Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 45

Thread: Interesting Tap Tactics

      
  1. #11

    Referees in England
    Dixie's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Retired from Berkshire
    Grade
    8
    Join Date
    26 Oct 06
    Posts
    12,770
    Thanks (Received)
    30
    Likes (Received)
    330

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Quote Originally Posted by viper492 View Post
    I disagree somewhat with you on [14 year-olds being expected to take a tap properly]. I would usually allow them to have a second go at it ... - You'd be surprised how many of these kids, despite having played for 5 or 6 years, still don't know how to take a tap properly ... they should all know but the evidence suggests otherwise. ... the usual ethos is a 'take it again' in most of our junior rugby - To be absolutely honest when I awarded the scrum it was the second time I'd done that in 3 seasons of refereeing and I'm not sure if I've seen any other ref awarding one at a junior level (up to U16) for it... Which is very surprising given how often it occurs.
    So what you are very clearly saying is that you have an astonishingly high incidence of a recurring problem with poor technique that ought to result in a scrum - bit like a failure to catch a ball - which, due to universally-low expectation among officials, is not properly sanctioned, with the offenders being given another go. You feel that actualy awarding a scrum would not be good for the players.

    My own view is exactly opposite. The players know that the refs lack the cojones to deal with the issue properly, so they have no incentive to perfect their tap technique. The risk with a tap is that the ball is kicked beyond the grasp of urgent fingers, resulting in at best a slow recovery and distribution, or at worst a knock-on - whereas a tap without release bears no such risk. As long as there is no sanction, it makes absolute sense to avoid the proper tap. When I reffed U.11, we resolved these issues within a season by awarding the scrum - not always without a warning, but probably every other game there was a scrum. By U.13, you never ever saw the tap against the boot.

    Quote Originally Posted by viper492 View Post
    I saw this obviously practiced manuever begin to come into action - players running dummy runs on various angles with the Gold side unable to see what's happening and being forced to commit to these runners while the halfback spreads the ball wide. Pretty impressive but I feel it is really against the spirit of the game.
    Can you tell us why you feel this is contrary to the spirit of the game? Do you perhaps feel that it's all about getting a 15-stone islander to smash through ranked defenders, so a team without such a player resorting to subtlety is cheating? There is a very effective move from a lineout whereby the blind winger ghosts into a gap between 10 and 12. His run is masked by the presence of the lineout players. Does that also fall beyond your fairness parameter - and if so ... why?
    Don't feed the pedant!

  2. #12
    Player or Coach ChrisR's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    None
    Grade
    Select Grade
    Join Date
    14 Jul 10
    Posts
    3,227
    Thanks (Received)
    33
    Likes (Received)
    320

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    There are two parts to the original post.

    1. Improper kick. From definitions a kick " .... must move the ball a visible distance out of the hand, or along the ground". Tapping the ball with the foot is not a kick. Therefore, to my way of thinking, the kick has not been taken so play has not restarted and there is no sanction. Remind player of the requirement for a kick and restart. Period. U-14 or otherwise, first and every time. To change a penalty (serious offense) to an advantage (scrum) to the offending team for such a minor technical issue is an anathema to me.

    2. Unusual tap kick. Refer to Law 21.4(h),(i),(j) & (k). The formation as described in the OP seems to violate 21.4(h). If this is a set play then players could be instructed to retire to be onside before the tap is taken.

    I remember a similar ploy many years ago where about five players would line up with their backs to the ops, to the side but behind the ball, the SH would tap and pass the ball to one of the players. Teammates would then run at a variety of angles and the ball would be pitched to one. It died from lack of effectiveness and the law change that allowed a PK to touch to go touch and the throw by the non-offenders.

    Never used it but it looked like fun.

  3. #13
    Banned

    Soc/Assoc
    n/a
    Grade
    < player
    Join Date
    20 Jan 12
    Posts
    6,000
    Thanks (Received)
    19
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Dixie is spot on, Learn early, learn once.

