like to know is whether the refs are going to be consistent with poilicing the clearing out of players at the ruck…
The Bakkies Botha citing last season being a case in point… the ruling (whilst arguably correct according to the letter of the law) was not consistent with what other players were doing week in and out…
February 2nd, 2010 at 11:36 am
Dolley going to the guppies?
February 2nd, 2010 at 11:39 am
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 11:19 am:
Consistency amongst SANZAR referees – bwahahahahahaa
remember you have Aussies and Kiwis in the mix
February 2nd, 2010 at 11:58 am
Reply to JT @ 11:36 am:
He he he – NOU – raak hulle desperaat
February 2nd, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Reply to bryce_in_oz @ 11:19 am: A Tukkie guy was sent off for the same thing going in ruck without arms
February 2nd, 2010 at 12:08 pm
Reply to Jacques(Bunny) @ 12:01 pm:
If I am correct – the Law states you must bind onto a team-mate before entering a ruck
February 2nd, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Reply to The Brand @ 12:08 pm: Yip but make yourself ready for allot of these penalty’s