PDA

View Full Version : [Law] Tap penalty to a runner clarifcation



didds
27-08-15, 07:08
U16s in England - my understanding its full rules if not specifically stated otherwise in the RFU youth regs for that age group.

Tap penalty to a runner.

can I clarify that a tap penalty, as the tap is made all players must be stationary - you cannot have a runner approaching at pace to whom a tap and pass is made?

But you can tap and pass (possibly to a stationary player who can then pass) to a player who started his run as the initial tap was made?

In the interests of avoiding pedantry, lets please for debate's sake ignore the usual caveats about safety yadda yadda yadda specifically - its taken as read that everything needs to be "safe" and i'm merely seeking clarification that my understanding is correct.

didds


PS Robbie - I was forced to choose a prefix but none of them fitted what I really wanted - I could choose junior as this is ultimately will be for an U16 side, but its not really a junior question, but a generic question about the laws at all levels. Maybe you need another prefix [FKs+PKs] ?

Dickie E
27-08-15, 07:08
Smells like a cavalry charge to me which is forbidden at all levels:

'Cavalry Charge’. The type of attack known as as a 'Cavalry Charge' usually happens near the goal line, when the attacking team is awarded a penalty kick or free kick. Either a single player stands some distance behind the kicker, or attacking players form a line across the field some distance behind the kicker.
These attacking players are usually a metre or two apart. At a signal from the kicker, they charge forward. When they get near, the kicker tap-kicks the ball and passes to a player who had started some distance behind the kicker.

Sanction: Penalty kick at the place of infringement

Let me guess: the 15 year old receiver of the ball is built like Herman Munster.

Phil E
27-08-15, 08:08
I agree with Dickie.
Cavalry charge as described. Banned no mater what the age group, including adults.

U16s use adult laws with U16 variations. A tap penalty at U16 is no different to adults.

dave_clark
27-08-15, 09:08
But you can tap and pass (possibly to a stationary player who can then pass) to a player who started his run as the initial tap was made?


not sure i agree with the previous responses...

in the original scenario, all players were still when the kick was taken. effectively it's a pop pass to a player running at pace, it just happens to be the second pass from a PK.

didds
27-08-15, 09:08
Let me guess: the 15 year old receiver of the ball is built like Herman Munster.

More like Israel Dagg!

I've been tasked with provising some tap penalty moves (because the line out is so pants). They already have "give it to the big bloke". I have some variations from a million years ago when i played but they all really only "work" because players are already moving. I was just checking that my understanding was correct - that yes, it is a cavalry charge.

didds

didds
27-08-15, 09:08
Right... so

1) all players still
2) PK is tapped
3) players start to move
4) runner receives pass from tapper

Is fine?

And

1) all players still
2) PK is tapped
3) players start to move
4) tapper passes to static player.
5) static player passes to runner

Is also fine? (3 and 4 interchangeable?)

didds

didds
27-08-15, 09:08
which has reminded me...

the 1970s Australian star burst move is now outlawed as-a-concept if not in actual law - correct? (without the ball up the jumper bit!)

didds

Phil E
27-08-15, 10:08
Right... so

1) all players still
2) PK is tapped
3) players start to move
4) runner receives pass from tapper

Is fine?

And

1) all players still
2) PK is tapped
3) players start to move
4) tapper passes to static player.
5) static player passes to runner

Is also fine? (3 and 4 interchangeable?)

didds

Yes.

It's the running BEFORE the ball is tapped that might constitute a cavalry charge.

crossref
27-08-15, 13:08
A cavalry charge is banned
But there is nothing in the law to say people have to be stationary, whether the receiver or anyone else.
What is illegal is *charging* not moving

didds
27-08-15, 14:08
Ok... so what is "charging" ?

* running full pelt, screaming?
* running full pelt
* running hard
* running 3/4s pace
* jogging
* walking

??

This isn't a dig at CRs point, but if the nuance is "charging" then - at the risk of minutiae like queries - what does "charging" actually mean?

I suspect of course that understandably you'll all have different opinions :)

And it is relevant because - akin to outfielders in cricket - a player on the move finds it easier to accelerate.

didds

John3822
27-08-15, 14:08
Ok... so what is "charging" ?

