Diving on the ball as leaving the ruck?

[Owen Bisto Taylor]

I think if you can dictate the state of the "ruck" and force them to make choices based on what you're trying to achieve as an official, that is better refereeing. Realistically you want a clean breakdown with bodies clear of the ball... I would rarely call ball out unless asked, but even then I let players roll the dice, if I still think its in, they gamble on giving away a penalty.

[Arabcheif]

Sounds a bit like what some of the members would call "Gotcha refereeing." Why not tell them when the ball is out so both sides have equal opportunity to go for the ball? Say before the match, I'll call the balls out lads. Don't go for it till I tell you its ok to go for it.

[Elpablo73]

I was told that you can't dive on the ball if it coming out of a ruck because the game is played on your feet and your first attempt should to either try to pick it up or kick it if it clearly out of the ruck; this is to promote positive play. If you go to pick the ball up and you get tackled you have at least moved to the next phase of meaningful play.

[Flish]

Sounds a bit like what some of the members would call "Gotcha refereeing." Why not tell them when the ball is out so both sides have equal opportunity to go for the ball? Say before the match, I'll call the balls out lads. Don't go for it till I tell you its ok to go for it.

Because you can shoot yourself in the foot the first you don’t or can’t call it, and at that point you’re inconsistent and maybe disadvantaged a team. I’ll try and call it out, and I make that clear in my PMB, but I can’t promise to, players have to make their own decisions, hopefully based on how i’ve shown my interpretation previously.

[Zebra1922]

I was told that you can't dive on the ball if it coming out of a ruck because the game is played on your feet and your first attempt should to either try to pick it up or kick it if it clearly out of the ruck; this is to promote positive play. If you go to pick the ball up and you get tackled you have at least moved to the next phase of meaningful play.

This sounds reasonable but why then only apply it to a ruck? Retreating players going for a kick that has gone over their heads will frequently go to ground and slide to collect the ball. Under the above we should be pressing for a law change to penalise that, or in fact any diving onto a ball in open play. This isn't how I'd like the game to change, I'd rather go the other way and remove this rather outdated and rarely applied law.

[Marc Wakeham]

I believe the law makers wanted play to "move on" after a ruck. So, this law cam into being. I would take it as no diving on until the ball is clear of the ruck area (so no linger "near [1mtr]).

Sadly we get the endless pick and drives where the desire to "open" play is being thwarted.


All that said It would have been nice if the lawmakers could have been clear as to what this law meant during the 2018 re-write cock up.

[menace]

I believe the law makers wanted play to "move on" after a ruck. So, this law cam into being. I would take it as no diving on until the ball is clear of the ruck area (so no linger "near [1mtr]).

Sadly we get the endless pick and drives where the desire to "open" play is being thwarted.


All that said It would have been nice if the lawmakers could have been clear as to what this law meant during the 2018 re-write cock up.

similar to this ^^^^
I had in my head that it to stop repeated tackles/rucks/muckles (piles of bodies) in essentially the same spot (ball not moving away). So this could be either by team losing the ruck that is legally onside/part of ruck just flopping/diving over on the ball as it has "just" emerged (technically ruck over so not off side) OR the team that won the ruck but is under pressure (ruck going backwards) immediately diving on the ball to retain possession. Both of them would create a pile of bodies near a pile of bodies and possible dangerous situation (not to mention boring play).

never had to use that law yet...

[didds]

I was told that you can't dive on the ball if it coming out of a ruck because the game is played on your feet and your first attempt should to either try to pick it up or kick it if it clearly out of the ruck; this is to promote positive play. If you go to pick the ball up and you get tackled you have at least moved to the next phase of meaningful play.

I get what your saying - but then you wouldn't presumably allow players to go to ground to gather a loose ball in totally open play either?

didds

[didds]

Sadly we get the endless pick and drives where the desire to "open" play is being thwarted.

thaough that is a result of the 1992 change of unsuccessful ruck outcomes... theer is nothing to gain by contestig a ruck situation unless you will definitely win it/force an error (CF "counter rucking"). So teams do not commit and wide field tremnch defense is standard. meaning there's no spacfe to play "open" rugby so off we go with pick and drives...

didds

[Flish]

The prompt for asking this was a U15 game on a boggy pitch where the breakdowns were pretty chaotic (as much down to weather as deliberate off feet), and I pinged for this as the ball came out as opposed to won out, and a player near fell forward out of the ruck (was bound prior) onto the loose ball, about 0.5m out and just made the pile up worse.

Being honest I would have called it out in terms of the 9 to use it, or a player running around from onside, but this wasn't even moving to the ball just flopping on it. Looked and felt wrong so that's how I called it, and no great argument, but some discussion and thought afterwards, hence the post.