PDA

View Full Version : Never seen this before



Phil E
08-09-14, 13:09
Premiership Rugby, Leicester v Newcastle Video.

http://www.premiershiprugby.tv/LatestVideos?utm_source=latest&utm_medium=site&utm_campaign=dropdown

At around 01-13-09 on the slider Leicester get a 5m scrum after Newcastle drag the ball back over their own goal line. The No 8 gets the ball at his feet and while the scrum drives over the line he holds the ball between his feet and "bunny hops" over the line, where the SH dives on the ball.

Never seen that before, has anyone else?

Andrew1974
08-09-14, 13:09
Never seen it before...but his 'bunny hop' control was excellent!

Taff
08-09-14, 13:09
Are you seen it once (IIRC in a televised Scarlets game last season) but it is illegal.

I was sure that I had read that picking up with your feet was not allowed and sure enough it is in the lawbook. Don't ask me to give you the law number as I am still having Internet problems.

crossref
08-09-14, 13:09
20.9 Scrum - general restrictions

(b) All players: Handling in the scrum. Players must not handle the ball in the scrum or pick it up with their legs. Sanction: Penalty kick

Who would give the PK ?

Dixie
08-09-14, 13:09
The No 8 gets the ball at his feet and while the scrum drives over the line he holds the ball between his feet and "bunny hops" over the line, where the SH dives on the ball.

Never seen that before, has anyone else? Shouldn't have done, because of 20.9(b):

20.9(b) All players: Handling in the scrum. Players must not handle the ball in the scrum or pick it
up with their legs.
Sanction: Penalty kick

Phil E
08-09-14, 13:09
Are feet part of your legs, or a separate body part?

RobLev
08-09-14, 14:09
Are feet part of your legs, or a separate body part?

Mine are attached to my legs - aren't yours..?

A little more seriously, I can't see the clip, but since a rugby ball is 580-620mm in girth, or roughly 8 inches in diameter at its widest point, I suspect that he was actually holding the ball with his ankles which are definitively part of the legs.

Blackberry
08-09-14, 14:09
Definite penalty from what I hear.... I wonder if we are going to get any imitators of it at our levels next week? :)

Jacko
08-09-14, 14:09
Would have been a penalty try anyway as it happens.

Phil E
08-09-14, 14:09
Still from the apex of one of the hops.

3004

winchesterref
08-09-14, 15:09
20.9 Scrum - general restrictions

(b) All players: Handling in the scrum. Players must not handle the ball in the scrum or pick it up with their legs. Sanction: Penalty kick

Who would give the PK ?

Me, now you've kindly refreshed my memory!
Clear PK.

Taff
08-09-14, 16:09
I had a vague memory that it was an offence, which is why I looked it up after the Scarlets game (in that match it went unpunished) but I would have assumed it was more of a technical offence (ie a FK) than a PK offence.

Dixie
08-09-14, 16:09
A related point from the Quins v Irish game: AR (Ash Rowden?) called in a flanker hooking the ball out of the tunnel, and Greg Garner immediately recognised it as the (fairly unusual) FK it is. Professional flanker admitted he had no idea it was an offence.

KML1 of this parish performed sterling TMO work when called upon, unfazed by being named by the commentators as Dean Richards at the start of the match.

irishref
08-09-14, 17:09
Yes, I recall Munster doing it a few years ago... Dennis Leamy at 8

http://www.rugbydump.com/2007/11/270/denis-leamys-bunny-hopping-madness-at-the-back-of-the-scrum

OB..
08-09-14, 22:09
From Gallaher and Stead's book The Compleat Rugby Footballer (1906)

When we decide to screw the scrum instead of letting the ball go clean out of it, the lock man gives the word. At the same time he dips down and picks the ball up between his knees, and he retains it there until the screwing movement has been completed and he is clear of the scrum
In 1911, this practice started to become common in England, so the RFU introduced a law that it was illegal to pick the ball up in a scrummage by hands or legs.