* running full pelt, screaming?
* running full pelt
* running hard
* running 3/4s pace
* jogging
* walking

??

This isn't a dig at CRs point, but if the nuance is "charging" then - at the risk of minutiae like queries - what does "charging" actually mean?

I suspect of course that understandably you'll all have different opinions :)

And it is relevant because - akin to outfielders in cricket - a player on the move finds it easier to accelerate.

didds

I would have thought anything more than a walk, and a slow walk at that. In order to discourage any thoughts of a cavalry charge, I usually manage it by saying something along the lines of, "Don't move until the ball is tapped." Seems to work

didds
27-08-15, 14:08
I I usually manage it by saying something along the lines of, "Don't move until the ball is tapped." Seems to work

... even though that is contrary to the advice provided by Crossref who is also a London Society referee?

Not trying to catch you out at all - but something as simple as this I wondered might be standard across at least a society?

didds

ChrisR
27-08-15, 16:08
Law 10.4(p) is the poorest law explanation with the possible exception of law 19.

Start by removing all references following "usually". Then ignore the sentence that starts with "Either".

What is left is the prohibition of a player charging forward, before the ball is tapped, to receive the ball.

It doesn't define "charging" but it is fair to assume that "charging" is more than a trot.

It does reference "forward" so players may move laterally. They are not required to be stationary. So a pass to a player looping into a wider channel is OK as long as he's not moving forward at the moment of the tap.

And a pass to a stationary player, then to the charging player? The law doesn't limit it to the first pass from the tap as it is the "charging forward" at the moment of the tap that is restricted.

Can one player be a Cavalry Charge? The term seems to imply more than one player but the restriction really only applies to the player receiving the ball so in this case one player is the cavalry.

crossref
27-08-15, 16:08
First - there are tap PK and tap PK

On the one hand is prearranged moves -- which is where we beware cavalry charges, and on the opther hand are Danny Care like quickly take taps.

Clearly when Danny care taps and runs we don't mind if the players around him run with him, and may well receive a pass

On the other hand when we have an organised tap-PK move we have to think about charges.

I reckon you know a charge when you see it.
It's legal to be moving when you enter a ruck, but it's illegal to charge into a ruck. This doesn't cause us problems, we all know a charge when we see it.

Phil E
27-08-15, 16:08
... even though that is contrary to the advice provided by Crossref who is also a London Society referee?

Not trying to catch you out at all - but something as simple as this I wondered might be standard across at least a society?

didds

Didds you know full well that the laws are not black and white, but in this instance you seem to be trying to get them to be.
Charging is whatever the referee deems it to be. You see it and then decide if it is or isn't. That may sound vague, but it's a case of "you just know it when you see it".


charge verb (MOVE FORWARD)
to ​move ​forward ​quickly and ​violently, ​especially towards something that has ​caused ​difficulty or ​anger:
The ​bull ​lowered ​its ​horns and charged.
The ​violence ​began when the ​police charged (at) a ​crowd of ​demonstrators.
informal to ​hurry from one ​place to another:
I've been charging about/around all ​day and I'm ​exhausted.
He came charging up the ​stairs to ​tell me the good ​news.

SimonSmith
27-08-15, 17:08
Part of what worries me about applying the "no charge" edict to the runner who gets it from the first receiver is that at some point you have to say that a strike runner is OK. Second receiver? Third?

Where does that line get drawn?

didds
27-08-15, 20:08
I reckon you know a charge when you see it.
.

So - would a jog be a charge? Some clearly think so ...

Thing is as a coach to 15 year olds, some of who are quite literal, others who are not overly bright, and many of which seem to want to turn every decision and instruction into an opportunity to hold an inquest, I am trying to come up with something they can

- easily understand
- easily put into practise
- are not going to find out one week its OK and the next it isn't.
- faced with the immediate above don't then (rightly or wrongly) exacerbate the scenario with the referee asking him why it was Ok last week
- then doing the same to me at next practise.

we can all say as their coach I need to teach them discipline and respect etc - but i get these lads for 40 minutes a week, and clearly their parents and teachers have failed to do it. Or I suppose have suppressed them so much this is their one chance to actually query and question - which on the whole as their coach I am happy for them to do but it needs to focussed and not generalised.

