PDA

View Full Version : Free pass for high tackle; commiting too many to the ruck/maul, scrums



Marko
23-09-15, 19:09
New Under 11 rules...

1. Can anyone throw any light on the thinking behind a FP being awarded for a high tackle but a FK for every other offence.
It seems to me that a FP is a more restricted advantage than a FK because all you can do is pass. It doesn't seem to make sense that a serious offence is penalised with a less advantageous award.

2. On a point of clarity, what award are other officials giving if a team commits too many players to the ruck or maul or doesn't pass from the base of ruck, maul or scrum? There does not seem to be any definitive statement other than the general one that foul play leads to a FK... but my instincts would be that this should only be a scrummage offence.

3. Whilst on the theme of scrums, this is my biggest concern over the new rules. When a team is awarded a scrum they should reasonably expect to win the ball from that as the other team have offended; but the inability to select an individual who is able to carry out the skill of hooking means that the scrum is little more than a 50:50 restart, and hugely open to manipulation by a canny coach or slightly one-sided referee. Surely it cannot be in the coaching interests of the children to spend time teaching all of them skills associated with hooking which most will never use. Surely if you are going to have uncontested scrums this must follow through to the team awarded the scrum being guaranteed the ball without a contested strike. What do others think?

OB..
24-09-15, 00:09
3. Whilst on the theme of scrums, this is my biggest concern over the new rules. When a team is awarded a scrum they should reasonably expect to win the ball from that as the other team have offended; but the inability to select an individual who is able to carry out the skill of hooking means that the scrum is little more than a 50:50 restart, and hugely open to manipulation by a canny coach or slightly one-sided referee. Surely it cannot be in the coaching interests of the children to spend time teaching all of them skills associated with hooking which most will never use. Surely if you are going to have uncontested scrums this must follow through to the team awarded the scrum being guaranteed the ball without a contested strike. What do others think?I totally agree that this rule is a serious mistake. I raised it with the expert I consulted earlier, because my observation last season at U10 (when the same rule theoretically applied) was that NO coach used it and NO referee enforced it.

The rationale is that they want to avoid early specialisation, but you can take that general principle too far - and they have done.

Marko
24-09-15, 17:09
Is there any suggestion that they might review this rule, or are we able to influence or lobby for a change?

OB..
25-09-15, 10:09
Is there any suggestion that they might review this rule, or are we able to influence or lobby for a change?At this stage I would think it highly unlikely. However given that nobody enforced it last year, I suspect the same will happen again.

Camquin
25-09-15, 11:09
I may end up doing some U13 Girls games this season - depending on numbers - and I was going to ask about this.
Knowing that the boys are not enforcing it is a useful data point.

Stormkahn
15-10-15, 14:10
New Under 11 rules...

1. Can anyone throw any light on the thinking behind a FP being awarded for a high tackle but a FK for every other offence.
It seems to me that a FP is a more restricted advantage than a FK because all you can do is pass. It doesn't seem to make sense that a serious offence is penalised with a less advantageous award.

2. On a point of clarity, what award are other officials giving if a team commits too many players to the ruck or maul or doesn't pass from the base of ruck, maul or scrum? There does not seem to be any definitive statement other than the general one that foul play leads to a FK... but my instincts would be that this should only be a scrummage offence.

3. Whilst on the theme of scrums, this is my biggest concern over the new rules. When a team is awarded a scrum they should reasonably expect to win the ball from that as the other team have offended; but the inability to select an individual who is able to carry out the skill of hooking means that the scrum is little more than a 50:50 restart, and hugely open to manipulation by a canny coach or slightly one-sided referee. Surely it cannot be in the coaching interests of the children to spend time teaching all of them skills associated with hooking which most will never use. Surely if you are going to have uncontested scrums this must follow through to the team awarded the scrum being guaranteed the ball without a contested strike. What do others think?

1. Not a clue, I asked the same myself.
2. FK, unless otherwise mentioned in the rules all offenses are 'Foul play'== FK. You're right there are a few offenses that only exist in this variant.
3. Under U11 rules the scrum in uncontested and the feeding team automatically win.

that's my experience from last year...

regards,

Dave.

Dan_A
15-10-15, 15:10
3. Under U11 rules the scrum in uncontested and the feeding team automatically win.

That's changed, they can now hook but not push

Pinky
15-10-15, 18:10
is it because the definition of high tackle is different in U11? In Scotland junior age grade tackles have to be below the waist, and it would seem OK to penalise this with a FP, whereas a proper high tackle would still get FK?

Stormkahn
16-10-15, 12:10
That's changed, they can now hook but not push

Righto, we didn't have that last year and thought they'd brought it in new for U12....

Not keen so far, the act of competing for the ball puts pressure on the scrum which causes a certain amount of push so with the 5 man scums at U12 I'm actually in danger of giving a penalty.

Early days I guess.