Referees view on this

[DTDA]

I coach a social side here in the US and am looking at a number of "Old School" moves to maybe incorporate into our playbook for next year.

I wondered what would be a referee's opinion on the legality of the penalty moves shown in
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Qd9w2X-Q-k

Thanks

[didds]

IANAR ;-)

usually the concerns about the wall that get discussed here are potential obstruction by the wall on the eventual; ball carrier. Its fair to say that in neither of those moves was obstruction an issue - no defender got close enough to the wall in time for it to be an obstruction.

However - your players will need to make suyre that the ball exists the wall's immediate proximity before the oppo get near to it.

The other thing that springs to mind is the possibility of the one man cavalry charge which gets debated here on occassion. To me its not an issue when its one person on the charge, but I appreciate other's do not share my view, and I do follow their reasoning.

didds

[Dan_A]

Cavalry charge: An illegal type of attack, which usually happens near the goal line, when the attacking team is awarded a penalty or free-kick. At a signal from the kicker, a line of attacking players charge forward from a distance. When they get near, the kicker taps the ball and passes to a player.

I can't see that the "one man cavalry charge" is relevant here. In the above example the initial tap and pass is to a stationary man in the wall. And I think the runner is also stationary until the ball is played?

[Dickie E]

Legal. No issues.

[crossref]

One-man cavalry charge is no longer in the Law book , so thats ok

As didds say, obstruction will the issue , if the timing is not perfect

[Phil E]

I am more worried that your rugby team have a playbook!!

[damo]

Looks fine.

A wall move will be illegal if there is obstruction, they disguise the ball carrier so much that it is dangerous for any would be defender, or it amounts to a cavalry charge. None of these appear to be an issue here so I can't see a reason to say that it is illegal.

[OB..]

I remember an (Australian?) ploy in which the ball was passed to a line of attackers who all simulated passing to the next man before breaking away and scattering, each pretending to have the ball. I believe this was banned because the defenders had little option but to each tackle a possible ball-carrier without being able to check first.

[CrouchTPEngage]

Legal for me. I would be watching for the risk of any forward pass in that wall. However, in this video, the players were slightly staggered so that the ball wnet backwards as it went from left to right. Well done and good innovation !

[Pinky]

Welcome to the forum.

Second move is definitely legal. First is less clear as there is a greater risk of obstruction where the eventual ball carrier burst through the line. This has been done in the context of the lineout, too. So you need to be sure there is no obstruction, usually by the ball being away from the wall by the time defenders get there as said above