Browner
08-09-14, 23:09
From Gallaher and Stead's book The Compleat Rugby Footballer (1906)

In 1911, this practice started to become common in England, so the RFU introduced a law that it was illegal to pick the ball up in a scrummage by hands or legs.

OB you're a star sometimes, wonderful info.

I can only imagine that picking up the ball with legs/knees/shins/ankles/feet are all done to avoid losing control of the ball whilst scrum is moving, so in that context it has to considered illegal , assuming the intention of this new 1911 law was to negate the practice and make losing control a real possibility.

So, PK it must be.

menace
09-09-14, 01:09
Something like this has happened to me in a game, and I viewed it a little differently. Firstly it was a bit if a surprise as I'd never seen it before and honestly I really didn't know what to make of it as my mind flashed through the law book to determine if any laws were broken.

In my instance the #8 when he picked up the ball between his feet had only his 2 hands on the back of his locks so as to maintain stability. So effectively at that time he had unbound and at that point I had deemed the scrum over. Therefore I did not see that as picking the ball up in the scrum. So I would say he has rights to pick up the ball with his feet. But his action had created a potentially effective 'obstruction'. I was prepared to allow players to come round and tackle the #8, but none did, and so the obstruction was not really material either.

Mind you within 2 hops he'd let the ball go to his 9, and he was duly cleaned up by the opposing flanker. No material affect on the game as I viewed it so I was happy to 'play on'.

Thoughts?

Perhaps in hindsight I got that wrong and was better to stop the hopping with a PK? (Not that it happened again so didn't have to 'manage it')

OB..
09-09-14, 13:09
In my instance the #8 when he picked up the ball between his feet had only his 2 hands on the back of his locks so as to maintain stability. So effectively at that time he had unbound and at that point I had deemed the scrum over. Therefore I did not see that as picking the ball up in the scrum. So I would say he has rights to pick up the ball with his feet. But his action had created a potentially effective 'obstruction'. I was prepared to allow players to come round and tackle the #8, but none did, and so the obstruction was not really material either. If you decide the scrum is over, at a time when the opposition might well believe it isn't, you should say so. I suspect both sides thought the scrum was continuing, which is why nobody came round to challenge. They can't tackle if he is just playing the ball with his feet, but they could kick it away or even fall on it.

I do not subscribe to the view that it can only be obstruction if players attempt to get to the ball carrier. It must be likely that they could get to him but for the obstruction, but I see no legal requirement for a token effort.

Browner
09-09-14, 16:09
If you decide the scrum is over, at a time when the opposition might well believe it isn't, you should say so. I suspect both sides thought the scrum was continuing, which is why nobody came round to challenge. They can't tackle if he is just playing the ball with his feet, but they could kick it away or even fall on it.
.

This.

Although theoretically if you deem the scrum ended by reason of the bind release, then if a player then picks it up with his knees is he now merely a ball carrier, and liable to being tackled?

In any event a clear shout is best practice, but shout what?

" ball out"
" scrum over"
" play on"
"Bind finished"

? Other

( but not "use it" coz of the 5s expectation)

OB..
09-09-14, 16:09
This.

Although theoretically if you deem the scrum ended by reason of the bind release, then if a player then picks it up with his knees is he now merely a ball carrier, and liable to being tackled?

In any event a clear shout is best practice, but shout what?

" ball out"
" scrum over"
" play on"
"Bind finished"

? Other

( but not "use it" coz of the 5s expectation)Technically if the #8 undinds but does not pick up the ball, it is a PK. Even if you choose to claim he picked it up with his feet, he has still unbound and the scrum is over.

I would recommend shouting "Ball out" so both sidies know the scrum is over.

Then later take an opportunity to explain to the #8 what is rquired.

Phil E
09-09-14, 20:09
Video here: http://www.leicestertigers.com/matchdaytv/index.php?play=media&id=19147

menace
10-09-14, 00:09
If you decide the scrum is over, at a time when the opposition might well believe it isn't, you should say so. I suspect both sides thought the scrum was continuing, which is why nobody came round to challenge. They can't tackle if he is just playing the ball with his feet, but they could kick it away or even fall on it.

