PDA

View Full Version : dummy in air



Not Kurt Weaver
21-10-09, 02:10
Would you allow a dummy pass from the supported jumper while still in the air?

Kind of a catch with a dummy pass back on the way down.

SimonSmith
21-10-09, 02:10
I can see what you're raising.

Why wouldn't you? And can you cite law to support that position? (yes, yes, I know...:) )

David J.
21-10-09, 04:10
I think it's fine.

For me the scenario I see is:

Red jumps, catches, fakes a throw to the receiver. Black cross the line to defend and are now offsides. Red now throws to the receiver. PK to Black?

What if Red throws and hits offsides Black?

ddjamo
21-10-09, 05:10
it's not a maul, ruck or scrum...have seen it and always thought to myself, "some day 'they' will not allow that."

oldman
21-10-09, 10:10
It would have to be quick.
Law 19.10(g)
[B]Lowering a player[B] Players who support a jumping team-mate must lower that player to the ground as soon as the ball is won by a player of either team.

Taff
21-10-09, 10:10
....Why wouldn't you?Perhaps I'm being thick here, but why would you allow it? :chin: Dummying from a ruck, maul or scrum is prohibited (ie the principle has been set) so why would we treat a LO any differently?

FlipFlop
21-10-09, 11:10
Dummying in open play is allowed.

And a general principle is - if there isn't a reason to disallow it, it's allowed (not the otherway round - to blow the whistle you need a reason). So unless you can point to a law that disallows it, then you allow it.

And the only objection I can think off would be the lowering instantly, or ungentlemanly conduct.

Taff
21-10-09, 11:10
Dummying in open play is allowed.

And a general principle is - if there isn't a reason to disallow it, it's allowed (not the otherway round - to blow the whistle you need a reason). So unless you can point to a law that disallows it, then you allow it.

And the only objection I can think off would be the lowering instantly, or ungentlemanly conduct.Ok, see your point, but when players dummy in open play, they don't trick the opposition into giving away an off-side penalty. A LO is a set piece and dummying is prohibited for the other set pieces, and to my mind it would be "ungentlemanly conduct". Sorry, don't mean to come across as argumentative, I'm just trying to be methodical. :o

Ian_Cook
21-10-09, 12:10
Ok, see your point, but when players dummy in open play, they don't trick the opposition into giving away an off-side penalty.

They could easily be, and are often, tricked into tackling a player without the ball!

In that case PK against the tackler?

Not on my paddock!!

Simon Thomas
21-10-09, 12:10
sorry guys this debate is too theoretical and out of line with accepted interpretations at all levels of the Game.

As I have said many times before the LoG are the framework in which we as referees manage the match. We look at materiality, impact, using contextual judgement & our expereince we make a decision to

a) ignore it totally
b) manage preventatively
c) acknowledge offence, but not blow as it is immaterial (at time or in overall context for match) and perhaps warn the miscreant (e.g. flanker early bind release but he is blind side and ball gone open, or he steps back).
d) blow for the offence

A referee's objective is to blow the whistle and penalise as little as possible, whilst managing & controlling the match safely and ensuring the LoG are followed and that neither team gets illegal benefits/advantages.

The caught ball "off-the-top" at line out is a skill, & positive tactical play (to keep across-the-line-offenders in check). The ball is visible to all players at all times, unlike the scrum / ruck / maul dummy where the ball may be hidden from many players, and hence is a tactic which is specifically outlawed in LoG - personally I used it a lot as a scrum half when it was legal and disagreed with it being outlawed.

In terms of lowering "as soon as the ball is won" we could have a similar debate to "release immediately" - usual interpretation is that a clean catch, held there for a second or so then down is perfectly acceptable.

OB..
21-10-09, 12:10
Why is dummying from a ruck, maul, or scrum prohibited?
Law 16.4 (f)

A player must not take any action to make the opposing team think that the ball is out of the ruck while it is still in the ruck.
(Similar wording in Laws 16 and 20)

In each case the offence is pretending to have the ball when you do not, and because of the heap of forwards, the opponents cannot see that. At the lineout that is not the case. The player clearly has the ball and dummies a pass. The significant difference from open play is that players who buy the dummy may go offside.

An open field dummy may well cause an opponent to tackle the assumed receiver - technically a penalty offence, but not one that is ever penalised per se.

Perhaps more relevant in the lineout is the prohibition on dummying the throw-in. That is in line with the general prohibition on contrived offences at a tap penalty.

I don't see lowering as relevant. It is commonplace to see the ball caught and passed almost in one movement when the jumper is at the top of his leap.

In the lineout, as long as the offside players retreat when they realise they have been fooled, I suggest play on because there is no law against it. If it draws a penalty offence, that is their own fault

OB..
21-10-09, 12:10
Got interrupted while composing that last effort - and now realise I was repeating previous posts! At least we are in agreement.

Ian_Cook
21-10-09, 14:10
Actually, I have seen the dummy off the top used quite well in a line-out throw, but not with the intent of contriving an offside PK.

The lifted player catches and dummies to the receiver as he is brought to ground; the opposition charge through the line-out to get at the receiver. The catcher heads off downfield with a couple of team-mates and no-one to stop them for the next 5-10m.

It usually only works once or twice, and often they are only fooled for a moment, but its often enough to get them heading the wrong way. It also puts doubt in the minds of the opponents line-out players, so that they might not be so keen to charge through.

Simon Thomas
21-10-09, 14:10
I know of three teams (one of whom I helped with pre-season coaching this year) who use the catch and dummy pass deliberately (on a special call) to slow down a particularly quick across the line oppo tail gunner.

Ian - what standard of match did you see the ploy you describe work at ? Any reasonably well coached team will have roles for each pod and line out participant. The catching jumper and his supporters should be always targetted either as a contest in the air or on landing, whatever others might do to block through the line pressure.

As a means of self-preservation I always insisted on very clear blocking and sweeping duties, especially when certain jumpers were playing who insisted on tap ball !

ddjamo
21-10-09, 15:10
personally, I like it...

historians - could we dummy off of rucks and scrums in the mid 80's? I could have sworn I remember that when I first started playing.

Lee Lifeson-Peart
21-10-09, 16:10
personally, I like it...

historians - could we dummy off of rucks and scrums in the mid 80's? I could have sworn I remember that when I first started playing.

Yes.

You weren't not allowed to do it IIRC. :confused:

Taff
21-10-09, 17:10
... historians - could we dummy off of rucks and scrums in the mid 80's? I could have sworn I remember that when I first started playing.It used to be allowed but I can't remember when it was changed. In fact I'm pretty sure Brynmor Williams (Cardiff / Wales and British Lions) used to think it was compulsory. :D

OB..
21-10-09, 17:10
The scrum restriction dates from 1992, ruck and maul from 1996.

Simon Thomas
21-10-09, 18:10
personally, I like it...

historians - could we dummy off of rucks and scrums in the mid 80's? I could have sworn I remember that when I first started playing.

Some time in 90s I suspect as I used it as a frequent playing tool in 1970s and all through 80s. I stopped playing 1990 and then started again in 1997 for three years by when it had been stopped.