Roll Away. Yeah, right!

[Blue]

I did a bit of an experiment and decided to rewind and play back slow every time a player got pinged for not rolling away (two SA games I recorded over night).

It was amusing. In the vast majority of cases there was no way in hell the offending player was able to roll, let alone move.

At one stage Joubert and one of the Bulls forwards had a quiet little chuckle over a penalty. Both looked like they knew how ridiculous the stoppage was.

Unless players start thinking about the way they fall after a tackle, we are going to see the penalty count at the breakdown continue.

At the moment the ref uses no discretion. He just blows it up.

 

[Schadenfreude]

Yeah - it has to be refereed that way, otherwise players will "'accidentally" fall there more often.

 

[suckerforred]

I have always thought that it is a bit unfair when players get trapped and simply can't get away. Sometimes I will go as far as to say that some teams have worked out how to trap them there in the effort to get as penalty. However, I agree with you Schadenfreude, if it is not policed how it is being policed otherwise the 'accidents' will happen a lot.

 

[Bowside]

Since they got rid of rucking this is the only way to referee it.

 

[fatprop]

I have always thought that it is a bit unfair when players get trapped and simply can't get away. Sometimes I will go as far as to say that some teams have worked out how to trap them there in the effort to get as penalty. However, I agree with you Schadenfreude, if it is not policed how it is being policed otherwise the 'accidents' will happen a lot.

some are prone to ensure they get "trapped"

 

[Bruce Ross]

Blue, let's take it back a little. Those of us who have been around for a while know that the present day ruck bears next to no relationship to the traditional ruck. The problem that you draw attention to is a consequence of the fact that there are bodies laying everywhere at the breakdown. The solution to this unsightly mess can be found in the Laws of our sport, specifically:

16.2 (d) All players forming, joining or taking part in a ruck must be on their feet.​

​

16.3 (a) Players in a ruck must endeavour to stay on their feet.​

​

(b) A player must not intentionally fall or kneel in a ruck. This is dangerous play.​

​

(c) A player must not intentionally collapse a ruck. This is dangerous play.​

​

The sanction for each of these offences is a penalty kick. Referees should be instructed to enforce the laws by penalising the first player that they observe who in their opinion has intentionally gone off their feet.

We also have:

16.4 (b) (b) Players must not handle the ball in a ruck except after a tackle if they are on their feet and have their hands on the ball before the ruck is formed.​

And finally everyone talks about rucking being illegal, but the Law is explicit:

16.3 (f) A player rucking for the ball must not intentionally ruck players on the ground. A player rucking for the ball must try to step over players on the ground and must not intentionally step on them. A player rucking must do so near the ball.​

​

So it's about time that referees were santioned for condoning illegal play so that we can get back to the ruck being a contest between players on their feet contesting the ball with their feet.

As Johnny Standley famously proclaimed: "It's in the book"

 

[Lee Grant]

In the vast majority of cases there was no way in hell the offending player was able to roll, let alone move.

I've written about this before Blue, and said that referees are not refereeing to the letter of the law but the spirit of it.

Before the law crackdown (my words) last year, players were tackling in a way whereby their bodies fell between the tackled player and his team mates. McCaw was an expert at it and as long he did nothing after he hit the deck to make matter worse, he was not pinged, or not very often.

12 months ago the referees looked earlier in the tackle process to see what was the root cause of the obstruction and it was the McCaw snake slide down the opponents' side of the tackle before both players hit the deck. Everybody did it but the great Kiwi was its finest exponent.

All of a sudden players got penalised for doing The Snake when it wasn't really illegal but the root cause of something that was.

Now players are more careful about getting pinged by making an adjustment before they hit the deck, if they can. If they can't, they make a great show of not being able too though sometimes they get penalised anyway.

You won't see any reference to what I wrote above in any referee guidelines: it just happened. I'm not a great believer in referees who whistle up things that are not technically in the law book because when too many of them do something it can become a convention that becomes quasi-law, when it isn't law at all.

But sometimes the game becomes better for it, as when decades ago referees started allowing attacking scrummies to put their hands into the ruck to fish the ball out, which had hitherto been illegal, and unheard of 50 years ago.

I like getting rid of the root cause of players finding themselves on the wrong side of the tackle and if folks don't like it the law can be tweaked to enshrine it in an ELV so it can become law later on.



PS - and McCaw? Ever the great pragmatist he adjusted. Now we hardly ever see him do it. What we need now is to get rid of the root cause of taking up space on the opponent's side of the ruck, the So'oialo Sydnrome - or a variation of it: moseying back to position and getting in the way. Strangely enough, not, this moseying is done between the attacking 9 and the 10 and limits the options for the 9 or makes him delay what he wants to do.

I call this the McCaw Shuffle but he is by no means the only exponent. The Ospreys are obviously coached it, and the Wales national team does it very well.
.