I do not subscribe to the view that it can only be obstruction if players attempt to get to the ball carrier. It must be likely that they could get to him but for the obstruction, but I see no legal requirement for a token effort.

In hindsight I tend to agree OB and take your point that perhaps a verbal 'something' would have been best but at the time it all happened in 2 seconds (2 or 3 hops) and it was over, no one seemed advantaged or disadvantaged so in the end decided I found good enough reason not to blow the whistle. I'd deal with it differently next time I'm sure.

In regards to your obstruction comment, I interpret that you're saying that every obstruction is material and therefore should be called? Isn't that getting on a slippery slope? The are regular obstructions in broken play, and if we called them all we'd be stopping the game a lot?

menace
10-09-14, 00:09
Video here: http://www.leicestertigers.com/matchdaytv/index.php?play=media&id=19147

Interesting...has anyone come out at all and said the move is illegal?

RobLev
10-09-14, 02:09
...

In regards to your obstruction comment, I interpret that you're saying that every obstruction is material and therefore should be called? Isn't that getting on a slippery slope? The are regular obstructions in broken play, and if we called them all we'd be stopping the game a lot?

OB can answer for himself but, for my part, insisting on the defenders tackling a man without the ball so as to get a PK against the attackers for obstruction risks letting the game get out of hand. The obstruction is complete and material when the attacker is prevented from making a tackle he'd otherwise have been able to make. Taking away the option of tackling the ball-carrier is surely always material?

Again, for 10.1(b), (c) (d) and (e) the obstruction has to be intentional; and for 10.1(a) and (e) contact is required by law; so most of the "regular obstructions" in broken play (if by that you mean inadvertent masking of the ball carrier as everyone runs in all directions) would not be offences.

menace
10-09-14, 03:09
Agree RobLev, but in your post you use the words 'prevented' and 'intentional', and I agree with you without issue these are material and need to be pulled up. In the scenario I'd posted, imo, nobody was effectively 'prevented' as someone could have come round and chopped him down, equally the 'hopper' had no intention for obstruction as they didn't know what they were doing was wrong. Also for eg...there is often lots of obstruction when BC runs behind their player, they may have even touched them, but we may let them go because there was no defender prevented from reaching the BC and the BC didn't obstruct intentionally and there was no material affect to anyone. So it's those sorts of immaterial 'obstructions' I interpreted OB may have meant should still be pulled up?
I guess like anything, it's a judgment call on the ref to determine 'prevented' and 'intention' when it comes to obstruction. I was just picking OBs thoughts on his interpretation.

menace
10-09-14, 03:09
Interesting...has anyone come out at all and said the move is illegal?

ps....other than those in this forum of course. I meant anyone in high places associated with coaching, elite refereeing, 'expert' journalists etc

Phil E
10-09-14, 10:09
Not that I am aware of.
Would have been interesting to hear what the assessor had to say on the day?

Browner
10-09-14, 11:09
In hindsight I tend to agree OB and take your point that perhaps a verbal 'something' would have been best but at the time it all happened in 2 seconds (2 or 3 hops) and it was over, no one seemed advantaged or disadvantaged so in the end decided I found good enough reason not to blow the whistle. I'd deal with it differently next time I'm sure.



Actually 10 hops, over 5 Meters.

The opposition mustve been disadvantaged, as the ball had no opportunity to spill out the side.

I expect to see this removed from scrummaging 'armoury" soon, via clarification , from someone !?! ......... The alternative is ludicrous over usage if the elite guys think this is a law loopholl to bunny hop through.

I suspect that it simply caught the ref by surprise.

OB..
10-09-14, 12:09
In regards to your obstruction comment, I interpret that you're saying that every obstruction is material and therefore should be called? Isn't that getting on a slippery slope? The are regular obstructions in broken play, and if we called them all we'd be stopping the game a lot?
I do not subscribe to the view that it can only be obstruction if players attempt to get to the ball carrier. It must be likely that they could get to him but for the obstruction, but I see no legal requirement for a token effort.
I though that was a pretty clear requirement for materiality.