    . You'd be surprised how many of these kids, despite having played for 5 or 6 years, still don't know how to take a tap properly
    Maybe referee leniency (or dad/ ref inexperience) or 'lack of consequence' is exactly why these players don't do it correctly. Most teams have 'experienced' 9s & its the quick thinking experienced players they who take the majority of QTP & QFK in juniors.

    My experience says you call it ' once' and you don't need to do it a second time in most matches, kids learn, u10+ is all about learning. I've coached through these age groups and its not a difficult technique to instill.

    Zero tolerance from u13+ gets my vote, exactly as does crooked feeds!

  4. #14

    Advises in England
    OB..'s Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    Glos & District
    Grade
    Adviser (grass roots)
    Join Date
    07 Oct 04
    Posts
    22,552
    Thanks (Received)
    110
    Likes (Received)
    1554

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Quote Originally Posted by Marauder View Post
    There are two parts to the original post.

    1. Improper kick. From definitions a kick " .... must move the ball a visible distance out of the hand, or along the ground". Tapping the ball with the foot is not a kick. Therefore, to my way of thinking, the kick has not been taken so play has not restarted and there is no sanction.
    21.4 (d) A clear kick. The kicker must kick the ball a visible distance. If the kicker is holding it, it must clearly leave the hands. If it is on the ground, it must clearly leave the mark.
    [...]
    Sanction: Unless otherwise stated in Law any infringement by the kicker’s team results in a scrum at the mark. The opposing team throw in the ball.

    He trudg’d along unknowing what he sought,
    And whistled as he went, for want of thought.
    The Referee by John Dryden

  5. #15
    Banned

    Soc/Assoc
    n/a
    Grade
    < player
    Join Date
    20 Jan 12
    Posts
    6,000
    Thanks (Received)
    19
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Quote Originally Posted by Marauder View Post
    . Tapping the ball with the foot is not a kick. Therefore, to my way of thinking, the kick has not been taken so play has not restarted and there is no sanction.
    I dont agree.
    The video in 21.4.(d) shows the correct sanction, and it being applied.
    . Sanction: Unless otherwise stated in Law any infringement by the kicker’s team results in a scrum at the mark. The opposing team throw in the ball.



    Edit....
    OB types quicker!

  6. #16
    Rugby Club Member viper492's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    SNRRA
    Grade
    L1
    Join Date
    11 May 14
    Posts
    39
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    So what you are very clearly saying is that you have an astonishingly high incidence of a recurring problem with poor technique that ought to result in a scrum...The players know that the refs lack the cojones to deal with the issue properly, so they have no incentive to perfect their tap technique. The risk with a tap is that the ball is kicked beyond the grasp of urgent fingers, resulting in at best a slow recovery and distribution, or at worst a knock-on - whereas a tap without release bears no such risk.


    Can you tell us why you feel this is contrary to the spirit of the game? Do you perhaps feel that it's all about getting a 15-stone islander to smash through ranked defenders, so a team without such a player resorting to subtlety is cheating? There is a very effective move from a lineout whereby the blind winger ghosts into a gap between 10 and 12. His run is masked by the presence of the lineout players. Does that also fall beyond your fairness parameter - and if so ... why?

    Dixie - to your first part: I agree that doing that would resolve the problem (and with the reasoning behind it) - I'll give it this approach a go in the next game I referee (tomorrow) and see what the reactions are - I feel as if it will not go down well [not that that is ever a reason to make/not make decisions]. I will include it in the PMB and make it clear to them to take them properly so that if the ref coach tomorrow asks why I was enforcing it I can lean back on that as I feel he might see it as curious to be enforced (will be interesting to say the least).