 

[Newter]

PS - and McCaw? Ever the great pragmatist he adjusted. Now we hardly ever see him do it. What we need now is to get rid of the root cause of taking up space on the opponent's side of the ruck, the So'oialo Sydnrome - or a variation of it: moseying back to position and getting in the way. Strangely enough, not, this moseying is done between the attacking 9 and the 10 and limits the options for the 9 or makes him delay what he wants to do.

I call this the McCaw Shuffle but he is by no means the only exponent. The Ospreys are obviously coached it, and the Wales national team does it very well.
.

Horwill does it too. If you can't beat em, join em.

 

[Bruwheresmycar]

I don't know which cases we are referring to, but as a general statement. Most of the time a player is penalized for not rolling away, it is because he has fallen onto the opposition side of the tackle to prevent quick ball. (a great example was Mark Lawrence giving a yellow card to a Cheetah's prop in week 1 for doing it 5m out :lol: )

There is nothing saying a player who can't physically roll away (in the position he got caught in), cannot be pinged for "not rolling away".

If a player is genuinely unlucky to end up where he is, "ball unplayable" is a reasonable call - attacking feed.

 

[Blue]

Thanks all. Very valid points. I fully understand how we arrived here but it still gives me the shits that we seem to be introducing apparent solutions to problems, creating a whole lot of new ones. It seems absurd at times.

 

[Lindommer]

What we need now is to get rid of the root cause of taking up space on the opponent's side of the ruck, the So'oialo Sydnrome - or a variation of it: moseying back to position and getting in the way. Strangely enough, not, this moseying is done between the attacking 9 and the 10 and limits the options for the 9 or makes him delay what he wants to do.

So'oialo? God spare me, Lee, where's your memory gone? What about Fitzpatrick's aimless wanderings back onside before cards? How many times did Sean wear a passed pill from an Aussie halfback preceeding Simon Poidevin going ballistic on the telly.


I remember them well. Every single one of them.

 

[Waylon]

If you can't roll away you can't but if you slow the ball down you get penalised

Life isn't fair

 

[Bardon]

Last year Refs were hot on not releasing the ball when tackled and the tackler releasing the tackled player before trying to strip the ball. This year from what I've see in the 6Ns and S15 rolling away, sealing off and last feet are among the hot topics for Refs.

 

[qwerty51]

Sealing off is definitely the hot topic for referees in Super rugby, there's at least 2 incidents per game of this now.

 

[Gagger]

Strangely enough Blue, when I read the title I thought you were actually going to be referring to the number of times players are getting warned to roll away - or take their hands off - but then don't and the ref does nothing. And I'm not talking about a genuine on the feet challenge, I mean a rediculous off-your feet on the wrong side clusterfuck. Joubert is a cracker for it.

In fact, the simple act of giving the defenders the time in which the ref actually says "roll away" or "hands off" has already fucked the speed of the recycle. Joubert went from ruck to ruck in the RWC saying the same thing over and over again with the defence (for some reason I tend to remember Black shirts in these situations...) banking on the warning.

Kind of opposite to your point though

 

[sonny crockett]

Another interesting topic, and I think I have seen the words 'spirit of the game' mentioned somewhere. Happy to inform that winning is pretty important, and as long as you operate within the bounds of laws and current (current being directives and what actually happens on the field) all should be well. Of course it is coached to slow the ball down, thats a gimme, but it can also be somewhat controlled by having dominant ball carries, ie, you need to have an attack that controls the defence, and from the other perspective, you need to have a defence that controls the attack. McCaw, Fitzpatrick, experts at it. A long term study of McCaw, focussing solely on McCaw, and his entry and exit points reveals quite alot, and as has been suggested already, how he evolved that when interpretations changed. There are myriads of ways to slow down delivery of the stone, plenty of them very legal, some of them bordering on the edge of legality, and some outside the law, but happening that quickly in the context of all the other things happening (decisions to be made) that they are not caught out. Very similar to Melbourne's wrestle at the tackle, highly effective in allowing them ro reset their defensive line. Works a treat, just slowing the pill down by a very small amount. The key is attacks need to overcome it and develop strategies to not get caught in situations that preclude this taking place.

 

[Blue]

Strangely enough Blue, when I read the title I thought you were actually going to be referring to the number of times players are getting warned to roll away - or take their hands off - but then don't and the ref does nothing. And I'm not talking about a genuine on the feet challenge, I mean a rediculous off-your feet on the wrong side clusterfuck. Joubert is a cracker for it.

In fact, the simple act of giving the defenders the time in which the ref actually says "roll away" or "hands off" has already fucked the speed of the recycle. Joubert went from ruck to ruck in the RWC saying the same thing over and over again with the defence (for some reason I tend to remember Black shirts in these situations...) banking on the warning.

Kind of opposite to your point though

Actually I think what you are referring to is having an even more negative impact on the game.

I was really hoping the refs would rack up the cards in the early rounds to lay down the law but it seems they are rather just blowing more and warning more. More of the same it seems.

Last night's Irish game was a good example of what you are referring to. The amount of times the ref warned the Irish in the second half was ludicrous.