Christ, last Friday I had to spend time explaining why ONE line was the tryline and not some other TOTALLY UNMARKED AND NON EXISTENT LINE!

So apologies for being dog at a bone like... but I just need to make my life simple as much as these lads!

LOL - I think...

didds

didds
27-08-15, 21:08
Didds you know full well that the laws are not black and white, but in this instance you seem to be trying to get them to be.
Charging is whatever the referee deems it to be. You see it and then decide if it is or isn't. That may sound vague, but it's a case of "you just know it when you see it".

all with you there Phil - I know.

Thing is you see,... a jog could never surely be classified as "to ​move ​forward ​quickly and ​violently". Yet its clear that some here wouldn't even permit a jog. I can however understand that a binary situation is a simple one :-)

I'm happy anyway that a jog is not charging. WADR to you all I can not see that it would ever be.

didds


didds

OB..
27-08-15, 21:08
Let's forget the precise wording and think about the basic tactic that WR decided was sufficiently dangerous to warrant putting something in the laws.

Near the goal line, the defenders are on the line and have to stop the attackers well short of that line. They cannot move until the ball is tapped. The attackers are spread out so it is not clear who is going to get the ball, which means tackles are likely to be one-on-one. If the attackers are moving before the ball is tapped, they will also have momentum to help them penetrate the defence.

The defenders will be on a hair trigger to charge out as fast as they can the moment the ball is tapped. The resulting collisions are what IMHO WR decided were far too risky to be allowed.

The speed at which the attackers are moving (they have a choice) may well be less significant than the speed of the defenders (who have no cboice).


I would have thought anything more than a walk, and a slow walk at that. In order to discourage any thoughts of a cavalry charge, I usually manage it by saying something along the lines of, "Don't move until the ball is tapped." Seems to workI endorse that approach.

(It is called a cavalry charge simply because that was the name given to the tactic when it first appeared.)

Robert Burns
28-08-15, 02:08
The tap is the point at which the Opposition can start to move from their 10m line towards the ball, so it makes sense to me that to remain equitable, the ball carriers team have the same requirement. Once the original tap is made it's open play and all tactics around this are fair (second runner on, looping, etc..).

I don't have any issues with either team moving, but running at speed to take a ball at momentum at the time of tap, which gives the attackers an unfair advantage to break a stationary line doesn't sound right.

And while there is no reason the defence could not try the same thing, every coach knows it would be a logistical nightmare to get right, and provide a huge weakness to the defensive line.

So in essence, to me it's a law to provide equity of the restarting of general play. YMMV

Robert Burns
28-08-15, 03:08
PS Robbie - I was forced to choose a prefix but none of them fitted what I really wanted - I could choose junior as this is ultimately will be for an U16 side, but its not really a junior question, but a generic question about the laws at all levels. Maybe you need another prefix [FKs+PKs] ?

Isn't it a Law question??

FlipFlop
28-08-15, 08:08
Personally I don't see the Cavalry Charge as dangerous, and don't understand why it is still in the book.

didds
28-08-15, 09:08
... I don't have any issues with either team moving, but running at speed to take a ball at momentum at the time of tap, which gives the attackers an unfair advantage to break a stationary line doesn't sound right.


this is getting dangerously close to what Robert asked us to avoid, but as its Robert... ;-)

I follow the reasoning indeed.

For debate's sake can someone explain the difference between a defense locked on an offside line unable to move and a line of attackers moving at speed in reasonable proximity to the defenders towards a stationary ball about to be passed

- at a tap PK/FK
- at a ruck (ball at base)

Because I can't!

didds

didds

didds
28-08-15, 09:08
Isn't it a Law question??

good point!! Except then aren't "they all" law questions?

LOL.

didds

Robert Burns
28-08-15, 09:08
this is getting dangerously close to what Robert asked us to avoid, but as its Robert... ;-)

I follow the reasoning indeed.

For debate's sake can someone explain the difference between a defense locked on an offside line unable to move and a line of attackers moving at speed in reasonable proximity to the defenders towards a stationary ball about to be passed

- at a tap PK/FK
- at a ruck (ball at base)

Because I can't!

didds

didds

As long as we avoid the "If a defenders lace is just over the offside line, is he offside type questions"

The difference is that with the current interpretation both players will arrive at a 5M line prepared for contact.