    Second Part: No I don't feel it's about using a huge islander to smash through the line but about the team being able to be aware when the tap is being taken (in this case the defending team were/would have been unable to tell if the tap had been taken - my memory is telling me at this point that they were probably in front of the man tapping it but I can't 100% remember... it's a bit over a week and 4 games later now). To me that is an act contrary to the spirit of the game and definitely shouldn't be allowed as how can a defending team respond to a play if they don't know if the tap has been taken. IMHO that cannot be allowed - there is a difference between actively deceiving the opposition by forming a wall/preventing the opposition from being aware of what's happening whereas the blind winger coming can be seen by, at least, the players in the lineout (although they may not be focused on the situation) - he is not being "intentionally" shielded by players with the sole intent being to deceive the opposition... Do we allow a team to have 7 players approach the lineout, form with 5 and then penalise the defending side for having 7 in the lineout? No. I feel this tap play is in the same vain as that.

  7. #17
    Rugby Club Member viper492's Avatar

    Soc/Assoc
    SNRRA
    Grade
    L1
    Join Date
    11 May 14
    Posts
    39
    Thanks (Received)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Since it won't let me edit...

    Browner - I fully agree and usually after you tell them once to ensure they take the tap properly they do.

    Given the thoughts around the taking of the tap, I feel I might try something different tomorrow and actually ensure that they follow the laws on this one tomorrow - I'll include it very quickly in my PMB saying that I'll act on it from the start. I'll also have a ref coach there so we'll see what he has to say when I blow a scrum in the 13B standard game. I agree that at this standard and age they should know what they're doing and if they don't, it's not my problem. It will be most interesting to see the coach/crowd reactions to this - I suspect extremely dissatisfied but I feel as if I'll take some sick joy out of that

  8. #18
    Banned

    Soc/Assoc
    n/a
    Grade
    < player
    Join Date
    20 Jan 12
    Posts
    6,000
    Thanks (Received)
    19
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Quote Originally Posted by viper492 View Post
    Since it won't let me edit...

    Browner - I fully agree and usually after you tell them once to ensure they take the tap properly they do.

    Given the thoughts around the taking of the tap, I feel I might try something different tomorrow and actually ensure that they follow the laws on this one tomorrow - I'll include it very quickly in my PMB saying that I'll act on it from the start. I'll also have a ref coach there so we'll see what he has to say when I blow a scrum in the 13B standard game. I agree that at this standard and age they should know what they're doing and if they don't, it's not my problem. It will be most interesting to see the coach/crowd reactions to this - I suspect extremely dissatisfied but I feel as if I'll take some sick joy out of that

    Good luck, I'd allow the coach to listen into the PMB, he won't be surprised thereafter. As for parents of kids.....any that want to take up the whistle can, otherwise they should cheer and support their siblings efforts.

    I'd bet several £s that if asked all players know the ball movement requirements of a PK or Fk

    U13 is a great age the players still appear to be actively listening to the PMB !!!!

  9. #19

    Referees in England


    Soc/Assoc
    Southern RL
    Grade
    Rugby League
    Join Date
    31 Oct 10
    Posts
    1,320
    Thanks (Received)
    6
    Likes (Received)
    80

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    From my personal observations, the requirement for a tap kick to go somewhere has been so thoroughly drilled into kids by U13 in London and surrounding areas that those of them who find themselves playing League in summer still do it habitually, even if some kindly person tells them "we don't care about that, you can just tap it on your foot and carry on".

  10. #20
    Banned

    Soc/Assoc
    n/a
    Grade
    < player
    Join Date
    20 Jan 12
    Posts
    6,000
    Thanks (Received)
    19
    Likes (Received)
    251

    Default Re: Interesting Tap Tactics

    Quote Originally Posted by 4eyesbetter View Post
    From my personal observations, the requirement for a tap kick to go somewhere has been so thoroughly drilled into kids by U13 in London and surrounding areas that those of them who find themselves playing League in summer still do it habitually, even if some kindly person tells them "we don't care about that, you can just tap it on your foot and carry on".
    I thought the RFU encouraged kids to have a complete rest at the end of the season rather than batter their young bodies on rock hard pitches, irrespective of how many ' kind' people thought otherwise. :-)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •