PDA

View Full Version : Kick off Fair Challenge



ctrainor
06-08-15, 20:08
With the recent memo about fair challenges it got me thinking about restarts.
The game is all about fair contests at ruck,maul, tackle,scrum, line out etc (well it is at my level)
Only in recent years have we seen receiving teams lift catchers.
How can this be a fair contest?
It is almost Impossible for a chaser to legally contest a kick if his opposing catcher is being lifted.
It is also often dangerous especially with a single lifter and they get the timing/position wrong.
They outlawed lifting a teammate to block kicks at goal a few years ago. I think this practice should be outlawed too.

OB..
06-08-15, 22:08
With the recent memo about fair challenges it got me thinking about restarts.
The game is all about fair contests at ruck,maul, tackle,scrum, line out etc (well it is at my level)
Only in recent years have we seen receiving teams lift catchers.
How can this be a fair contest?
It is almost Impossible for a chaser to legally contest a kick if his opposing catcher is being lifted.
It is also often dangerous especially with a single lifter and they get the timing/position wrong.
They outlawed lifting a teammate to block kicks at goal a few years ago. I think this practice should be outlawed too.Part of the problem is that a running chaser can jump higher then a stationary defender. I think I prefer the defender to have an advantage in this case. The chaser can wait till the catcher lands, and that somewhat discourages (inaccurate) kicking.

Browner
07-08-15, 09:08
There is no other time ( in general play) that it would be acceptable for a player to be lifted to get protection from being challenged for a catch of possession, so I agree CTrainer its about time it was ditched as an acceptable practice.

There is no requirement for kick off catchers to be static, all it needs is for a teammate further down field to run forward and leap to get either the same in air protections that any receiver or chaser during general play.

Lifting was invented & became vogue to protect the catcher from dangerous 'levellings', but that problem has effectively been eradicated through making chasers 'responsible' if they don't legitimately challenge for the ball and hit a jumper mid air, now chasers have to demonstrate deliberate timings in their chase in all general play incidents.

TheBFG
07-08-15, 09:08
Don't kick it to the lifting pod then :shrug:

crossref
07-08-15, 11:08
I tend also to a shrug.
As bfg says, you can always kick somewhere else. Also It's quite a skill to set up a lift in open play, happy for that to be rewarded

Browner
07-08-15, 14:08
...... Also It's quite a skill to set up a lift in open play, happy for that to be rewarded

The mere fact that its not easy to setup doesn't legitimise its use.

It's arguable that lifters are obstructing an opponent's 'timely access' to the ball in open play & other than LO's when else in open play can opponents legally prevent your access to the ball by positioning themselves in this way?

There is no longer a justifiable reason why kick off catchers should get greater protections than say a fullback/winger seeking to catch a box kick etc, both can jump and therefore gain the now standard/ample "in the air" protections that are afforded & have now evolved into the game [..or maybe no15 should also be allowed to be lifted & then lowered only when sufficient time has elapsed for his teammates to have all repositioned themselves in support !!!! - :shrug:.... i'm actually surprised that we've never seen a coached attempt:chin:]

Rather than BFG's suggestion of merely avoid it [which requires pre suspicion of where it might be] I'm in favour of returning to the days when we didn't have it [ps...who first invented the use????]

Overall, its time to outlaw this outdated practice ,which IMHO, is contrary to the spirit of the game.

ctrainor
07-08-15, 16:08
I agree with the don't kick it there thought ( the number of times I see teams kick the same way with the same result is unbelievable) however it is clear to me that the lifter is not going for the ball and is in effect obstructing the fair contest. With a really strong lifter(s) the catcher can be held up for a few seconds totally negating any contest for the ball.

pwhaling
07-08-15, 16:08
Why should the challenge be fair? No other reatarts are fair. There should be a contest, but one side is always going to be favoured.

Rushforth
07-08-15, 16:08
Why should the challenge be fair? No other reatarts are fair. There should be a contest, but one side is always going to be favoured.

You have hit the nail on the head.

The requirement is not for "fairness", but rather for "fair contest". There should, as you say, be a contest. Fairness will follow if both teams can (= are able to) contest.

Any "strategem" in which the contest gets removed should be questioned.

crossref
07-08-15, 17:08
. With a really strong lifter(s) the catcher can be held up for a few seconds totally negating any contest for the ball.

I think that's def obstruction and you can manage/PK that out.

ChrisR
07-08-15, 17:08
There is a good reason not to legislate lifting the catcher out of the game.

Safety. With the protection afforded by the lifters the collisions in the air are eliminated.

OB..
07-08-15, 17:08
Wasn't there a clarification (or something) that said the lifters would be obstructing if they were in front of the catcher?

Browner
07-08-15, 18:08
There is a good reason not to legislate lifting the catcher out of the game.

Safety.

With the protection afforded by the lifters the collisions in the air are eliminated.

The game hasn't sought to eradicate mid air collisions per se'.
Granted safety was the valid reason for the introduction, but its no longer necessary given that there are adequate 'jumper in the air' protections.

Likelihood of RC [& further sanctioning] will deter smart chasers from upending kick off catchers who jump to gather.

The risk in this aspect of game play isn't significantly greater than in any open play kick catch.

Balones
07-08-15, 18:08
There is a good reason not to legislate lifting the catcher out of the game.

Safety. With the protection afforded by the lifters the collisions in the air are eliminated.

I have seen far too many examples of when the support has been inadequate and resulted in the supporters dropping the lifted player and causing more serious injury. The slightest 'nudge' to a supporter unstabilises the pod. On balance I am in the banning camp.

Why should a receiver be still? When I was coaching and playing I always insisted that a player moving forward should be taking the ball wherever possible.

OB..
07-08-15, 19:08
Why should a receiver be still? When I was coaching and playing I always insisted that a player moving forward should be taking the ball wherever possible.Ay, there's the rub.