Without this a attacker can get the momentum to break the defensive line, while the defence can get no momentum to counter it.

Is it right, I don't know, but current interpretation is as per what others have posted regarding a calvery charge, and that will be the most consistent answer you'll get, even if it doesn't answer all of your query fully.

Jacko
28-08-15, 09:08
Personally I don't see the Cavalry Charge as dangerous, and don't understand why it is still in the book.

Interesting point. How is it any different from a ruck near the try line where attackers run full pelt toward the try and have the ball popped from the base of the ruck??

Ian_Cook
28-08-15, 10:08
didds

A suggestion...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzZMpfpIwIw

And this is that other code, but still good...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v1e7YEqzkE

didds
28-08-15, 10:08
Interesting point. How is it any different from a ruck near the try line where attackers run full pelt toward the try and have the ball popped from the base of the ruck??

indeed - hence my query above.

Unfortunately I didn't understand Robbie's attempt to explain the difference as both situations potentially have the defense not moving until the pass (indeed, a tap PK requires a split second extra before the pass if anything) with the attackers already moving.

except it seems cavalry charges only apparently exist at taps, not at ruck pop passes. which is what I don't understand.

Im not trying to justify cavalry cjharges at taps - i can see the inherrent safety issues. I just cannot het a handle on

- what actually constitutes a charge, but am happy in myself now that a jog has to be acceptable anbd if the ref disagrees on the day we'll just have to go with that interpretation

- why a pop pass from a ruck base is different and allowable when the safety element is the same. Jacko clearly agrees with me here.

didds

didds

didds
28-08-15, 10:08
That first one was used by hawera Athletic as far back as 1992 cos our in-goals on the main picth were a full 22 metres deep. :-)

didds

didds
28-08-15, 11:08
didds

A suggestion...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzZMpfpIwIw


Hmm... so why is that NOT a cavalry charge by the baa-Baas?

Multiple players running towards the in-goal before the kick was made?

didds

Dan_A
28-08-15, 11:08
didds

A suggestion...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzZMpfpIwIw

And this is that other code, but still good...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v1e7YEqzkE

I was thinking of the first of these too - and we are saying this is ok because he taps to himself, then they run then he kicks, right?

** edited - as I solved my first question **

didds
28-08-15, 13:08
But surely a chip in the air to himself is no difference than a tap along the ground to himself?

the players are moving before his in-goal chip, which is on a par to a pass to a player. The ball is live - as it would be if he had tapped it along the ground.



didds

Robert Burns
28-08-15, 13:08
Fair point about the ball at the back of a ruck.

crossref
28-08-15, 13:08
Personally I don't see the Cavalry Charge as dangerous, and don't understand why it is still in the book.

Interesting point. How is it any different from a ruck near the try line where attackers run full pelt toward the try and have the ball popped from the base of the ruck??

I think the reasons would be
1 defenders are much closer
2 being open it's more difficult for the attackers to time and execute, in reality the charger is not going to be going so fast.

Ian_Cook
28-08-15, 13:08
Hmm... so why is that NOT a cavalry charge by the baa-Baas?

Multiple players running towards the in-goal before the kick was made?

didds

The danger in a cavalry charge in the static defender trying to tackle a player who has built up a head of steam. In the baa-baas move, there is no pop-pass so no tackle to be made.

didds
28-08-15, 14:08
Absolutely Ian! But the referee wouldn't know that until the moment the ball left the boot for the in-goal reverse kick. Up until that juncture he could have been about to make a pop pass to a runner. which wold bring about a collission very quickly given the shorter (5m) distance involved.

didds

didds
28-08-15, 14:08
[ruck pop pass scenario]in reality the charger is not going to be going so fast.

really? we tend to see "floppers" from ruck pop passes on the whole - but we do certainly do see charging rhino type pop passes at rucks.


didds

MrQeu
28-08-15, 14:08
I'd say the Baabas start moving AFTER the tap kick is done. Therefore, legal.

Dan_A
28-08-15, 15:08
I'd say the Baabas start moving AFTER the tap kick is done. Therefore, legal.


Yes, completely agree.

L'irlandais
29-08-15, 08:08
...Thing is as a coach to 15 year olds, ... I am trying to come up with something they can

- easily understand
- easily put into practise...when I read the OP, it did not strike me that you were looking for something along the lines of a charge, rather something like the classic Wall set piece (http://www.rugbydump.com/2007/07/168/the-classic-wall-set-piece-try-by-sale-sharks) ; maybe what you need.

didds
30-08-15, 10:08
the classic wall set piece is amongst some ideas... but the "running players" need to time their run from the wall not the tap clearly. I just wanted to clarify the situation wrt runners at the tap.

I was thinking of the over the head chip that ian linked to (based on my Hawera days) - but again the timing of the runs is imperative.

As it is I do have a couple of other ideas unrelated to runners - which i will be writing up for dan cotterell's Rugby Coach Weekly in due course for those that subscribe :)

didds

Dickie E
30-08-15, 10:08
the classic wall set piece is amongst some ideas... but the "running players" need to time their run from the wall not the tap clearly. I just wanted to clarify the situation wrt runners at the tap.

I was thinking of the over the head chip that ian linked to (based on my Hawera days) - but again the timing of the runs is imperative.

As it is I do have a couple of other ideas unrelated to runners - which i will be writing up for dan cotterell's Rugby Coach Weekly in due course for those that subscribe :)

didds

or maybe work on the lineout???

crossref
30-08-15, 15:08
That wall try is a great. There are a number of reasons you might find fault with it, but NOT because anyone was moving before the tap... As it's clearly NOT a *charge*

Chris_j
30-08-15, 19:08
Not least the NFL style off the ball blocking of defenders by the wall members to clear a huge hole through which the receiver ran!

Fatboy_Ginge
31-08-15, 11:08
Having had this last season I stopped the runner as he started about 10m back and was in full flow when he received the ball. I made them play the penalty again after I explained to both teams that their runners could start moving when the ball was played AND NOT BEFORE. They were happy and when I explained to the coaches as well at half time, they were happy as well.

crossref
31-08-15, 12:08
Having had this last season I stopped the runner as he started about 10m back and was in full flow when he received the ball. I made them play the penalty again after I explained to both teams that their runners could start moving when the ball was played AND NOT BEFORE. They were happy and when I explained to the coaches as well at half time, they were happy as well.

..but happy or not, it's not really correct. The Law prohibits *charging* it doesn't prohibit moving.

Dickie E
01-09-15, 03:09
..but happy or not, it's not really correct. The Law prohibits *charging* it doesn't prohibit moving.

"in full flow" is probably charging

didds
01-09-15, 08:09
or maybe work on the lineout???

Of course - and that's occurring too. But if nothing else (and lineout aside) the useless and toothless FK in midfield would still be a valid scenario.

didds

didds
01-09-15, 09:09
Not least the NFL style off the ball blocking of defenders by the wall members to clear a huge hole through which the receiver ran!

which defenders did they block from making a tackle in that clip? There's npot a single defender in the vicinity of the wall.

didds

didds
01-09-15, 09:09
"in full flow" is probably charging


it undoubtedly is.

But that isn't what FBG said to the teams and coaches.

"I explained to both teams that their runners could start moving when the ball was played AND NOT BEFORE."

crossref
01-09-15, 09:09
"in full flow" is probably charging

Yes, but Fatboy said


Having had this last season I stopped the runner as he started about 10m back and was in full flow when he received the ball..

that sounds perfectly correct

but this sounds too restrictive


I made them play the penalty again after I explained to both teams that their runners could start moving when the ball was played AND NOT BEFORE. They were happy and when I explained to the coaches as well at half time, they were happy as well.

for instance if various players are strolling around as the PK is taken, that's not a cavalry charge.

Chris_j
01-09-15, 21:09
which defenders did they block from making a tackle in that clip? There's npot a single defender in the vicinity of the wall.

didds
Of course not, they started 10m back. But the right hand wall player was the only one not to play the ball and he ran straight out and played a defender without the ball, wrapping him, creating the gap.